Wanda is not a glass canon at all.

[Wawchik]

8 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

For example: in several other games that I play that have glass canon characters, they can be the most powerful strongest characters in the game, but they do not come without serious downsides- Such as: Not being able to wear armor, or being restricted to which weapons they can and can not pick up…

In most cases the glass canon always ends up being the female character, but not always… sometimes it can be a really really skinny dude too, or even a short alien cat thing, anyway: Point is that they move fast, but they’re smaller body frame prevents them from picking up heavy swords, mallets etc..

That's literally Wilba with her transformation. Chat, it's the time, they can keep Wanda as she is, give us pig girl

[00petar00]

On 5/15/2025 at 4:26 AM, PonyOfApocalips said:

As Wanda it isn't to expensive tbh

She doesn't need to be and players can unlock characters for free, it was your point for players to have different expectations when it came to DLC characters not mine.

On 5/15/2025 at 4:26 AM, PonyOfApocalips said:

For FW? 4- his DMG isn't problem for any of character, his overheal is. 

CC i dont remember,

but werepig wasn't in game back then and i guess you are right about him cause he is well designed and pretty anti-tank Boss 

I wonder how long it takes you to kill CC of werepig compared to any player that dodges most boss attacks, FW actually isn't that bad to tank.

On 5/15/2025 at 3:43 PM, Theukon-dos said:

Oh can you bugger off with your numbers and metrics? You know what you get when you try to make something that appeals to everyone? You get something that's really, really *boring*. And that's the mentality that's sanded off every sharp edge and spine that made me fall in love with this game over seven years ago.

My main point with that reply was that glass cannon can't exist in DST that you completely ignored. Games without any logic aren't usually going to be fun so I don't see how numbers and metrics don't matter, it is true that nothing appeals to everyone but the idea is for it to appeal to as many people as possible.

On 5/15/2025 at 3:43 PM, Theukon-dos said:

I don't care if Wanda would only have half the people playing her if she was a true glass cannon. Because the half that still do would be having far more fun than they did before, and thus result in a net positive on enjoyment. 

That's your opinion as it fits your playstyle but you aren't losing any money from DST sales as klei is going to If they listened to you. Games that get updated over the years or even most games don't exist in a bubble where only a vision of a specific minority of the players matters.

I can say the same to you and be a voice for players that aren't as active or attentive as I am on the forums so which group of players should developers listen to If they want to make more money and to satisfy a larger group?

It would only be a net positive for players that want that but wouldn't be half because every single character refresh and skill tree buffed the character in question so that means that most players want their characters to be stronger and not weaker. At first I did think that some characters would stay weak to support more playstyles but it seems that all character mains want their character to get buffed so it literally explains the direction the game has taken and it won't ever fit your vision.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2025 by 00petar00

[Theukon-dos]

On 5/16/2025 at 10:47 PM, 00petar00 said:

 

My main point with that reply was that glass cannon can't exist in DST that you completely ignored. Games without any logic aren't usually going to be fun so I don't see how numbers and metrics don't matter, it is true that nothing appeals to everyone but the idea is for it to appeal to as many people as possible.

That's your opinion as it fits your playstyle but you aren't losing any money from DST sales as klei is going to If they listened to you. Games that get updated over the years or even most games don't exist in a bubble where only a vision of a specific minority of the players matters.

I can say the same to you and be a voice for players that aren't as active or attentive as I am on the forums so which group of players should developers listen to If they want to make more money and to satisfy a larger group?

It would only be a net positive for players that want that but wouldn't be half because every single character refresh and skill tree buffed the character in question so that means that most players want their characters to be stronger and not weaker. At first I did think that some characters would stay weak to support more playstyles but it seems that all character mains want their character to get buffed so it literally explains the direction the game has taken and it won't ever fit your vision.

 

 

Ok first of all. I see where you're coming from on the glass cannon argument. I just disagree entirely. Revivals in DST may not be free, but they are quite common once you know where to look. And the general assumption is that anyone playing a glass cannon will be experienced enough to have atleast some understanding of the boss's patterns before going in.

 

Second, y'know what? You're right. I am in the minority of players here. That's why I'm so damn mad at everything you're saying.

 

You know what you get when you try to appeal to everyone? Slop, that's what. Bland, uninteresting, and uninspired slop. You can't add to much of any one flavor, because then you'll chase away anyone who doesn't like that flavor. And in the end that sort of paranoia and "playing it safe" just means that you end up with something that doesn't have any flavor at all.

But you know what? Don't Starve and DST used to have flavor. Fantastic flavor even. Was it for everyone? No. But for the people it was for, it was one of the best flavors we've ever tasted. But that wasn't enough for Klei. Not enough people wanted that flavorful game. So what did they do? They watered it down. Shaved off as much of that flavor as possible and left us with a watered-down slop compared to what it once was. All so that people like you would stop by for a meal that was never made for you in the first place.

 

Am I gatekeeping right now? Frankly, I don't think so. Because that would assume the gate's still intact in the first place. But I'll always advocate for a return to form. Because for as much as Klei's removed all the rough edges that made DST so great in the first place, I know it's not to late for atleast a fragment of that to return in some way, shape, or form.

