Klei, how long are you going to try to ruin my base? And other suggestions

[Mike23Ua]

26 minutes ago, cropo said:

It won't do this, it will only kill penned up critters, it won't hinder actively hunting and gathering the materials you need. You're vastly overrating the effects of this weather. If a few critters dying near you is all it takes to suddenly find yourself at a loss on how to gather trivial and basic resources, then you have no right to even be participating in post-game content.

 

Having it not kill critters, but still be an active threat to the player, will still keep it as an additional hazard to various fights and other tasks the player would do. I don't think most people are against it actually being a threat to deal with, but having the core purpose of it's threat be to grief your base or your silly decorations just to force you to grind materials and spam repairing them all day is being argued as an uninspired and boring gameplay loop.

 

I wouldn't really consider ARK a survival game, more of a base-building and gameplay progression pseudo RPG slash pokemon game. Games like Conan Exiles as well, they were built more with a big server base raid mentality like Rust where one of the primary focuses of the game is keeping constant upkeep of your base. Basic survival and food gathering take a massive back seat to the rest of the game.

 

So it basically changes from ''Don't Starve'' to ''Don't let critters die". They can't challenge the player directly, so they have to send threats that they can't control through any form of skill or mastery for ''difficulty''.  We've really come full circle, I don't think the game has a future with this train of logic.

 

Really really seems like you guys want base-management simulators.

The problem with it ONLY effecting the player and nothing else is at that point it becomes no different from Hunger, Winter Cold, Summer Overheating, Spring Wetness, or Low Sanity.

AKA it Becomes just another boring Status bar to manage and Maintain.

I don’t want that…

The Seasons should all have impact on the world, its mobs, and its resources, things change, new things spawn, new resource opportunities. Etc.

Hamlet had a strong wind season that would literally blow your loot off the side of the map to be deleted from the world forever.

Dont Starve Together on the other hand seems like the devs can’t let anything harsh or bad, or that isn’t completely preventable from ever happening.

And to be honest with you I’m growing rather bored of the same 4 unchanged seasons.

[cropo]

1 minute ago, Mike23Ua said:

The problem with it ONLY effecting the player and nothing else is at that point it becomes no different from Hunger, Winter Cold, Summer Overheating, Spring Wetness, or Low Sanity.

AKA it Becomes just another boring Status bar to manage and Maintain.

I don’t want that…

But that is survival. Don't Starve is special among survival games in that those ''bars'' are actually an important part of the game. It's easy for many of us to say they're not important, and that's because most of us have been playing for 10+ years.  Even with all the advancements in the game, and my own knowledge, I still have to at least take some consideration to getting food in the game, it's not as hard as it used to be, but it's something i at least have to keep in mind and pay attention to. I'm engaging with the content on a serious level.

 

The biggest difficulty I have in this game is rain, because it is intrusive, puts strict restrictions on the gear I can use, and makes every moment that I am not wearing rain protection(such as to wear armor to fight) really matter. I mean, it's not like it's impossible to deal with or beat, but I have to actually take it seriously on some level and make choices in the effect. This happens without it destroying structures, killing random mobs, or doing a bunch of other nonsense. 

Lunar Rain is a logical extension of that, making fighting a bigger concern because it compliments the challenge of fighting a tough enemy when you have to keep your eyes open to dodge falling rocks.  It can serve this purpose just fine without killing critters for no reason.

 

2 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

The Seasons should all have impact on the world, its mobs, and its resources, things change, new things spawn, new resource opportunities. Etc.

I think most of us agree on this, the disagreement we have is that you seem to be willing to accept anything even minutely hinting at more, when in reality they do little more than grief megabasers while leaving actual survival players unchallenged and unbothered by the mechanics.  The harsh conditions for megabasers seem to be the bigger motivating factor for you, rather than actually looking at the content and asking yourself if it's really adding any challenge to the game.

