Almost a year later, rifts are still not worth opening; the circular logic behind the late game

[EatenCheetos]

22 minutes ago, grm9 said:

i've already told you twice that if you mean making more people play the game, then it'd need to become easier instead of harder

That’s not what I mean at all, that’s not even the topic of discussion. You’re not making sense

[Mike23Ua]

12 hours ago, Siren11 said:

This would be awful for newer players. I like to play on the same world for 1000+ days (partially bc I can’t accomplish things nearly as fast as most of you), and being pushed into a harder game mode that I can’t really counter without beating bosses I can’t beat yet would just… suck.

I wouldn’t mind if Klei started adding new survival challenges after the first year or so. I don’t think everything in the game should be an optional boss that the player can fight whenever they’re ready (as much as I enjoy those fights). But Fuelweaver, Celestial Champion, and rifts (sans planar armor) are complicated in a way that shouldn’t be forced on players before they’re ready for the challenge imo.

I always have fun exploring new fights and new challenges (not to mention new loot), and that’s enough to push me to try these fights even when I fail. I don’t need or want to be forced into it.

Well let me completely debunk this, single player don’t starve gave zero flips about you or you wanting to survive for 3000+ days in the same world, single player don’t starve challenges you and constantly kept challenging you, there was even one point where you had to attempt to stop the aporkalypse.

The thing here though: was there was a menu of options to where if you did not like a certain feature, you could toggle that feature completely off (such as removing the BFB boss from even spawning)

And I think that’s the difference between DS & DST….

Klei tries so hard not to step on “established” or “New” players toes so most DSTs content is completely Optional, where as in the single player game and it’s DLCs.. Everything was toggled to ON and after you experienced it enough (and realize you don’t like it..) - You had the option to turn it OFF through settings.

11 hours ago, Reecitz said:

I kinda sense a pattern of people, mostly veterans, not really thinking out or caring for what the experience is like for new players.

As the post above describes, the single player game gave zero flips about new players… all the difficult content was toggled to on by default, and the player could Opt out of it by toggling it off in settings.

in the absolute politest way I can say this- Klei needs to quit babysitting newer players & instead give them a pop up notification that says something like-

“Finding the game too hard? Don’t like a certain feature? Toggle it off through world settings!”

AND THEN the game could be allowed to ramp up in difficulty (same as the single player game and it’s DLCs…) without asking the player: “Are you Ready?”

[Uedo]

22 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Well let me completely debunk this, single player don’t starve gave zero flips about you or you wanting to survive for 3000+ days in the same world, single player don’t starve challenges you and constantly kept challenging you, there was even one point where you had to attempt to stop the aporkalypse.

The thing here though: was there was a menu of options to where if you did not like a certain feature, you could toggle that feature completely off (such as removing the BFB boss from even spawning)

And I think that’s the difference between DS & DST….

Klei tries so hard not to step on “established” or “New” players toes so most DSTs content is completely Optional, where as in the single player game and it’s DLCs.. Everything was toggled to ON and after you experienced it enough (and realize you don’t like it..) - You had the option to turn it OFF through settings.

As the post above describes, the single player game gave zero flips about new players… all the difficult content was toggled to on by default, and the player could Opt out of it by toggling it off in settings.

in the absolute politest way I can say this- Klei needs to quit babysitting newer players & instead give them a pop up notification that says something like-

“Finding the game too hard? Don’t like a certain feature? Toggle it off through world settings!”

AND THEN the game could be allowed to ramp up in difficulty (same as the single player game and it’s DLCs…) without asking the player: “Are you Ready?”

I'd argue it was easier to keep a world in DS than DST, You could just reset everything to regen the world whilst keeping a stable base in one of the DLC's.
At least DST makes you have do something other than click a button to regen all resources everywhere at once.

25 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Klei tries so hard not to step on “established” or “New” players toes

If you're not established or new, what are you? You're basically saying 'Make a binary choice between two numbers, 1 or 2 and it can't be one or two.'

27 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

AND THEN the game could be allowed to ramp up in difficulty (same as the single player game and it’s DLCs…) without asking the player: “Are you Ready?”

If it said 'GO MIKE YOU CAN DO IT, PLEASE SAVE OUR WORLD, YOU'RE OUR ONLY HOPE - Love Charlie and Wagstaff' followed by 'Yes' or 'Not right now' would that change things for you? 

I'm getting the feeling you're putting to much feeling on the question. If you removed the box and it happened naturally, once you gave the hand dreadstone or wagstaff a shard, I feel you'd have no complaint but all that really does is just either lead to people not noticing it, people understanding how it works so it's literally what they want to happen or being surprised at which point they leave or rollback. Does it have to be there? No. Would everything be fine? Absolutely. But Klei have said they want to make things less obscure and you've supported that decision many times.