[FillerText]

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

But you know what? Don't Starve and DST used to have flavor. Fantastic flavor even. Was it for everyone? No. But for the people it was for, it was one of the best flavors we've ever tasted. But that wasn't enough for Klei. Not enough people wanted that flavorful game. So what did they do? They watered it down. Shaved off as much of that flavor as possible and left us with a watered-down slop compared to what it once was. All so that people like you would stop by for a meal that was never made for you in the first place.

I get where you're coming from, but last time I had this feel is when I was in a quiet, rainy environment constantly looking for gold on day 14 so I can finally craft an alchemy engine. Also Adventure Mode. Adventure Mode is amazing.

After that, the flavor just completely dissipated. It's only built around uncertainty, and after I got used to Singleplayer's different world gen, and lack of some items, I just started doing more or less the same. I had a similiar experience with the game past the fact that I decided to just make a pretty base due to there not being any bosses for me to kill. Then I started snowballing hard, despite wasting my time carefully aligning structures so they look pretty. At some point it was basically impossible for me to die just because I was playing the game at my own pace.

[Guille6785]

6 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

But you know what? Don't Starve and DST used to have flavor. Fantastic flavor even. Was it for everyone? No. But for the people it was for, it was one of the best flavors we've ever tasted. But that wasn't enough for Klei. Not enough people wanted that flavorful game. So what did they do? They watered it down. Shaved off as much of that flavor as possible and left us with a watered-down slop compared to what it once was. All so that people like you would stop by for a meal that was never made for you in the first place.

you just got better at the game

[00petar00]

8 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

But you know what? Don't Starve and DST used to have flavor. Fantastic flavor even. Was it for everyone? No. But for the people it was for, it was one of the best flavors we've ever tasted. But that wasn't enough for Klei. Not enough people wanted that flavorful game. So what did they do? They watered it down. Shaved off as much of that flavor as possible and left us with a watered-down slop compared to what it once was. All so that people like you would stop by for a meal that was never made for you in the first place.

There are just more possibilities in the game, it wasn't difficult at any point to survive indefinitely. The only difference is that it was more tedious because we didn't have end game items like we do now.  How hard is it to ignore bosses and focus on pure survival? It becomes boring really fast, I have played on PVP servers in the early days of DST and didn't have a base at all and could survive as long as I wanted.

DST did become easier but the biggest difficulty hurdle is knowledge and it still very much exists. The problem lies in people that are active on forums that read every single patch note and strategies that players discover on forums, youtube or chinese websites. The issue here is that you are making the game easier on yourself by using forums and playing beta versions of the game and a lot of people justify reading and knowing about every single detail because they want to play beta and test the new additions to the game.

For example skill trees, you need to go out of your way to figure out the most optimal combination for your playstyle or there isn't that many good options so there is only one that is clearly above the rest. Most players won't get maximum value from it and while I would've preferred If we didn't get skill trees because there is too much focus on characters it is still very good addition to hook new players in that don't have any idea what they are doing and are likely to quit.

[BattleOzze]

13 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

You know what you get when you try to appeal to everyone? Slop,

Nah, man, you get slop if you put 4 ice in crock pot or something. Maybe catcoon will vomit some occasionally.

 

Also, to say that the game has become a slop (or less flavorfull, whatever does that mean) just because you personally stopped liking it is incredibly rude. I personally like the latest updates.

[cropo]

For me personally, the only form of difficulty I've ever encountered in Don't Starve that really threw me for a loop was the initial beginning when I didn't know how to play, and ANR bosses because they have so much damn HP and summon 50 things at a time, and I suppose avoiding the aporkalypse when starting from Hamlet. I don't think survival has ever been difficult, in any period of the games life time. I always wonder what people mean when they reference "ye olde times" in Don't Starve because much of it wasn't really hard at all and a lot of the balance changes they made in DST were great.

I honestly think Shipwrecked was the lowest point of balance, to this day you can compete with rift-items solely on that DLC alone and it was just soooo easy.

[Cruvimaster]

Many people talk about Wanda, but few know what it's like to play Wanda.

[Edible Coal]

1 hour ago, Cruvimaster said:

Many people talk about Wanda, but few know what it's like to play Wanda.

that feeling when dead is unavoidable

[Theukon-dos]

22 hours ago, Guille6785 said:

you just got better at the game

 

19 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

There are just more possibilities in the game, it wasn't difficult at any point to survive indefinitely. The only difference is that it was more tedious because we didn't have end game items like we do now.  How hard is it to ignore bosses and focus on pure survival? It becomes boring really fast, I have played on PVP servers in the early days of DST and didn't have a base at all and could survive as long as I wanted.

DST did become easier but the biggest difficulty hurdle is knowledge and it still very much exists. The problem lies in people that are active on forums that read every single patch note and strategies that players discover on forums, youtube or chinese websites. The issue here is that you are making the game easier on yourself by using forums and playing beta versions of the game and a lot of people justify reading and knowing about every single detail because they want to play beta and test the new additions to the game.