 

If some "amazing" new feature and mode of difficulty came out that i felt was actually worth trading the megabasers fun for I would gladly support it. This just...isn't it, it's not the answer.

 

Like seriously, imagine yourself sitting down and talking to someone in real life who knows the game well. Tell them something like ''Lunar rain killing mobs makes the game more survival focused!", like can you picture yourself seriously saying that and not having doubts about it?  Like just play it in your head...i just can't see how this is the mechanic that leads us to a better game, how removing it is ''seriously crippling'' and ''gutting true challenge'' from the game. It's really, really not...

 

But I'm honestly considering giving up this discussion, at this point there's just no convincing anyone. If these "add challenge, by not challenging survival players and punishing the megabasers" features are the future of DST, then I guess that's just how it's gonna be.

[Mike23Ua]

Actually your wrong, Spring rains also bring about spring lightning strikes, which can and often do hit random trees or other things and then proceed to set it on fire.

My entire point has been that the “Seasons” of DST have never been exclusively just about managing a personal status Bar.

If you don’t set up lightning rods all over the constant (or at least in areas you plan to be in or around) stray lightning strikes set the world ablaze, if you don’t pay attention during summer to things that start smoldering, you can accidentally burn the entire pig king village down just by walking near it during summer.

If your unlucky enough to be chilling in your base or someone else is chilling in their base when the Winter Deerclops spawns, GGWP it wrecks your stuff and leaves with a sick smile on its face.

The game (and its seasons) have ALWAYS been destructive.. and now that we’re getting new content & new seasonal weathers- It’s suddenly not allowed to be destructive? I don’t get it…

[cybers2001]

50 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

The game (and its seasons) have ALWAYS been destructive.. and now that we’re getting new content & new seasonal weathers- It’s suddenly not allowed to be destructive? I don’t get it…

This tired argument...

The difference is that destructive elements have always allowed the player to still build however they want, while offering ways to mitigate or avert the destruction.

• Giants give audible warnings.
• Frog rain is a gradual buildup from normal rain.
• Summers have oasis desert and caves.
• Shipwrecked volcano gave warning quakes.
• Hamlet aporkalypse is on a predictable timer.

None of these things are the same as spontaneous hail out of nowhere, or unavoidable rifts destroying terrain, or boulders perpetually littering the caves. The only thing I would even compare the new updates to in terms of unnecessary destruction and annoyance is the old disease mechanic. And did anyone actually complain when Klei finally removed disease from the game?

[prettynuggets]

when these people realized DST is not DS.
having destructive mechanics is doable cus you play it alone. all consequences is on you. 
why is it so hard to understand this is multiplayer game. if you solo and can run away from hail before its destroy your surrounding. but its not really enjoyable if you being punished by someone else mistake... 
this is not a matter of survivability to the player. this just extra annoyance. 

[CuteC]

48 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

The game (and its seasons) have ALWAYS been destructive.. and now that we’re getting new content & new seasonal weathers- It’s suddenly not allowed to be destructive? I don’t get it…

You get a massive headstart for deerclops, yes it may happen that someone can stand afk at the wrong time but what can you do about that.

Yes there's lightning during hard rain but lightning rods have massive range and are not that expensive, it's unfortunate when you're out of your base but it's not even guaranteed lightning will hit something, it may hit the ground or you and if it DOES hit like a tree, only the tree is likely to burn because it is raining and fire has a tougher time spreading.

Summer however is the one no one likes and that's because of wildfires, flingos are really dumb and that is why oasis base is the usual go-to for anyone experienced, that or instantly going to caves because fire in this game spreads like a highly contagious disease.

You act like no one in dst history has ever hated wildfires..

[Popian]

7 hours ago, cropo said:

killing critters for no reason.

I think it's exposition for why the Lunar isles are so desolate.