Maybe I approach things wrongly with you. Why shouldn't it have a box? What will happen if the box disappeared? What would that look like for the flow of the game? What would you suggest to replace it?

The reason I ask is that it ultimately falls to the final two questions: What impact would it have had if you hadn't have implemented this change? On a cost perspective, be that time or resources, was it worth it? 

I think the last two could only be answered with: A marginal, if not, immeasurable impact - if at all. Followed by; Considering it makes so little difference outside of aesthetics, no Klei could use the time and resources for something better - like, literally any arbitrary task in the entire universe.

[Siren11]

33 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Well let me completely debunk this, single player don’t starve gave zero flips about you or you wanting to survive for 3000+ days in the same world, single player don’t starve challenges you and constantly kept challenging you, there was even one point where you had to attempt to stop the aporkalypse.

This is why I specifically pointed out the complexity. In singleplayer, it was relatively easy to walk away from some “unavoidable” challenges, and armor stacking + low boss health meant you could just tank a lot of the bosses. Even the ones with gimmicks weren’t like Fuelweaver. And sure, Hamlet had the Aporkalypse. But it also had the Living Artifact.

Did you miss the part where I said I wanted more non-optional content? I actually do want the game to ramp up in difficulty (without going overboard, obviously). I was arguing against forcing people into boss fights that they couldn’t reasonably be expected to figure out in that time frame, and I’m against introducing challenges that don’t really have a counter. 

33 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Klei tries so hard not to step on “established” or “New” players toes so most DSTs content is completely Optional, where as in the single player game and it’s DLCs.. Everything was toggled to ON and after you experienced it enough (and realize you don’t like it..) - You had the option to turn it OFF through settings.

As the post above describes, the single player game gave zero flips about new players… all the difficult content was toggled to on by default, and the player could Opt out of it by toggling it off in settings.

in the absolute politest way I can say this- Klei needs to quit babysitting newer players & instead give them a pop up notification that says something like-

“Finding the game too hard? Don’t like a certain feature? Toggle it off through world settings!”

AND THEN the game could be allowed to ramp up in difficulty (same as the single player game and it’s DLCs…) without asking the player: “Are you Ready?”

Okay, genuine question. For those of you who constantly talk about how great singleplayer is and how Klei is ruining DST by catering to the newbies and megabasers or whatever… why not just play singleplayer? It sounds like you’d have more fun.

(I also promise Klei isn’t “babysitting” anyone and this game is still punishing when you’re new. That’s like… half the point I keep trying to make here. I might not be struggling to survive, but I don’t want the game to be unplayable for my friends who are still having a hard time. And not everyone likes just turning off features. How about you guys have to turn the hard features on? Then there’s no annoying pop up either.)

[EatenCheetos]

1 hour ago, Uedo said:

I'd argue it was easier to keep a world in DS than DST, You could just reset everything to regen the world whilst keeping a stable base in one of the DLC's.
At least DST makes you have do something other than click a button to regen all resources everywhere at once.

If you're not established or new, what are you? You're basically saying 'Make a binary choice between two numbers, 1 or 2 and it can't be one or two.'

If it said 'GO MIKE YOU CAN DO IT, PLEASE SAVE OUR WORLD, YOU'RE OUR ONLY HOPE - Love Charlie and Wagstaff' followed by 'Yes' or 'Not right now' would that change things for you? 

I'm getting the feeling you're putting to much feeling on the question. If you removed the box and it happened naturally, once you gave the hand dreadstone or wagstaff a shard, I feel you'd have no complaint but all that really does is just either lead to people not noticing it, people understanding how it works so it's literally what they want to happen or being surprised at which point they leave or rollback. Does it have to be there? No. Would everything be fine? Absolutely. But Klei have said they want to make things less obscure and you've supported that decision many times.

Maybe I approach things wrongly with you. Why shouldn't it have a box? What will happen if the box disappeared? What would that look like for the flow of the game? What would you suggest to replace it?

The reason I ask is that it ultimately falls to the final two questions: What impact would it have had if you hadn't have implemented this change? On a cost perspective, be that time or resources, was it worth it? 

I think the last two could only be answered with: A marginal, if not, immeasurable impact - if at all. Followed by; Considering it makes so little difference outside of aesthetics, no Klei could use the time and resources for something better - like, literally any arbitrary task in the entire universe.

All of this yapping just for you to miss the point entirely.