For example skill trees, you need to go out of your way to figure out the most optimal combination for your playstyle or there isn't that many good options so there is only one that is clearly above the rest. Most players won't get maximum value from it and while I would've preferred If we didn't get skill trees because there is too much focus on characters it is still very good addition to hook new players in that don't have any idea what they are doing and are likely to quit.

First of all, "You got better at the game" and "The game has gotten a lot easier" are both statements that can co-exist. I don't even consider myself that good at the game. Better than average definitely. But I'm poorly organized, reckless, bad at preparing, and there are still several raid bosses that I've not managed to beat such as Celestial Champion or Toadstool. Yes, Knowledge is a massive part of that difficulty so being well-read alleviates that. But having more options and those options being stronger still makes new players more likely to stumble on them, and makes them easier to exploit once you do know about them.

 

Second, I'm not even just talking about difficutly. Yes, that is a factor. I'd be a fool to try and deny that. But the game's still shifted a ton beyond just that. You've got the addition of the ocean and lunar biomes, rifts to try and add a new end-game, the massive buffs to characters between the refreshes and skill trees, the shift to focus on boss battles and other brawls, and more that I can't think of off the top of my head. All those things contribute in ways that make the game feel super different independantly of how they change the difficulty. There's one line in there I want to highlight in particular.

Quote

it is still very good addition to hook new players in that don't have any idea what they are doing and are likely to quit.

This? This is the problem. Skill trees where added to appeal to new players who wouldn't like DST otherwise, and did so at the detriment of what the game was and who it was for. That's not a good thing, and is in fact exactly what I'm talking about when I said the game lost it's flavor. Games shouldn't appeal to everyone. Becuase doing so just makes them less interesting and comes at the cost of people who don't enjoy the sorts of things that become mainstream.

Look at a game like Rimworld for example. Rimworld is a colony sim that sets itself apart by being more focused on the stories that unfold naturally from the various world interactions. And through the setting, a lawless planet on the edge of known space where anything goes because the only people who could possibly enforce rules are a multi-decade star ship ride away.

Early on when I was first getting into the DLCs for the game, I hadn't realized just how annoying it was to run colonies with multiple different faiths running about. Meaning that most of the invaders I had recruited still held onto their home religion that demanded conquest and ritual execution. My own colonists didn't have such demands, but the constant mood debuffs on the other two where starting to get extremely annoying to try and manage, so I ended up sending a small strike team to a nearby logging camp where I gunned down one of the two people stationed there and kidnapped the other one to appease the warmongers back home.

 

After the ritual completed and all the upset recruits where finally appeased, I took a closer look at the body and realized she was 17 ears old and in her second trimester of pregnancy.

 

This moment shook me to my core. I was very familiar with all the crimes against humanity that Rimworld lets you commit. But this was the first time I had gone out with the goal of doing one, and had ended up committing one of the worst I could have imagined at the time. A young woman having her story cut short just months before what could have been the happiest day of her life for no reason than to appease a bunch of bloodlusted zealots. It's a moment that will stick with me for years, and has been one of the defining factors in cementing Rimworld as one of my favorite games.

 

Now, I want you to look me dead in the eye and say that Rimworld would be improved by removing all the uncomfortable and disturbing things that it lets you do becuase doing so would make the game more appealing to new players who would be chased off by the dozens of human leather corsets I'm pawning off on the regular.

 

Obviously this is a far more extreme example than what DST's going through. But do you get the point? Changing the game to appeal to more players just gets rid of what made it special in the first place.

[00petar00]

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

First of all, "You got better at the game" and "The game has gotten a lot easier" are both statements that can co-exist. I don't even consider myself that good at the game. Better than average definitely. But I'm poorly organized, reckless, bad at preparing, and there are still several raid bosses that I've not managed to beat such as Celestial Champion or Toadstool. Yes, Knowledge is a massive part of that difficulty so being well-read alleviates that. But having more options and those options being stronger still makes new players more likely to stumble on them, and makes them easier to exploit once you do know about them.

So you managed to beat FW but not CC that doesn't regen health and you can continue the fight whenever? Toadstool is also much easier compared to FW and is only a drain of resources.

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Second, I'm not even just talking about difficutly. Yes, that is a factor. I'd be a fool to try and deny that. But the game's still shifted a ton beyond just that. You've got the addition of the ocean and lunar biomes, rifts to try and add a new end-game, the massive buffs to characters between the refreshes and skill trees, the shift to focus on boss battles and other brawls, and more that I can't think of off the top of my head. All those things contribute in ways that make the game feel super different independantly of how they change the difficulty. There's one line in there I want to highlight in particular.

Why even speak about rifts If you can't kill CC but even If you do it still doesn't make the game much easier because anyone skilled enough to get that far should have the tediousness of the game alleviated.

The main point I am trying to make is that survival by itself isn't that fun and it is much easier to reach this threshold compared to killing all bosses and obtaining endgame items.