[Mike23Ua]

6 hours ago, prettynuggets said:

when these people realized DST is not DS.
having destructive mechanics is doable cus you play it alone. all consequences is on you. 
why is it so hard to understand this is multiplayer game. if you solo and can run away from hail before its destroy your surrounding. but its not really enjoyable if you being punished by someone else mistake... 
this is not a matter of survivability to the player. this just extra annoyance. 

I believe it is actually more of a flaw with DSTs outdated gaming engine than ANYTHING.

Players blame each other for being in a certain area when certain things happen because DST “Offloads” areas of the game world if you simply leave that area and go somewhere away from it.

Its why for years players have been able to laugh at the threat of Deerclops or summer wildfires, they simply run away from whatever they don’t want destroyed so it only happens in the areas you want it to.

I feel like this for the most part- Due to DST still running on a gaming engine created in 2015… But as technology advances & things that weren’t previously possible become completely possible:

I for one would like for weather to be GLOBAL across the game world, so I can’t just “Offload” areas of the map, and players don’t blame one another for not leaving an area to “offload” it from taking damage.

Its stupid.. and it honestly makes DSTs weather seasons and worldly hazards exploitable.

[CuteC]

31 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

I for one would like for weather to be GLOBAL across the game world, so I can’t just “Offload” areas of the map, and players don’t blame one another for not leaving an area to “offload” it from taking damage.

Its stupid.. and it honestly makes DSTs weather seasons and worldly hazards exploitable.

So what you're saying is you want the entire world to literally burn in one summer?

[Mike23Ua]

18 minutes ago, CuteC said:

So what you're saying is you want the entire world to literally burn in one summer?

If you want to think of it in that way.. sure?? I err I guess?? But with so many ways to protect, prevent or ignore wildfires- I just don’t think being able to Simple walk away “offloading” an area should no longer be one of them..

[Spino43]

1 hour ago, Mike23Ua said:

I for one would like for weather to be GLOBAL across the game world, so I can’t just “Offload” areas of the map, and players don’t blame one another for not leaving an area to “offload” it from taking damage.

Example? Even AAA games like Elden Ring have to utilize some from of off loading. Asking for the whole world to be constantly loaded isn't really feasible.

Also another proof that you want this game to be as awfully masochist as possible because you think it's the only way for the game to be hard. 

 

[CuteC]

1 hour ago, Mike23Ua said:

If you want to think of it in that way.. sure?? I err I guess?? But with so many ways to protect, prevent or ignore wildfires- I just don’t think being able to Simple walk away “offloading” an area should no longer be one of them..

Good luck somehow protecting the entire constant with flingos by first summer, I am sure that's fun and definitely what the players want.

[Mike23Ua]

1 hour ago, Spino43 said:

Example? Even AAA games like Elden Ring have to utilize some from of off loading. Asking for the whole world to be constantly loaded isn't really feasible.

Also another proof that you want this game to be as awfully masochist as possible because you think it's the only way for the game to be hard. 

 

The shortest TL:DR I’ve ever made, Klei added craftable items & structures to deal with the weather hazards. Running away from an area so it offloads wasn’t ever one of the things they intended to be one of them.

[GelatinousCube]

33 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

The shortest TL:DR I’ve ever made, Klei added craftable items & structures to deal with the weather hazards. Running away from an area so it offloads wasn’t ever one of the things they intended to be one of them.

Yet again speaking on kleis behalf when in reality you have no idea what their intentions were. Do you honestly genuinely think that they wanted wildfires to just blaze across the entire surface miles away from players where we have absolutely zero chance of preventing or stopping them? If so that's absolutely insane.

Even if this is the case I'm sure they were aware of the games limitations and that unloading an idea far away would end weather hazards/fire in that area intended or not. 

You really live in your own bizarre reality don't you?

[prettynuggets]

4 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

I for one would like for weather to be GLOBAL across the game world, so I can’t just “Offload” areas of the map, and players don’t blame one another for not leaving an area to “offload” it from taking damage.

u want this but ur box thingy wont even load at that point. u know how much burden it took to load all area at once ?
 