[Mike23Ua]

8 minutes ago, Siren11 said:

This is why I specifically pointed out the complexity. In singleplayer, it was relatively easy to walk away from some “unavoidable” challenges, and armor stacking + low boss health meant you could just tank a lot of the bosses. Even the ones with gimmicks weren’t like Fuelweaver. And sure, Hamlet had the Aporkalypse. But it also had the Living Artifact.

Did you miss the part where I said I wanted more non-optional content? I actually do want the game to ramp up in difficulty (without going overboard, obviously). I was arguing against forcing people into boss fights that they couldn’t reasonably be expected to figure out in that time frame, and I’m against introducing challenges that don’t really have a counter. 

Okay, genuine question. For those of you who constantly talk about how great singleplayer is and how Klei is ruining DST by catering to the newbies and megabasers or whatever… why not just play singleplayer? It sounds like you’d have more fun.

(I also promise Klei isn’t “babysitting” anyone and this game is still punishing when you’re new. That’s like… half the point I keep trying to make here. I might not be struggling to survive, but I don’t want the game to be unplayable for my friends who are still having a hard time. And not everyone likes just turning off features. How about you guys have to turn the hard features on? Then there’s no annoying pop up either.)

Should be pretty obvious, single player don’t starve doesn’t have the massive and continuing to expand cast of DLC characters, Reworks & skills, amazing character skins & belongings, frequent new content updates, bugs & patch support, story & lore continuation, etc..

So telling someone to just go play single player DS is honestly an Insult.

& the thing that I genuinely don’t understand about you people on these forums is that you fight and argue over everything.. but yet you don’t ever stop to think about the possibilities..

Like okay for example: Klei added character skill trees which now drastically alter the way a character will be played and enjoyed, further giving that character unique skills and a defined playstyle that they simply did not have in the single player game.

Now here’s MY personal logic- Just as easily as Klei added skill trees and point of interest way points into DST…

They can make additional “risky?” Changes- like giving the game Artifacts/Trinkets that can randomly be obtained from looting dangerous places similar to the artifacts & trinkets you can obtain in the likes of Minecraft or the Survivalists, or “Insert any RogueLike here”

And to anyone who says that doesn’t fit the playstyle of DST I have to ask…

Yeah well did Way Points & Skill Trees? Did the Gorge or the Forge Events?

I think the actual truth here is that BECAUSE DST is a game that’s still being updated with new ideas and content, is that it is “Allowed” to branch out and be many different things from what it started out as.

I can assure you that absolutely no one playing Fortnite ever expected it to get a dedicated racing mode, guitar hero mode, and Lego crafting mode… but yet look where it’s gotten now.

So before you EVER say that DST will never ever ever be A RogueLite/Like, or a Team Based Battle Arena, or any other new way of playing the game…

I want you to take a minute & actually sit & think about what Klei has ALREADY DONE with the game/franchise.

Solo DS Story Mode, Up’d Difficulty DLCs, Gorge, Forge, Skill Trees..

In conclusion: The game is changing for better or for worse, and I for one don’t think it’s fair to try and shoe-horn it into one particular category or playing experience.

Because the true beauty of a franchise like Don’t Starve, isn’t what it IS…. It’s all the things it COULD be.

And I believe Klei have already proven that with Story Mode, Harder DLCs, Gorge, Forge & Skill Trees.

[EatenCheetos]

52 minutes ago, Siren11 said:

Okay, genuine question. For those of you who constantly talk about how great singleplayer is and how Klei is ruining DST by catering to the newbies and megabasers or whatever… why not just play singleplayer?

That’s a logical fallacy, specifically an Ergo Decedo fallacy.

52 minutes ago, Siren11 said:

And not everyone likes just turning off features. How about you guys have to turn the hard features on?

Read Mike23Ua’s comment here for an explanation of why that’s wrong.

Edited March 27 by EatenCheetos

[Siren11]

41 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Should be pretty obvious, single player don’t starve doesn’t have the massive and continuing to expand cast of DLC characters, Reworks & skills, amazing character skins & belongings, frequent new content updates, bugs & patch support, story & lore continuation, etc..

So telling someone to just go play single player DS is honestly an Insult.

I wasn’t telling you to do anything. I was asking a genuine question because I was curious. I just want everyone playing this game to have as much fun as I do and it seems like maybe singleplayer would be a better experience for some people. But it makes sense that you would like certain aspects of DST enough to want to stick with it. I guess I should have considered that.

Please don’t put words in my mouth.

I have realized that my use of the word “just” was meant to mean “simply,” but it may have been interpreted to mean “only.” Definitely not my intention. Also, other people might have said similar things but with the intention of telling you to stop playing. I’m sorry if I reminded you of a bad experience or something.