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

This? This is the problem. Skill trees where added to appeal to new players who wouldn't like DST otherwise, and did so at the detriment of what the game was and who it was for. That's not a good thing, and is in fact exactly what I'm talking about when I said the game lost it's flavor. Games shouldn't appeal to everyone. Becuase doing so just makes them less interesting and comes at the cost of people who don't enjoy the sorts of things that become mainstream.

What's wrong with this? Most players before skill trees were added don't have issues with them existing, the biggest complaint and the one I hold is that it is taking too much time away from content updates that everyone can access. Games should appeal to as many people because at the end of the day the point of any company is to make money, you can make arguments as to why to focus on niche audience but DST is a game that can thrive in mainstream so it is very detrimental to focus on a small amount of players.

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Look at a game like Rimworld for example. Rimworld is a colony sim that sets itself apart by being more focused on the stories that unfold naturally from the various world interactions. And through the setting, a lawless planet on the edge of known space where anything goes because the only people who could possibly enforce rules are a multi-decade star ship ride away.

I don't think Rimworld can be compared to DST at all and I have played Rimworld since alpha 6. These games are completely different.

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Early on when I was first getting into the DLCs for the game, I hadn't realized just how annoying it was to run colonies with multiple different faiths running about. Meaning that most of the invaders I had recruited still held onto their home religion that demanded conquest and ritual execution. My own colonists didn't have such demands, but the constant mood debuffs on the other two where starting to get extremely annoying to try and manage, so I ended up sending a small strike team to a nearby logging camp where I gunned down one of the two people stationed there and kidnapped the other one to appease the warmongers back home.

Rimworld ideology is a DLC and you can fine tune it like skill trees to only have massive benefits that don't have any negatives and that is what I often do when starting over but I do fine tune it with some "negatives" that will eventually become positives. I have liked every single DLC except the latest one so I can't really talk about it as I haven't played with it but every other DLC can be abused to make your colony stronger.

4 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

After the ritual completed and all the upset recruits where finally appeased, I took a closer look at the body and realized she was 17 ears old and in her second trimester of pregnancy.

 

This moment shook me to my core. I was very familiar with all the crimes against humanity that Rimworld lets you commit. But this was the first time I had gone out with the goal of doing one, and had ended up committing one of the worst I could have imagined at the time. A young woman having her story cut short just months before what could have been the happiest day of her life for no reason than to appease a bunch of bloodlusted zealots. It's a moment that will stick with me for years, and has been one of the defining factors in cementing Rimworld as one of my favorite games.

There is so much storytelling with rimworld and that is one of the reasons it a s good game but most of these are still a gimmick and random. I don't see why the need to get so attached to them and If the colonist is worth it they can be revived with resurrector mech serum, you can turn your pawns into sanguophages or If you are like me and play the same save file long enough you can fine tune best gene combination and eventually have everyone implanted.

5 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Now, I want you to look me dead in the eye and say that Rimworld would be improved by removing all the uncomfortable and disturbing things that it lets you do becuase doing so would make the game more appealing to new players who would be chased off by the dozens of human leather corsets I'm pawning off on the regular.

 

These things aren't comparable, DST doesn't really have a story that most people follow so most things can be changed to satisfy more players but with Rimworld the stories that are generated are a large part as to why people like the game.

Rimworld has embraced that and the changes they'd need to make wouldn't even be worth it and most would dislike it.

5 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Obviously this is a far more extreme example than what DST's going through. But do you get the point? Changing the game to appeal to more players just gets rid of what made it special in the first place.

The difference is that Rimworld is mainstream because these changes don't impact gameplay and only how much someone can be offended. DST wouldn't have anywhere near as much players or sales If they didn't focus on making the game more accessible years ago.

[Malfario]

On 5/11/2025 at 9:49 AM, Szczuku said:

This is a dst discussion forum. People are allowed to talk about stuff that you may not necessary be interested in. Just ignore threads you're not interested in instead of trying to gatekeep conversation

Pointing out how much people talk about wanda and expressing frustration about it its part of the conversation as well. Expressesing exhaustion about the debate, Its the part of the debate, thats not gatekeeping. 

Also, this forum is not just a dst disccusion forum, this is a discussion the devs actively read so they know how we feel about the state of the game, and so ignoring a topic can be translated as people not caring about it, even if they actually do, because they didnt participated. And i think people been exhausted of the conversation showcases a lot more of information about the situation that taking sides.

[Theukon-dos]

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

So you managed to beat FW but not CC that doesn't regen health and you can continue the fight whenever? Toadstool is also much easier compared to FW and is only a drain of resources.

I have beaten AFW once. Hilariously, that once was with Wanda. Don't get me wrong, I probably could beat those guys if I properly applied myself. But I haven't. 

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

Why even speak about rifts If you can't kill CC but even If you do it still doesn't make the game much easier because anyone skilled enough to get that far should have the tediousness of the game alleviated.

See, I could reach rifts if I wanted too. Or I could just toggle them manually on the home screen. I smack talk them because I hate everything they stand for and want them to die in a pit full of rusty nails.

