Hear me out, portal in the Archives teleporting to DST's "Hamlet" (Paid DLC that can be purchased with spools)

[Reiko24]

[chirsg]

I'm in between cool with this and just having a hamlet lite, not unlike what we have with sailing in it's current iteration.
Having water in dst isn't so dissimilar to shipwrecked. There are boats, there are sharks, there's even an archipelago. 

Having a different island that has themes which mix the art of hamlet and gorge would be great. 

Hamlet is my favorite thing in all of don't starve, but man oh man, does it have it's flaws.

[arubaro]

I dont see how klei would waste the time needed to release a paid dlc game size, that also can be weave.., for the price of, at most, 2 skin packs instead of simply releasing the skin packs in less time without taking in count all the work to make some kind of 3rd shard with good performance..

Edit And is old content unbalanced for rog maps and progression so they will need extra time to make it a non absurd experience... is simply easier to add totally fresh new content for free to attract skin buyers than wasting time to add old content from other game people can buy

[chirsg]

19 minutes ago, arubaro said:

I dont see how klei would waste the time needed to release a paid dlc game size, that also can be weave.., for the price of, at most, 2 skin packs instead of simply releasing the skin packs in less time without taking in count all the work to make some kind of 3rd shard with good performance..

Edit And is old content unbalanced for rog maps and progression so they will need extra time to make it a non absurd experience... is simply easier to add totally fresh new content for free to attract skin buyers than wasting time to add old content from other game people can buy

I don't like this point of view at all. Single player is abandoned and modders continuously tout how badly optimized DS is compared to DST.

So much of what is in DS is some of the best work Klei has done that is held back by
- Bad optimization
- Less freedom
- Lack of optimization
- Hyper dwindling playerbase
- No option for multiplayer
- Balancing of the economy which is subject to break at a moment's notice

 

I have to stand against your opinion with all my heart. New content for the sake of new content is absurd and is just a brainstorming session just to create content bloat, whereas having something that has worked in the past and is visually stunning shouldn't be overlooked when it comes to recycling in a certain manner.

I hope you don't get your way.

[Maxposting]

20 minutes ago, chirsg said:

recycling in a certain manner.

I don't follow, do you want new content inspired by hamlet or just a dst port of hamlet?

[arubaro]

21 minutes ago, chirsg said:

New content for the sake of new content is absurd and is just a brainstorming session just to create content bloat, whereas having something that has worked in the past

New content can be well integrated. Hamlet only worked when was isolated from the other dlcs, when you mixed them the balance broke completely which means "new old content for the sake of new content to create content bloat"

23 minutes ago, chirsg said:

is visually stunning

Agree and dont forget the ost, hamlet is top themes of dont starve and really fun but i dont see it fitting rog map unless klei makes huge changes to it

[chirsg]

54 minutes ago, Maxposting said:

I don't follow, do you want new content inspired by hamlet or just a dst port of hamlet?

I'd be happy with either, but it's not entirely realistic to get a straight out port of hamlet in dst. Would be great and I'd be the number 1 fan of it happening, but the former would suffice. 
Even if a lot of hamlet's content was ripped off to go into dst, I'm cool with that. Somehow balancing slanty shanties would be great. Not have them be a straight out get out of jail free card and it could fit in the dst constant somehow. Shops, trading. We get so much food already, that it wouldn't be such bad sport to have an economy going.

I've got a ton of ideas, but I'm not a game dev. All I know is I'd like this game to have some semblance of economy balanced with survival. I know it can be done somehow. 

[Cliffford W.]

2 hours ago, Maxposting said:

I don't follow, do you want new content inspired by hamlet or just a dst port of hamlet?

If it would be entire port of Hamlet.

Bad idea as it would drastically lengthen loading times.

[Dr.Webber]

Correct

[Waoling]

I feel like there can be Hamlet inspire mechanic, without porting the entire Hamlet into DST.

[gamehun20]

Bug hamlet maybe?

[NPCMaxwell]

Maybe one could add Hamlet underground biomes then? [Also with the leading to another main-island part]

[Waoling]

6 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

Bug hamlet maybe?

Yes, like Wurt like to eat bug, but there is no bug in the mainland.

[Mike23Ua]

No In Solo DS on Xbox Ateast the way “DLC” works you can select it prior to hosting a world (you can host a regular world, a SW or a Hamlet world.. but if you have SW toggled to ON Hamlet can not Also be toggled to On, it will Default to OFF)

I would assume DLC in DST would be about like choosing “Classic” or “Together” World Gen options.

For those of you Unaware what that does- It removes the biomes added exclusively for DST (like Dragonfly and her magma pools)

Also if you choose “No Giants Here” it disables not Just the bosses, but it also disables Reign of Giants DLC.