41 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

They can make additional “risky?” Changes- like giving the game Artifacts/Trinkets that can randomly be obtained from looting dangerous places similar to the artifacts & trinkets you can obtain in the likes of Minecraft or the Survivalists, or “Insert any RogueLike here”

This is cool but has nothing at all to do with what I was talking about. I’d be into this. I guess it’s sort of already like the Ruins or Hamlet?

41 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

I think the actual truth here is that BECAUSE DST is a game that’s still being updated with new ideas and content, is that it is “Allowed” to branch out and be many different things from what it started out as.

I never said it wasn’t. It already has, to my understanding. I think that’s awesome!

41 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

So before you EVER say that DST will never ever ever be A RogueLite/Like, or a Team Based Battle Arena, or any other new way of playing the game…

I want you to take a minute & actually sit & think about what Klei has ALREADY DONE with the game/franchise.

Solo DS Story Mode, Up’d Difficulty DLCs, Gorge, Forge, Skill Trees..

In conclusion: The game is changing for better or for worse, and I for one don’t think it’s fair to try and shoe-horn it into one particular category or playing experience.

Because the true beauty of a franchise like Don’t Starve, isn’t what it IS…. It’s all the things it COULD be.

And I believe Klei have already proven that with Story Mode, Harder DLCs, Gorge, Forge & Skill Trees.

This is exactly why I didn’t want to talk on the forums in the first place. I’ve played the game too. I know how many things Klei has done with it, and I think that’s great! I never said I wanted to shoehorn it into one experience (in fact, I think everything I’ve ever said would prove the opposite).

I think we’re having two entirely different conversations at this point.

39 minutes ago, EatenCheetos said:

That’s a logical fallacy, specifically an Ergo Decido fallacy.

I know tone is difficult over the internet, but I never meant to imply that Mike should stop playing DST or anything. I was asking a genuine question about why people wouldn’t play the game they seem to like more. I’m not trying to win an argument. I’m not even trying to argue!!

39 minutes ago, EatenCheetos said:

Read Mike23Ua’s comment above for an explanation.

I did, and none of it has anything to do with what I said.

If you guys can’t avoid talking down to me and assuming I have bad intentions, I’m done here.

Edited March 27 by Siren11
Additional clarification

[Reecitz]

2 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

Well let me completely debunk this, single player don’t starve gave zero flips about you or you wanting to survive for 3000+ days in the same world, single player don’t starve challenges you and constantly kept challenging you, there was even one point where you had to attempt to stop the aporkalypse.

The thing here though: was there was a menu of options to where if you did not like a certain feature, you could toggle that feature completely off (such as removing the BFB boss from even spawning)

And I think that’s the difference between DS & DST….

Klei tries so hard not to step on “established” or “New” players toes so most DSTs content is completely Optional, where as in the single player game and it’s DLCs.. Everything was toggled to ON and after you experienced it enough (and realize you don’t like it..) - You had the option to turn it OFF through settings.

As the post above describes, the single player game gave zero flips about new players… all the difficult content was toggled to on by default, and the player could Opt out of it by toggling it off in settings.

in the absolute politest way I can say this- Klei needs to quit babysitting newer players & instead give them a pop up notification that says something like-

“Finding the game too hard? Don’t like a certain feature? Toggle it off through world settings!”

AND THEN the game could be allowed to ramp up in difficulty (same as the single player game and it’s DLCs…) without asking the player: “Are you Ready?”

No offense, but I KNOW you're not the one telling new players to deal with it, after the many times you insist certain aspects of the game should be easier.

Perhaps you should, I don't know, follow your own advice?

5 minutes ago, Siren11 said:

If you guys can’t avoid talking down to me and assuming I have bad intentions, I’m done here.

Probably for the best, I'm afraid. For what it's worth, you seemed like a nice and cohesive person - a rare sight indeed. 

[Mike23Ua]

2 minutes ago, Reecitz said:

No offense, but I KNOW you're not the one telling new players to deal with it, after the many times you insist certain aspects of the game should be easier.

Perhaps you should, I don't know, follow your own advice?

Well if I was to personally be in charge of redesigning the entirety of DST to be more beginner friendly but at the same time completely and totally unforgiving to more experienced players, I would do it like the “Two Worlds” story chapter from single player don’t starve.

Meaning I would give the beginner players a starting location they can live on and survive a mostly peaceful not so harsh gaming environment, but when they finally DO jump into that One Way Wormhole.. there’s no going back to the less forgiving starter island paradise.

This would prevent problems the game CURRENTLY has such as allowing extremely experienced players to activate or rush harder difficulty content onto Beginners.

And if you absolutely need a few examples of that: Lunar Grotto/Sealed Archives war Awakening, Moonstorms, Lunar & Shadow Rifts.. all of those things can be forced onto beginners who aren’t prepared to deal with them just because BETTER players rushed them into existing.