[lenship2]

1 hour ago, GelatinousCube said:

You really live in your own bizarre reality don't you?

dont you know that mike's from a parallel universe?

[prettynuggets]

4 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

But as technology advances & things that weren’t previously possible become completely possible:

at one point u said u dont like using pc cus u dont know how make them operate. since ur box thingy have all game that can run without altering anything.
now u just spewing all bs talking about game engine like u know how to write one.
if u really know if there a much more modern version of game engine that works with dst and their developer used to.. that would make loading all area of the world possible without make ur box thing catch on fire. tell them here.

[Dragonboooorn]

2 hours ago, lenship2 said:

dont you know that mike's from a parallel universe?

Thats the aftermath of using console instead of good ol pc

[cropo]

4 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

The shortest TL:DR I’ve ever made, Klei added craftable items & structures to deal with the weather hazards. Running away from an area so it offloads wasn’t ever one of the things they intended to be one of them.

I don't think there is a single large open world game that can maintain loading of every area in the game, calculating every possible event and reaction of the games mechanics. It's impossible unless the game is incredibly small in scope.

 

Think of Minecraft, you go 10 million miles in one direction. What you're basically saying is that the processor would need to figure out where to spawn every zombie in those 10 billion miles, where they walk, if it's raining in one area, snowing in another, if lightning hits an object, the game needs to process the effect that tells it to burn whatever it hit, then it needs to tell that fire to spread to any nearby targets that are eligible for burning up as well. All this while it also needs to calculate what the player is doing, what buttons they are pressing, how to dictate their hunger drain from certain actions, etc.

 

Most games do have ways around this, including Singleplayer Don't Starve. For example, if the player is in the caves, but they have bees on the surface, it can't use processing power to pathfind for the bees, tell them to land on flowers, and bring it back to their nests. They instead use a shortcut where the processor only needs to ask ''How long has the player been gone from the bees?'' and then add honey to the nests based on that time. Same for growing things, and a bunch of other stuff. Instead of logically deciding how each plant regrows, processing if you had already harvested it, etc. When the player walks and loads it back in the game will ask the processor "how long was the player away? Make the plant grow based on that time please". 

 

So the only way to make structures burn while not being loaded is they would have to write code for the game to ask ''How long was the player away from their base since wildfires started? 20 days? Seems logical that that and that and that should be burnt then" and then load in the structures as burnt when you revisit them. They would have had to intentionally code this in if this was what they wanted.

 

I'm not a coder but I'm pretty sure this basic explanation is mostly right? Code buffs correct me if I'm being dumb.

[00petar00]

17 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

So losing out on content for several months is unacceptable but losing out on content concepts forever is? Because no matter how you sugar coat it what I'm reading is it's wrong to deprive people like you of your experiences but it's entirely fine to deprive people like me for your sake. Yours is the golden standard by which content is allowed choices be damned because it has the potential to inconvenience you it shouldn't exist and honestly that's not fair.

The issue is that you want to force people to either do something on repeat for thousands of days or not interact with a year + of content updates in the future which doesn't seem like there is a good option to choose.

I would really want to see klei share some stats on how many people actually want these destructive or repetitive mechanics because you are similar to megabasers, there's not that many players that want that and majority will always be new or average players that don't play DST over 1 hour a day every few days.

The difference between you and me is that your ideas want to force me to play the way you do while my playstyle doesn't affect you, that's why my playstyle is more valid. It is completely fair and logical, when have you been forced to build a megabase? How can you not see the difference?

17 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

I'm telling you that if you can't accept what random players decide to do in a world then you should make your own. I'm not saying you have to but if you don't you need to accept what happens it's litterally the same advice we give about griefers. It's simple accept the content or don't or alter future settings of whatever the future new content brings to keep a ideal level of impact. It's not like we're going to fight to keep any destructive mechanic regardless of how it's implemented we were on the same page about how the rifts shouldn't have been able to spawn on bases or destroy terrain no?