I would Imagine that hosting “Shipwrecked” would break the world up into Archipelago Islands etc..

DST is a Multiplayer game that focuses extremely heavily on the player investing permanently into one core world.

So you can absolutely FORGET about world hopping unless it worked like Dead Rising 2 or something- Aka… all players need to be in the teleport zone & teleported together, or NO ONE gets to teleport.

of course the worlds “host” should always have priority, if the host wants to teleport its their world, their rules- And your really just in it as a “Guest”

Some games do it this way to such as “Only the server host can interact with this”

Point is that Klei would either have to disable world hopping, or spend a ton of extra time developing ways to make it work.

But in my brutally harsh & unforgiving honest opinion: With as much development time as they’ve already wasted on character reworks, re-reworks, Tweaks to Reworks players weren’t happy with, Skill Tree Reworks and also Skill Tree Tweaks- AND the very mediocre still boring Ocean…..

I would’ve preferred THIS over any of that. 

[Memetan]

Is already April Fools' Day?

[cybers2001]

No idea how this would work, logistically. If there was a separate world connected via a portal, that world would effectively be its own shard on the server. If I'm hosting a dedicated server, how does the server know if I purchased the dlc or not? Does it just generate a shard for the dlc, even if none of the players in that world can access it? If it's a public server with a dozen people playing, are some players going to just head over to the new shard and be separated from the rest of the group? What happens if a Wanda, who owns the dlc, opens a backtrek portal to the dlc shard? Are other players able to circumvent the dlc restriction, or does the portal just reject them?

[Reiko24]

11 hours ago, cybers2001 said:

No idea how this would work, logistically. If there was a separate world connected via a portal, that world would effectively be its own shard on the server. If I'm hosting a dedicated server, how does the server know if I purchased the dlc or not? Does it just generate a shard for the dlc, even if none of the players in that world can access it? If it's a public server with a dozen people playing, are some players going to just head over to the new shard and be separated from the rest of the group? What happens if a Wanda, who owns the dlc, opens a backtrek portal to the dlc shard? Are other players able to circumvent the dlc restriction, or does the portal just reject them?

I mean, the whole "create another shard" thing seems pretty unoptimized and old-fashioned to me.

Why not just generate an area like the caves far, far away in a different place, and make the whole area have the biome "caves" in code, which has its own behaviours instead of the usual ones? I mean, we already have an area like the Lunar Island, which has its own behaviours that are not tied to turfs or anything. 

Same thing could be done with Hamlet. I wonder if it would decrease lag that DST has when hosting multiple shards right now. It would also make loading times almost instant.

 

My idea was that the host needs to have the DLC, and when they host the game, if they have the DLC and they enable it in the settings, the world will generate the Hamlet islands. Host's friends would be able to go through the portal normally.

 

 

Edit: Imagine how many things could be done with this if it is feasible and really works! Lunar rift and shadow rift dimensions, hamlet, etc. so much potential when you are not bound to different shards. It would also make items like the Lazy Deserter work across dimensions.

[cybers2001]

6 hours ago, Reiko24 said:

I mean, the whole "create another shard" thing seems pretty unoptimized and old-fashioned to me.

Why not just generate an area like the caves far, far away in a different place, and make the whole area have the biome "caves" in code, which has its own behaviours instead of the usual ones? I mean, we already have an area like the Lunar Island, which has its own behaviours that are not tied to turfs or anything. 

Same thing could be done with Hamlet. I wonder if it would decrease lag that DST has when hosting multiple shards right now. It would also make loading times almost instant.

If it's part of the caves shard, though, then it would be "Hamlet but in the caves." Is that what you're suggesting?

6 hours ago, Reiko24 said:

My idea was that the host needs to have the DLC, and when they host the game, if they have the DLC and they enable it in the settings, the world will generate the Hamlet islands. Host's friends would be able to go through the portal normally.

That's the thing, though. AFAIK you don't even have to own a copy of DST to be able to run a dedicated server for it, so there's no way to know whether the host has the DLC or not.

[Reiko24]

2 hours ago, cybers2001 said:

If it's part of the caves shard, though, then it would be "Hamlet but in the caves." Is that what you're suggesting?

No, I mean eliminate the shards completely. Host everything on one specific shard, generated far away from each other and make each biome have its own properties. If you were to enter such a DLC or just caves, you would be teleported, and your map would be locked to this one biome to make it more immersive and to not give away that it's on the same shard. If Lunar Island has its own properties specific only to its terrain, why can't we make caves like this?

 

2 hours ago, cybers2001 said:

That's the thing, though. AFAIK you don't even have to own a copy of DST to be able to run a dedicated server for it, so there's no way to know whether the host has the DLC or not.

 Oh, if that's the case then that's a problem. I have heard that you need to have a copy, but that was using SteamCMD, so idk about other methods...