Same as how players who heavily rely on living near pig kings village can now permanently be trolled by Wickerbottoms spamming full Moons spoiler alert (Pigmen turn into more deadly Werepigs)

But the thing I’m purposing is that Klei completely redesigns dst from the ground up, and they give players a starting location that is immune to these late game shenanigans, but once the player takes the one way trip portal.. they can’t ever go back to the starting island in that world anymore.

This allows newbies to get a feel of the game, without joining a 30,000 day old world that has Moonstorms and Wild Rifts popping up all over everywhere.

[EatenCheetos]

28 minutes ago, Reecitz said:

No offense, but I KNOW you're not the one telling new players to deal with it, after the many times you insist certain aspects of the game should be easier.

Perhaps you should, I don't know, follow your own advice?

Talk about bad logic. The world isn’t black and white. He is allowed to argue that some things should be easier while others should be harder.

[Uedo]

1 hour ago, EatenCheetos said:

All of this yapping just for you to miss the point entirely.

Or you're completely missing mine. I'd put a bet on that 

[EatenCheetos]

22 minutes ago, Uedo said:

Or you're completely missing mine. I'd put a bet on that 

Bet, let’s dissect your post:

3 hours ago, Uedo said:

I'd argue it was easier to keep a world in DS than DST, You could just reset everything to regen the world whilst keeping a stable base in one of the DLC's.
At least DST makes you have do something other than click a button to regen all resources everywhere at once.

This is not related to the previous post at all

3 hours ago, Uedo said:

If you're not established or new, what are you? You're basically saying 'Make a binary choice between two numbers, 1 or 2 and it can't be one or two.'

You missed the context completely here. Mike is clearly already referring to a middle ground. Then you follow up with a False Analogy fallacy.

3 hours ago, Uedo said:

If it said 'GO MIKE YOU CAN DO IT, PLEASE SAVE OUR WORLD, YOU'RE OUR ONLY HOPE - Love Charlie and Wagstaff' followed by 'Yes' or 'Not right now' would that change things for you? 

I'm getting the feeling you're putting to much feeling on the question. If you removed the box and it happened naturally, once you gave the hand dreadstone or wagstaff a shard, I feel you'd have no complaint but all that really does is just either lead to people not noticing it, people understanding how it works so it's literally what they want to happen or being surprised at which point they leave or rollback. Does it have to be there? No. Would everything be fine? Absolutely. But Klei have said they want to make things less obscure and you've supported that decision many times.

Maybe I approach things wrongly with you. Why shouldn't it have a box? What will happen if the box disappeared? What would that look like for the flow of the game? What would you suggest to replace it?

Then you focus exclusively on the popup box, even though Mike was talking about much broader concepts. He didn’t even mention that popup box.

3 hours ago, Uedo said:

The reason I ask is that it ultimately falls to the final two questions: What impact would it have had if you hadn't have implemented this change? On a cost perspective, be that time or resources, was it worth it? 

I think the last two could only be answered with: A marginal, if not, immeasurable impact - if at all. Followed by; Considering it makes so little difference outside of aesthetics, no Klei could use the time and resources for something better - like, literally any arbitrary task in the entire universe.

Finally, you close by referring again only to the popup box (which, again, was not mentioned in Mike’s post)

In conclusion, you either deliberately avoided staying on topic, or you simply missed the point completely.

[Uedo]

27 minutes ago, EatenCheetos said:

Bet, let’s dissect your post:

This is not related to the previous post at all

You missed the context completely here. Mike is clearly already referring to a middle ground. Then you follow up with a False Analogy fallacy.

Then you focus exclusively on the popup box, even though Mike was talking about much broader concepts. He didn’t even mention that popup box.

Finally, you close by referring again only to the popup box (which, again, was not mentioned in Mike’s post)

In conclusion, you either deliberately avoided staying on topic, or you simply missed the point completely.

I concede, you're clearly out brained me friend. Here have my wife. I'm not worthy.

......iloveu

28 minutes ago, EatenCheetos said:

He didn’t even mention that popup box.

Finally, you close by referring again only to the popup box (which, again, was not mentioned in Mike’s post)

In conclusion, you either deliberately avoided staying on topic, or you simply missed the point completely.

In all seriousness though - the pop up box Mike quoted as saying 'Are you ready?'  Maybe calm down and do something else for a while, you stink of internet

4 hours ago, EatenCheetos said:

That’s not what I mean at all, that’s not even the topic of discussion. You’re not making sense

Like your post to @grm9 - if you feel people constantly arn't making sense, maybe revaluate your perspective a bit? 