 

I don't even think Rifts make the game easier. I just don't think trying to rip off Terraria's hard mode fits the game at all and that it feels like they tacked it on with a glue stick.

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

The main point I am trying to make is that survival by itself isn't that fun and it is much easier to reach this threshold compared to killing all bosses and obtaining endgame items.

It's not fun because Klei's done jack to update the survival mechanics over the last decade to instead focus on adding whatever raid bosses they feel like.

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

What's wrong with this? Most players before skill trees were added don't have issues with them existing, the biggest complaint and the one I hold is that it is taking too much time away from content updates that everyone can access. Games should appeal to as many people because at the end of the day the point of any company is to make money, you can make arguments as to why to focus on niche audience but DST is a game that can thrive in mainstream so it is very detrimental to focus on a small amount of players.

No actually, why the hell are you so focused on Klei's bottom line? Do you own Klei stocks or something? 

 

Yes, Klei is a company. But that doesn't mean they're obligated to squeeze every penny out of their IP as possible. 'Nor does it mean that players are obligated to bend over and take it.

 

You know what else they could do to make more money? Triple the amount of MTX the game has, lock character abilities behind a paywall. Add (paid) loot boxes, ect. ect.

 

Quick edit because I realized I dodn't actually answer your question.

 

I, the player, bought DST because it had qualities that I wanted and was willing to exchange money to get.

Klei decided that these qualities that, again, are the reason I bought DST, where not profitable enough. And have sense released updates to scrub these qualities from the game despite the fact that they are ehat I and many others bought the game for in the first place.

 

Therefore, in attempting to to give the game mass-market appeal, Klei has removed much of thw appeal that made me and so many more people get the game in the first place, despite having already spent time and money in it before the change.

 

The pursuit of infinite growth and marketability has actively made the game worse for me and many others. That is why it is a bad thing.

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

I don't think Rimworld can be compared to DST at all and I have played Rimworld since alpha 6. These games are completely different.

Rimworld ideology is a DLC and you can fine tune it like skill trees to only have massive benefits that don't have any negatives and that is what I often do when starting over but I do fine tune it with some "negatives" that will eventually become positives. I have liked every single DLC except the latest one so I can't really talk about it as I haven't played with it but every other DLC can be abused to make your colony stronger.

OK, see- that is true. You can just use Ideologies to optimize the hell out of your colony. The difference is that you can't go the other way with skill trees. With the sole exception of Walter's skill tree, none of them have enough scope or options to actually let you expand a character's playstyle. They're all just piling in more and more dakka because Klei apparently can't develop anything that isn't related to combat. 

 

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

There is so much storytelling with rimworld and that is one of the reasons it a s good game but most of these are still a gimmick and random. I don't see why the need to get so attached to them and If the colonist is worth it they can be revived with resurrector mech serum, you can turn your pawns into sanguophages or If you are like me and play the same save file long enough you can fine tune best gene combination and eventually have everyone implanted.

I- just- what?

9 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

These things aren't comparable, DST doesn't really have a story that most people follow so most things can be changed to satisfy more players but with Rimworld the stories that are generated are a large part as to why people like the game.

Rimworld has embraced that and the changes they'd need to make wouldn't even be worth it and most would dislike it.

The difference is that Rimworld is mainstream because these changes don't impact gameplay and only how much someone can be offended. DST wouldn't have anywhere near as much players or sales If they didn't focus on making the game more accessible years ago.

My brother in Christ, Don't Starve wasn't already Klei's golden goose *before* they started trying to give it mass appeal. Would it have less players? Yeah, probably. But the franchise was still popular enough to get 2 (later 3) DLCs and a multiplayer spinoff/sequal in the first place.

Edited May 21, 2025 by Theukon-dos

[Jakepeng99]

On 5/11/2025 at 1:20 PM, WilsonHiggs said:

•Fragile•. A character can't be fragile if can't be hit or if can evade being fragile by, for example, wearing an armor that reduces 95% of damage or, in the case of Maxwell, not only can wear that armor but ride a beefalo rising his 75hp into 1000hp. We also have the case of Walter which sanity is punished by getting hit but not only he can resist many hits, he can kill shadows by holding F or how now his atack speed is fast enough to hit without much delay

 

Videogames with good glass canon characters which are well implemented into the content either have ways to deal damage from distance or gap closers, ways to block projectiles or the character has slow atack animation to counter the ranged characters,  don't allow the characters that are supposed to deal a lot of damage but be fragile to reach high defenses 

They added perks for 13 years old content and call it the day

With some luck Klei won't rise the planar defense with perks added with shoe horn to make them more resistance and will start to revisit old content to adapt it into the new era

Wanda also has the choice to not  be a glass cannon, which removes the daily downsides of being one.

[Bumber64]

7 hours ago, Jakepeng99 said:

Wanda also has the choice to not  be a glass cannon, which removes the daily downsides of being one.

Thus making her a viable survival game character. (In spite of how poorly she handles certain forms of damage.)