These arguments are literally so desperate and make no sense, why should I be forced to play single player and never play on a pub that is moderated just because someone can activate rifts that I can't disable? Klei didn't want to add DLCs because they would split the playerbase but is this any different?

This is a multiplayer game and the point is that you can't stop other players from activating rifts or turn them off after.

We agree on destructive mechanics from rifts not destroying base but hail is pretty similar to that in the current state and brightshades are terrible.

Like I said you can literally modify world settings and make your game so much more difficult to survive, cut on everything beneficial and increase every danger. That's literally the same as you saying I can just not turn rifts off.

18 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

Coulda sworn there was a poll a while back asking if people wanted new harsher seasons, or bosses, and some other options and people most choose the seasons here. You keep calling survival content as chores but base building is chore heck the very act of playing dst somewhat regularly could be considered a chore depending on who you ask.

The definition of the word chore is repetitive task or a tedious but necessary task. Base building is only done once and it isn't repetitive like brightshades, boulders, hail or any other survival mechanic.

18 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

I'm not being defensive I'm asking you to fact check yourself before you declare things about other people? Is it that hard to comprehend? But no we'll just have this same conversation as we do every beta where we're at odds where you'll bring up misinformation as per norm and I'll try to correct you. But you could cut out the middleman and just not make claims you don't fully remember or better yet focus on the topic at hand?

You are being defensive though, it doesn't make my argument any better and you are still stunlocked on this. I am sorry but I am not going to bother reading every single thread you made before I comment and everyone can make a mistake. It isn't that often that this happens and you just can't accept that someone won't invest the time to fact check everything.

18 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

I also have thousands of hours and it sounds like what you are describing is speed runners what is the benefit for a person playing the game around survival to constantly reset the world? How are you surviving if you abandon the world each time you hit a predetermined day count? Do you suddenly scrap your world the moment you finish your megabase? If your only playing in a world for a short amount of time like that it seems more likely the goal is just to kill all the bosses or something.

Obviously most of the survival players play like that and reset after they kill everything that they want and have abundance of food, you can't really make an argument that game becomes difficult the longer you play as it is completely the opposite.

You are an exception if you play like that and if you are going to tell me to pull out stats it would be disingenuous when no one has them and everyone has access to play on all the pubs and you can literally see most survival players play like I said.

18 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

While we currently don't have one I imagine we're going to get a lunar equivalent also I think the eyebrella stops this as well I can't really remember though.

That's the problem with the current updates, why add new features that have no counters? Brightshades were supposed to be one mob and the way klei pacified people that were mad was them saying that there will be more creatures to dilute the mob spawning pool. How long are the players supposed to wait? Years?

18 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

Because it wasn't the first and won't be the last and second that wasn't just aimed at you but the forums in general I said as much there already it's why I gave it more spacing.

The issue is that you are replying to me and saying these things, so you are also spreading misinformation and should fact check or don't mention me when you say that.

18 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

So in other words I was right the only reason to bring this up is to invalidate the opinion of the person your debating rather than actually addressing the topic at hand how do you not see a problem with this??? How do you see this as staying on topic??? I know which person your talking about and this is the very reason I have a problem with this and why I'm not letting this go you want to bully people out of the discussions by making their previous and potientally current opinions a point of ridicule that is not how you make a proper discussion unless your trying to become a politician. And no your not the only one who does this which is why I made the previous statement at the end of my last post. The fact so much of our posts are dedicated to taking pot shots and accusations rather than the mechanic at hand should speak for itself. Heck half the time people arguing on here don't even know what stance the person they're arguing with has on a topic. But somehow digging up the past to invalid/mock people is somehow contributing to a healthy discussion? I think not.