[mykenception]

3 hours ago, Siren11 said:

why not just play singleplayer? It sounds like you’d have more fun.

13k comments in the forum. mostly about policing how others play and how dst is awful because it isn't ds

pretty sure they ain't stopping anytime soon

[Reecitz]

50 minutes ago, mykenception said:

13k comments in the forum. mostly about policing how others play and how dst is awful because it isn't ds

pretty sure they ain't stopping anytime soon

Nothing but people with bad logic here. But it's common forum behavior, so can you really be surprised?

Bottom line: people rather complain than wait, possibly due to attention spans being damaged over the years.

Edited March 27 by Reecitz

[Faintly Macabre]

7 hours ago, Siren11 said:

Okay, genuine question. For those of you who constantly talk about how great singleplayer is and how Klei is ruining DST by catering to the newbies and megabasers or whatever… why not just play singleplayer? It sounds like you’d have more fun.

On the offchance you've merely abandoned the argument with those particular posters and not the entire forum, I'll try to explain at least one angle a little more coherently and thoroughly, and with less completely unwarranted hostility:

Klei announced DST like a week after DS's RoG expansion dropped. It was originally pitched as an expansion to the base game rather than its own distinct product, but at some point that changed for technical reasons. As DST was being developed, they started adding all kinds of new features that we were told were going to be implemented in the base game, which would turn out only to be a partial truth: in reality, a lot of DST's content was exclusive from the word go.

What's worse is that DST's development very very obviously took over the majority of their focus: in spite of releasing two expansion DLCs for the base game, both were buggy and frankly incomplete messes at release. They supported both of those releases for a few months after they dropped and then just pissed off, only finally coming back to fix game-breaking bugs and add a handful of new features (which also turned out to be buggy) many many months later in the case of the first and nearly four years later in the case of the second. In the latter case, they literally just hired a guy who had developed and published a massive bug patch mod on the Steam Workshop.

Meanwhile, DST ultimately morphed into the actual, expressly labeled sequel to DS, and has been in active development ever since. And as if it wasn't bad enough for the base game to be abandoned, DST was for many years being developed seemingly without much consideration for solo players, who basically had to play the game on Hard Mode to get their shiny new content and lore. Over the past few years it seems like they've taken solo play a bit more into consideration, and players have managed to make the earlier content less arduous with new tools released along the way, but there are still struggles.

This is one of the reasons why you may have noticed the beta board over the past couple of weeks just turned into a battleground over patching cheese out; despite a bunch of people insisting everybody's just lazy, bad at the game, want something for nothing, and a bunch of other character attacks that for some reason were rarely moderated, a lot of us just liked having a few tools for outmaneuvering challenges where for many the difference between "unfun test of some skill but mostly patience" and "perfectly manageable and reasonably enjoyable boss fight" is just 1 vs. 2.

Oh, and most of these multiplayer challenges get even worse if you're playing on console/controller as you not only have to fight the boss, but an outdated and insufficient control scheme too. It was actually super cool to see the adjustments they made to try to alleviate this a bit, and they were absolutely a step in the right direction. But even with these changes, AFW is so chaotic as a solo player that I was still not quite 50/50 on kills because your inventory management tools are still so insufficient and a single mistake can easily just end an attempt and flush any resources you've already spent down the toilet with it.

And like, fine? It still needs some work. I could live with that... if they hadn't changed their mind about keeping the cheese for this older content. Quality of Life, indeed.

So yeah. That's why some solo players are here and why some of them are mad: we got the short end of the stick because DS is a largely forgotten mess and the first few years of DST's design choices still make us second-class citizens here.

6 hours ago, EatenCheetos said:

Read Mike23Ua’s comment here for an explanation of why that’s wrong.

I don't think you know what the word "wrong" means.

Edited March 28 by Faintly Macabre

[_zwb]

5 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

The thing here though: was there was a menu of options to where if you did not like a certain feature, you could toggle that feature completely off (such as removing the BFB boss from even spawning)

You can with world gen options and world hopping.

5 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

without asking the player: “Are you Ready?”

It's left this way because the rifts arc isn't finished, it's more of a "do you what to try this early access stuff?"

[Reecitz]

18 minutes ago, _zwb said:

It's left this way because the rifts arc isn't finished, it's more of a "do you what to try this early access stuff?"

Oh really? That's interesting. Is that something confirmed by Klei that rift content will no longer be optional eventually?

Not that I don't believe you; you're one of the few people here who I believe can actually back up their claims.