Edited May 21, 2025 by Bumber64

[Wawchik]

9 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

My brother in Christ, Don't Starve wasn't already Klei's golden goose *before* they started trying to give it mass appeal. Would it have less players? Yeah, probably. But the franchise was still popular enough to get 2 (later 3) DLCs and a multiplayer spinoff/sequal in the first place.

From what I've heard dlcs weren't profitable enough, so no, it wasn't 

[00petar00]

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

No actually, why the hell are you so focused on Klei's bottom line? Do you own Klei stocks or something? 

 

Yes, Klei is a company. But that doesn't mean they're obligated to squeeze every penny out of their IP as possible. 'Nor does it mean that players are obligated to bend over and take it.

The more players that enjoy the game the better it is.

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

You know what else they could do to make more money? Triple the amount of MTX the game has, lock character abilities behind a paywall. Add (paid) loot boxes, ect. ect.

The difference here is that klei is trying to keep and imrove their reputation while most online games tank it to profit in the moment but klei can release a mid game and people will still buy it because of the reputation. Reputation is transactional between players and developers and the higher reputation a company has the more they can get away with stuff.

For example blizzard and bethesda have lost so much reputation that a lot of players don't even care about them anymore.

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

I, the player, bought DST because it had qualities that I wanted and was willing to exchange money to get.

Klei decided that these qualities that, again, are the reason I bought DST, where not profitable enough. And have sense released updates to scrub these qualities from the game despite the fact that they are ehat I and many others bought the game for in the first place.

Almost everything that you wanted exists in the game and you just have to not go seek out the new additions or use skill trees to have the same experience besides the character refresh that is forced upon you.

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Therefore, in attempting to to give the game mass-market appeal, Klei has removed much of thw appeal that made me and so many more people get the game in the first place, despite having already spent time and money in it before the change.

DST is an online game and when you buy a game that gets updated regularly you can't expect it to stay the same or for developers to keep the same direction especially in agame like DST because it was remade from DS and DS is already quite old. People change and learn, developers can figure out what most players want and give it to them.

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

The pursuit of infinite growth and marketability has actively made the game worse for me and many others. That is why it is a bad thing.

It is still a minority of players and I can make an argument that DST is much better because it has drawn much more players in.

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

OK, see- that is true. You can just use Ideologies to optimize the hell out of your colony. The difference is that you can't go the other way with skill trees. With the sole exception of Walter's skill tree, none of them have enough scope or options to actually let you expand a character's playstyle. They're all just piling in more and more dakka because Klei apparently can't develop anything that isn't related to combat. 

This is unfair comparison because skill trees are tailored to every single character. I could understand If we had something like ideology where you could tailor it how you like and it would apply to every character. The scope obviously has to be smaller because ideology dlc took a long time to be developed for rimworld and you can only imagine how much it would take for klei to have something as big as that for every character.

17 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

My brother in Christ, Don't Starve wasn't already Klei's golden goose *before* they started trying to give it mass appeal. Would it have less players? Yeah, probably. But the franchise was still popular enough to get 2 (later 3) DLCs and a multiplayer spinoff/sequal in the first place.

My main point is that rimworld doesn't really change the gameplay much even If everything offensive is removed because it is just a story of your pawn, it would make the game much worse but you could still get similar experience If you aren't there for the story but still many people are playing rimworld for that.

DST changes that are suggested and the direction that players like you want the game to follow would negatively impact a lot of players that like the game as it is currently.

DST could've still been successful but at a much lesser scale, I am not saying that they couldn't make a profit and make a spinoff or sequel but why should the game exist in a state that a smaller number of people enjoy it when developers themselves have decided to go for mainstream audience? I could understand If they decided to focus on the core community because there are games like that but klei hasn't taken that direction and it is ultimately their choice whether to make more or less money.

[Theukon-dos]

12 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

The more players that enjoy the game the better it is.

Once again. Not every game needs to be for every player.

12 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

The difference here is that klei is trying to keep and imrove their reputation while most online games tank it to profit in the moment but klei can release a mid game and people will still buy it because of the reputation. Reputation is transactional between players and developers and the higher reputation a company has the more they can get away with stuff.

For example blizzard and bethesda have lost so much reputation that a lot of players don't even care about them anymore.

Didn't Doom: The Dark Ages just come out to be the biggest ID launch ever? And didn't Oblivion Remastered sell 1.4 million copies in April, both of these despite also launching on Gamepass? 

12 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

Almost everything that you wanted exists in the game and you just have to not go seek out the new additions or use skill trees to have the same experience besides the character refresh that is forced upon you.

What is it you think I'm looking for, and what about my complaints makes you think that I'd have more fun going in blind? Earlier you defended skill trees with this stance by saying new players would have to experiment with them to find what they like. But that's what I already do. Yeah, I play the beta. But the skill trees are still visible from the get-go. And I do play with them to figure out what works instead of waiting for other people to find the best combos.

More than that though, well- funny story. I actually don't like trying to learn the game blind at all. I find DST to be way to obtuse for learning it naturally to actually work. 

12 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

DST is an online game and when you buy a game that gets updated regularly you can't expect it to stay the same or for developers to keep the same direction especially in agame like DST because it was remade from DS and DS is already quite old. People change and learn, developers can figure out what most players want and give it to them.