There is no problem with doing that as we all have different opinions and these are beta forums where devs will actively take out ideas from. If you mention something that doesn't align with what I believe the game direction should be, I'll do my best to reply and explain why I don't think that should be the case.

It is not about making your previous ideas a point of ridicule but to show how extreme some of your opinions are and shouldn't be taken as seriously when it comes to game development.

You are not any different from me considering how you structure your posts.

[GelatinousCube]

40 minutes ago, Dragonboooorn said:

Thats the aftermath of using console instead of good ol pc

Noooooooooo please do not lump us other Console players in with Mike!

[cropo]

1 minute ago, 00petar00 said:

when have you been forced to build a megabase? How can you not see the difference?

They're trying to argue that megabasers are ''holding back'' the potential scope of what Klei can do. Like they're in their office thinking ''Lets add this unique, fun, interesting, and challenging mech- Oh wait, it destroys bases so we can't do it, lets just give everyone free candy to decorate their base with." Using this logic they argue your playstyle DOES affect them, by limiting how much Klei can add to the difficulty.

 

Which would make sense if any of these mechanics they defend were balanced more fairly or actually had some kind of genuine challenge to them. Even without the megabaser angle a lot of the content they were defending isn't really challenging in a way that makes the game fun and more survival-focused. Which is an issue I have with the staunch support for them.

[00petar00]

11 minutes ago, cropo said:

They're trying to argue that megabasers are ''holding back'' the potential scope of what Klei can do. Like they're in their office thinking ''Lets add this unique, fun, interesting, and challenging mech- Oh wait, it destroys bases so we can't do it, lets just give everyone free candy to decorate their base with." Using this logic they argue your playstyle DOES affect them, by limiting how much Klei can add to the difficulty.

 

Which would make sense if any of these mechanics they defend were balanced more fairly or actually had some kind of genuine challenge to them. Even without the megabaser angle a lot of the content they were defending isn't really challenging in a way that makes the game fun and more survival-focused. Which is an issue I have with the staunch support for them.

It is quite funny and he still is trying to convince me in some way that dreadstone pillars are actually useful to him a survival player that only needs like 1 pillar for his base. Rock pillar outlasts probably 95% of survival players and even if it needs some repairing it doesn't affect them at all, how hard is it to pick up one rock that pillar dropped after earthquake damaged it to repair the same pillar?

So he wants the game not to have permanent pillars just to spite megabasers as there is literally no other answer.

[_zwb]

8 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

outdated gaming engine

Ugh, not this argument again, I've already explained to you in another thread, it's not "outdated game engine" problem, it's the hardware limitations of your device problem.

8 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

“Offloads” areas of the game world if you simply leave that area and go somewhere away from it.

So that your device don't burst into flames trying to simulate thousands of entities at once, plus the player can't even interact with objects that far away from them.

8 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

But as technology advances & things that weren’t previously possible become completely possible:

That's not how computers work... Impossible things don't just become possible naturally

8 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

I for one would like for weather to be GLOBAL across the game world

This is already in the game: meteor shower.

Making wildfire go on off screen is a bad idea though, first off fire doesn't spread off screen, so you'd just find randomly burnt objects around the map. There's also no counter play that works off screen as well, so this would be a unstoppable force just burning your stuff randomly, not fair at all. If fire spread and flingomatics are made to be constantly loaded, the game would face some serious optimisation issues, literally unplayable.

6 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

craftable items & structures to deal with the weather hazards.

You know those items are off loaded as well right?

 

Honestly Mike your lack of knowledge on how computers and game simulation work is just

[GelatinousCube]

21 minutes ago, _zwb said:

Honestly Mike your lack of knowledge on how computers and game simulation work is just

Well Batman could clearly do it given enough prep time!

Also in *insert random much simpler game that is like turn based or a completely different genre and is one of the few types of games that can keep a whole map loaded because its so simplistic and not at all like DST* they manage to do it so why can't DST!