[EatenCheetos]

37 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

On the offchance you've merely abandoned the argument with those particular posters and not the entire forum, I'll try to explain a little more coherently and thoroughly, and with less completely unwarranted hostility:

Klei announced DST like a week after DS's RoG expansion dropped. It was originally pitched as an expansion to the base game rather than its own distinct product, but at some point that changed for technical reasons. As DST was being developed, they started adding all kinds of new features that we were told were going to be implemented in the base game, which would turn out only to be a partial truth: in reality, a lot of DST's content was exclusive from the word go.

What's worse is that DST's development very very obviously took over the majority of their focus: in spite of releasing two expansion DLCs for the base game, both were buggy and frankly incomplete messes at release. They supported both of those releases for a few months after they dropped and then just pissed off, only finally coming back to fix game-breaking bugs and add a handful of new features (which also turned out to be buggy) many many months later in the case of the first and nearly four years later in the case of the second. In the latter case, they literally just hired a guy who had developed and published a massive bug patch mod on the Steam Workshop.

Meanwhile, DST ultimately morphed into the actual, expressly labeled sequel to DS, and has been in active development ever since. And as if it wasn't bad enough for the base game to be abandoned, DST was for many years being developed seemingly without much consideration for solo players, who basically had to play the game on Hard Mode to get their shiny new content and lore. Over the past few years it seems like they've taken solo play a bit more into consideration, and players have managed to make the earlier content less arduous with new tools released along the way, but there are still struggles.

This is one of the reasons why you may have noticed the beta board over the past couple of weeks just turned into a battleground over patching cheese out; despite a bunch of people insisting everybody's just lazy, bad at the game, want something for nothing, and a bunch of other character attacks that for some reason were rarely moderated, a lot of us just liked having a few tools for outmaneuvering challenges where for many the difference between "unfun test of some skill but mostly patience" and "perfectly manageable and reasonably enjoyable boss fight" is just 1 vs. 2.

Oh, and most of these multiplayer challenges get even worse if you're playing on console/controller as you not only have to fight the boss, but an outdated and insufficient control scheme too. It was actually super cool to see the adjustments they made to try to alleviate this a bit, and they were absolutely a step in the right direction. But even with these changes, AFW is so chaotic as a solo player that I was still not quite 50/50 on kills because your inventory management tools are still so insufficient and a single mistake can easily just end an attempt and flush any resources you've already spent down the toilet with it.

And like, fine? It still needs some work. I could live with that... if they hadn't changed their mind about keeping the cheese for this older content. Quality of Life, indeed.

So yeah. That's why solo players are here and why some of them are mad: we got the short end of the stick because DS is a largely forgotten mess and the first few years of DST's design choices still make us second-class citizens here.

This does not answer the question of why solo players play DST rather than DS at all. 

Also please don’t lump the rest of us solo DST players with you. Most of us don’t rely on exploits to beat bosses and aren’t mad about those changes. I don’t even know why you’re bringing any of this up anyway because none of this relates to the topic at hand.

37 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

I don't think you know what the word "wrong" means.

 

“Wrong” (adj) definition 5 via Merriam Webster: “not in accordance with one's needs, intent, or expectations” — which references an opinion by default, so it is correct usage.

2 hours ago, Uedo said:

In all seriousness though - the pop up box Mike quoted as saying 'Are you ready?'

His entire post was about the way Klei treats difficulty as a whole, then he used the dialogue from the popup box for effect at the end. You decided to ignore the broad contents of the entire post and treat it as if it were simply about the popup box.

Edited March 28 by EatenCheetos

[Faintly Macabre]

2 minutes ago, EatenCheetos said:

This does not answer the question of why solo players play DST rather than DS at all. 

At all? It doesn't answer the question at all? Bro, get out of here. You're one of the poorest-faith posters on the board, and your Debate For Dummies cheat sheet doesn't hide that at all.

[Siren11]

8 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

Klei announced DST like a week after DS's RoG expansion dropped. It was originally pitched as an expansion to the base game rather than its own distinct product, but at some point that changed for technical reasons. As DST was being developed, they started adding all kinds of new features that we were told were going to be implemented in the base game, which would turn out only to be a partial truth: in reality, a lot of DST's content was exclusive from the word go.

What's worse is that DST's development very very obviously took over the majority of their focus: in spite of releasing two expansion DLCs for the base game, both were buggy and frankly incomplete messes at release. They supported both of those releases for a few months after they dropped and then just pissed off, only finally coming back to fix game-breaking bugs and add a handful of new features (which also turned out to be buggy) many many months later in the case of the first and nearly four years later in the case of the second. In the latter case, they literally just hired a guy who had developed and published a massive bug patch mod on the Steam Workshop.