 

12 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

It is still a minority of players and I can make an argument that DST is much better because it has drawn much more players in.

This is unfair comparison because skill trees are tailored to every single character. I could understand If we had something like ideology where you could tailor it how you like and it would apply to every character. The scope obviously has to be smaller because ideology dlc took a long time to be developed for rimworld and you can only imagine how much it would take for klei to have something as big as that for every character.

My main point is that rimworld doesn't really change the gameplay much even If everything offensive is removed because it is just a story of your pawn, it would make the game much worse but you could still get similar experience If you aren't there for the story but still many people are playing rimworld for that.

DST changes that are suggested and the direction that players like you want the game to follow would negatively impact a lot of players that like the game as it is currently.

DST could've still been successful but at a much lesser scale, I am not saying that they couldn't make a profit and make a spinoff or sequel but why should the game exist in a state that a smaller number of people enjoy it when developers themselves have decided to go for mainstream audience? I could understand If they decided to focus on the core community because there are games like that but klei hasn't taken that direction and it is ultimately their choice whether to make more or less money.

I- hmm. OK, let's take a step back here for a second.

 

I've been focusing on how you use player growth to justify completely changing the game. But I do need to make it clear.

I am absolutly not opposed to Klei making the game easier to on-board. I do recognize that Klei as a business needs to make money. 

My problem with the direction they've gone in pursuit of this goal has been terrible. Not that it's been terrible because they're trying to appeal to new players. In fact, I'd argue the bigger problem is that recent updates don't do *enough* to help new players.

 

I genuinly don't think that Klei has a plan or direction for the game beyond "keep making updates". Rifts have been a mess. They're late-game content, so no relation to new players at all. And when you actually look at what Klei tried to accomplish with them, they completely failed at those goals and it was obvious they would do so.

 

Meanwhile, I don't just hate skill trees because they make the game easier. I hate them because they decided to commit to making skill trees for everyone despite not every character starting from the same spot. But even that doesn't explain the massive inconsistencies between skill trees, meaning I can only assume that nobody at Klei is making sure the teams working on skill trees are communicating and aiming for the same baseline with what they should accomplish.

 

If the goal is primarily to attract new players, there are tons of ways they can do that without making DST a whole different game. I'm not opposed to change entirely. And as I said, I don't even like the intended new player experience. So there are several changes I would make to it that wouldn't have huge effects on the long-term state of the game.

 

For example, the biggest change I Champion is cutting both enemy damage and player armor protection in half. This would have no effect on the difficulty of the game's fights for players who are prepared. But makes fights far less punishing for new players who don't realize that armor is something they can make yet.

 

Or, even better, just add an option to scale the game for a single survivor, so that new players who don't have friends to play with aren't trying to learn and game balanced around the assumption you have a team.

 

There are options. Klei can have their cake and eat it too. They just need to stop throwing it out the window instead.

[Bumber64]

2 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

For example, the biggest change I Champion is cutting both enemy damage and player armor protection in half. This would have no effect on the difficulty of the game's fights for players who are prepared. But makes fights far less punishing for new players who don't realize that armor is something they can make yet.

That's a buff to followers.

What about new players who don't realize they can make weapons?

The real issue is durability. Noobs don't expect to bring multiple weapons/armor to a fight. Solo DST is worse than DS in that regard, due to armor changes and enemy health.

Edited May 22, 2025 by Bumber64

[00petar00]

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Didn't Doom: The Dark Ages just come out to be the biggest ID launch ever? And didn't Oblivion Remastered sell 1.4 million copies in April, both of these despite also launching on Gamepass? 

Doom: The dark ages was a flop, you can just check steamdb for playercount and while there was a lot more players on game pass that was because of subscriptions and not just for this game.

Oblivion is one of the few games that holds so much nostalgia and it is actually a good game that was remastered by virtuos studio as bethesda can't make good games anymore and even in this case there were quite a few controversial changes as bethesda is woke so its really impossible for them not to put identity politics in a game and that means elder scrolls 6 no matter how good the game is it will probably be a flop or barely make even by relying on nostalgia. Body type 1 and 2 in oblivion is what caused the most popular mod to be made that allows you to pick male and female that was banned on nexus mods for no good reason.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

What is it you think I'm looking for, and what about my complaints makes you think that I'd have more fun going in blind? Earlier you defended skill trees with this stance by saying new players would have to experiment with them to find what they like. But that's what I already do. Yeah, I play the beta. But the skill trees are still visible from the get-go. And I do play with them to figure out what works instead of waiting for other people to find the best combos.

If you read every patch note you are obviously going to make DST much easier on yourself because the biggest difficulty hurdle in this game is knowledge. If you play on beta you probably read everything related to the update because otherwise it would be a waste of time to figure out what was added and it might take ridiculous amount of time If it is something niche and no one that is active on forums wants to guess what was added or changed, it wouldn't even be possible to test.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

More than that though, well- funny story. I actually don't like trying to learn the game blind at all. I find DST to be way to obtuse for learning it naturally to actually work. 