Meanwhile, DST ultimately morphed into the actual, expressly labeled sequel to DS, and has been in active development ever since. And as if it wasn't bad enough for the base game to be abandoned, DST was for many years being developed seemingly without much consideration for solo players, who basically had to play the game on Hard Mode to get their shiny new content and lore. Over the past few years it seems like they've taken solo play a bit more into consideration, and players have managed to make the earlier content less arduous with new tools released along the way, but there are still struggles.

This is one of the reasons why you may have noticed the beta board over the past couple of weeks just turned into a battleground over patching cheese out; despite a bunch of people insisting everybody's just lazy, bad at the game, want something for nothing, and a bunch of other character attacks that for some reason were rarely moderated, a lot of us just liked having a few tools for outmaneuvering challenges where for many the difference between "unfun test of some skill but mostly patience" and "perfectly manageable and reasonably enjoyable boss fight" is just 1 vs. 2.

Oh, and most of these multiplayer challenges get even worse if you're playing on console/controller as you not only have to fight the boss, but an outdated and insufficient control scheme too. It was actually super cool to see the adjustments they made to try to alleviate this a bit, and they were absolutely a step in the right direction. But even with these changes, AFW is so chaotic as a solo player that I was still not quite 50/50 on kills because your inventory management tools are still so insufficient and a single mistake can easily just end an attempt and flush any resources you've already spent down the toilet with it.

And like, fine? It still needs some work. I could live with that... if they hadn't changed their mind about keeping the cheese for this older content. Quality of Life, indeed.

So yeah. That's why solo players are here and why some of them are mad: we got the short end of the stick because DS is a largely forgotten mess and the first few years of DST's design choices still make us second-class citizens here.

Thank you! I really appreciate this explanation.

I do sometimes play solo (I actually prefer solo DST over singleplayer). Even when I play with friends, I tend to do some fights by myself (although we’re working on coordinating attacks and trading aggro, so that will probably change). I understand at least some of the frustration there, although I’m sure all the changes have helped make my solo DST experience better than it originally was. But trying to learn Fuelweaver has been… painful, to say the least. I can’t even imagine doing it on console.

There’s also all the other things Mike pointed out (like skins). I guess I was mostly thinking of my own perception of singleplayer vs. DST and especially the non-optional survival threats in both games. And some people do bring up singleplayer a lot when critiquing DST, so I didn’t understand why people weren’t playing the game they seem to enjoy more. But clearly there’s a lot of stuff exclusive to DST that we all love.

[EatenCheetos]

12 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

At all? It doesn't answer the question at all?

Point out where you gave the real reason: because people prefer DST’s content to the original. Simple as that.

It also doesn’t accurately answer why some solo players are upset at the new content. Earlier in this thread it was quite clearly stated that solo players are upset that the game is becoming less harsh. 

Instead, you just yapped about the history of DST and threw in something about being mad that exploits are being fixed. So yeah, I’d say you were completely off topic.

 

Edited March 28 by EatenCheetos

[Siren11]

27 minutes ago, EatenCheetos said:

This does not answer the question of why solo players play DST rather than DS at all. 

I appreciated their answer. It was my question anyways.

If we’re being technical, I was asking why people would choose to play the game they seemingly like less. But even for people who prefer the original Don’t Starve experience, I understand the appeal of continued support and updates, content, skins, and lore. And I can admit that I may have been wrong in my original perception (that the people making these arguments like singleplayer more than DST).

Anyways, I stand by my original point that ramping up the difficulty of the non-optional survival content in DST would be good, but Klei shouldn’t do it in an extreme way that would only hurt casual players and newbies (while not providing much challenge for experienced players). It would be a tricky thing to balance, but if we can talk about things in good faith, then I’d love to hear people’s ideas!

[EatenCheetos]

5 minutes ago, Siren11 said:

Anyways, I stand by my original point that ramping up the difficulty of the non-optional survival content in DST would be good, but Klei shouldn’t do it in an extreme way that would only hurt casual players and newbies (while not providing much challenge for experienced players).

I still think the way to do this would be to force the boss quest lines after some X amount of days. Klei would have to make it a bit clearer for new players to understand what to do, perhaps a his could be solved with something like inscribed obelisks or stones that depict drawings of what to do.

For example, in the woods players could find a drawing of ancient people putting a sun callers staff in the moonstone and watching it change. Something like this for every vague part of the quest lines would be good.

Finally, players would have to know that a change is coming to the world. If we’re taking the idea of rifts activating after the first year, players could start to see particles or small changes days ahead of time and comment on them. Then the rifts themselves would start small, but ramp up as the world gets older. 

It would keep the game fresh after the first year and continue the race-against-the-clock feeling that the first year perfected.

You could easily get 1-2 more years of content out of this before the game reaches a stagnant difficulty. That would be nearly 3x as much content in the standard experience!