So that means you are literally solving the biggest difficulty of the game before even playing it and that may be the reason you don't enjoy DST as much.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

I've been focusing on how you use player growth to justify completely changing the game. But I do need to make it clear.

I am absolutly not opposed to Klei making the game easier to on-board. I do recognize that Klei as a business needs to make money. 

My problem with the direction they've gone in pursuit of this goal has been terrible. Not that it's been terrible because they're trying to appeal to new players. In fact, I'd argue the bigger problem is that recent updates don't do *enough* to help new players.

Skill trees do make the game easier and also that is something new players can latch on to as they don't really know what to do.

Rift and late game updates are quite needed because there is only so much to do for players that enjoy that part of the game and this doesn't really make the game easier for players that enjoy the earlier parts of the game so no matter how strong the items that are added are as long as it takes a while to get to them it is still not something for players that enjoy the survival aspect and it doesn't impact them as much because survival isn't really that hard and by the time you activate rifts you have killed quite a few bosses so it obviously isn't going to become harder as you have already put in the effort. 

The point I want to make is that you can survive indefinitely without risking anything or gathering resources to fight dangerous bosses without LFG or meat effigy to revive you is easy. I played on a popular PVP server in the early days of DST and I only built science/alchemy to prototype and hammered it after, it was possible to survive forever without building a base, the thing is that this isn't fun for most players and the only reason I did it was because the server was PVP focused so there is no benefit to helping others prototype or use your structures. A lot of players can easily survive indefinitely without building any structures.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

I genuinly don't think that Klei has a plan or direction for the game beyond "keep making updates". Rifts have been a mess. They're late-game content, so no relation to new players at all. And when you actually look at what Klei tried to accomplish with them, they completely failed at those goals and it was obvious they would do so.

There's a difference between early and late game content and it should obviously not have anything to do with new players as it would make the game too easy If you could somehow obtain late game gear without actually getting there. I don't think klei failed, they have been very consistent with with these updates and while not everyone enjoys planar system including me it is still a good addition. To counter late game updates we got skill trees for new and early game players so it seems like everything is planned as it obviously should be.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Meanwhile, I don't just hate skill trees because they make the game easier. I hate them because they decided to commit to making skill trees for everyone despite not every character starting from the same spot. But even that doesn't explain the massive inconsistencies between skill trees, meaning I can only assume that nobody at Klei is making sure the teams working on skill trees are communicating and aiming for the same baseline with what they should accomplish.

 

The biggest reason I dislike skill trees is that we lost developer time that could've been used to make content that everyone can access as I only main one character at any given time usually and at most play 2-3 and that is the case with most players.

DST doesn't need to be balanced like that so inconsistences can exist as it is a sandbox game and this also goes into what I have always suggested, some characters should be stronger and others weaker to support more playstyles but what is funny is that every single character got a massive buff because mains of every character wants their character to be strong and this goes against what players like you want.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

If the goal is primarily to attract new players, there are tons of ways they can do that without making DST a whole different game. I'm not opposed to change entirely. And as I said, I don't even like the intended new player experience. So there are several changes I would make to it that wouldn't have huge effects on the long-term state of the game.

The problem is keeping new players, a lot of people will try out a game but how many will play it after 10 hours?

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

For example, the biggest change I Champion is cutting both enemy damage and player armor protection in half. This would have no effect on the difficulty of the game's fights for players who are prepared. But makes fights far less punishing for new players who don't realize that armor is something they can make yet.

I don't understand how lowering damage and halving the armor protection would help new players at all, it seems like it would be the exact opposite.

New players can't find a good healing method and revival with telltale hearts requires booster shots to restore stats and they aren't easy for them to gather. Experienced players can avoid taking damage or already have a good healing source and they also usually use LFG.

Armor is one of the core mechanics of DST and players that stick with the game learn it very fast.

11 hours ago, Theukon-dos said:

Or, even better, just add an option to scale the game for a single survivor, so that new players who don't have friends to play with aren't trying to learn and game balanced around the assumption you have a team.

That should've been the case on release but it is very hard to add a scale for bosses and mobs now because a lot of players currently have adapted to the health of mobs and bosses and they defend keeping the same health no matter what.

Edited May 23, 2025 by 00petar00

[Theukon-dos]

1 hour ago, Bumber64 said:

That's a buff to followers.

What about new players who don't realize they can make weapons?

The real issue is durability. Noobs don't expect to bring multiple weapons/armor to a fight. Solo DST is worse than DS in that regard, due to armor changes and enemy health.

Maybe overall, but followers would also deal half as much damage, so I'm not sure exactly where it would end up.

 

All tools also boost the user's damage, even if they're not true weapons. Axes in particular only trail trail the spears damage by about 7 points. So I'd not call that as important of a priority.

 

As for durability, I somewhat disagree, only because I'm talking about small incremental fights, not their first boss battle or whatever. Though funny enough that change would also help on that end. Due to how armor durability is lost, everything having lower DR would make it last longer too, unless the durability was nerfed aswell. But I don't see a real reason to do that.