Thanks for this plot twist.

[Danila6300]

I haven't actually had a chance to try out the beta test yet, but I was very surprised and pleased by the news about Pearl's eviction.  I am glad that some locations change somehow and play their role in the plot. I would also like to point out that this eviction highlights Wagstaff's character. Wagstaff is willing to spit on everyone for his own goals and I think this was fully conveyed in this beta test. 

 

Thank you very much for such an unexpected plot!

[Radicaljoe]

I'm not happy for the plot twist. I think through shorts and other storytelling tools klei could convey it just as easily without needing to destroy such a nice place to build and beautify.

 

We already knew wagstaff was very morally gray/had little morals at all. We see him pickpocketing everyone at the theater disaster. He looks nice but will scam you for everything you got.

Ruining places like that above doesn't highlight that more, it just makes it a little more clear of what we already knew.

[Danila6300]

5 minutes ago, Radicaljoe said:

We already knew wagstaff was very morally gray/had little morals at all. We see him pickpocketing everyone at the theater disaster. He looks nice but will scam you for everything you got.

Ruining places like that above doesn't highlight that more, it just makes it a little more clear of what we already knew.

There is beauty in destruction too. And I think Klei did it perfectly. In fact, I love it. 

[GenomeSquirrel]

do you realize he is moving Pearl away from danger, there's nuanced levels of evil, at this this implies a level of concern; contrast to Charlie who will not waste an opportunity to kill you ...

[Danila6300]

Just now, GenomeSquirrel said:

do you realize he is moving Pearl away from danger, there's nuanced levels of evil, at this this implies a level of concern; contrast to Charlie who will not waste an opportunity to kill you ...

Leads away from danger? That's too boring and tedious. But when one old man drives another old woman out of her place of residence, that's something we simply haven't seen in this game. This is simply a phenomenal event and probably the only one of its kind. This must be left behind! 

[_zwb]

2/10 weak bait

[GenomeSquirrel]

1 minute ago, Danila6300 said:

Leads away from danger? That's too boring and tedious. But when one old man drives another old woman out of her place of residence, that's something we simply haven't seen in this game. This is simply a phenomenal event and probably the only one of its kind. This must be left behind! 

that's pretending hammers don't exist ... 

[Danila6300]

2 minutes ago, GenomeSquirrel said:

that's pretending hammers don't exist ... 

I didn't understand you. 

[Siren11]

I like this update as well, but more because of what it shows us about the survivors. We already know Wagstaff is dangerously ambitious and willing to trick or hurt others to achieve his goals. However, the survivors are generally considered good people despite all the really bad things you can do in this game. I think this is the first time the survivors’ actions have genuinely elicited an emotional response in the player base. We’re actually having to think about whether we’re really okay with evicting a nice (ish) old lady for the sake of our own ambitions. I think it’s a pretty cool idea.

[GenomeSquirrel]

Just now, Danila6300 said:

I didn't understand you. 

pig houses and rabbit houses, you can hammer them, leaving the occupant homeless, been in the game for a while ...

[Danila6300]

Just now, Siren11 said:

I like this update as well, but more because of what it shows us about the survivors. We already know Wagstaff is dangerously ambitious and willing to trick or hurt others to achieve his goals. However, the survivors are generally considered good people despite all the really bad things you can do in this game. I think this is the first time the survivors’ actions have genuinely elicited an emotional response in the player base. We’re actually having to think about whether we’re really okay with evicting a nice (ish) old lady for the sake of our own ambitions. I think it’s a pretty cool idea.

Yes! Moments like these generally make the plot more alive in my opinion. 

Just now, GenomeSquirrel said:

pig houses and rabbit houses, you can hammer them, leaving the occupant homeless, been in the game for a while ...

Sorry, but I don't really understand why you wrote this. In my post I focus on the storyline of the game and the character traits of Wagstaff. What I'm saying is that I'm glad that this kind of plot twist was included in the game in general. It's the plot, not the gameplay part. 

[Radicaljoe]

18 minutes ago, _zwb said:

2/10 weak bait

God I hope it is bait

[Chewabacca]

24 minutes ago, Siren11 said:

I like this update as well, but more because of what it shows us about the survivors. We already know Wagstaff is dangerously ambitious and willing to trick or hurt others to achieve his goals. However, the survivors are generally considered good people despite all the really bad things you can do in this game. I think this is the first time the survivors’ actions have genuinely elicited an emotional response in the player base. We’re actually having to think about whether we’re really okay with evicting a nice (ish) old lady for the sake of our own ambitions. I think it’s a pretty cool idea.

But if it is meant to come off like that, why is Pearl so weirdly okay with moving? And story-wise, Wagstaff isn’t offering us anything up front to tempt us into shady behavior, it’s just “run along now and advance the plot”. I would be more okay with it if Pearl was angrier about being told to leave her home behind and Wagstaff said something even as vague as “I can make it worth your while”. Maybe there could even be an option to hammer down his junk and force him to relocate to the mainland at the cost of increasing the number of captured gestalts needed to progress since now he has to work in an area with less lunar energy, so that it actually feels like you’re making the choice to be a bad person to save yourself some time, instead of being just Wagstaff’s dumb little errand boy breaking everything you’ve built because Progression Guy asked you to. 

[mr. brj]

1 hour ago, Danila6300 said:

There is beauty in destruction too.

I agree but Pearl being fine with everything and Wagstaff's whole "crabs seeking better homes" narrative both seem too forced. Wagstaff literally kicking Pearl out or Pearl herself seeking a new place and the player helping her with that would be more fitting.

Edited May 23, 2025 by mr. brj

[Siren11]

53 minutes ago, Chewabacca said:

But if it is meant to come off like that, why is Pearl so weirdly okay with moving? And story-wise, Wagstaff isn’t offering us anything up front to tempt us into shady behavior, it’s just “run along now and advance the plot”. I would be more okay with it if Pearl was angrier about being told to leave her home behind and Wagstaff said something even as vague as “I can make it worth your while”. Maybe there could even be an option to hammer down his junk and force him to relocate to the mainland at the cost of increasing the number of captured gestalts needed to progress since now he has to work in an area with less lunar energy, so that it actually feels like you’re making the choice to be a bad person to save yourself some time, instead of being just Wagstaff’s dumb little errand boy breaking everything you’ve built because Progression Guy asked you to. 

It does need some more fleshing out, but I think Pearl’s okay with it because she’s been tricked. She values privacy, so she doesn’t want Wagstaff hanging around her island. She’s okay with moving to an “uninhabited” island. I don’t know what happens if you interact with Pearl on Moon Quay, but maybe that’s where the anger could come in.

I like your ideas! It would add more to the story if the survivors had more of a reason to help Wagstaff (and betray Pearl). Right now it’s pretty much about the player, which I think could also work. But it’s not as strong a choice.

[PonyOfApocalips]

3 hours ago, Siren11 said:

I like this update as well, but more because of what it shows us about the survivors. We already know Wagstaff is dangerously ambitious and willing to trick or hurt others to achieve his goals. However, the survivors are generally considered good people despite all the really bad things you can do in this game. I think this is the first time the survivors’ actions have genuinely elicited an emotional response in the player base. We’re actually having to think about whether we’re really okay with evicting a nice (ish) old lady for the sake of our own ambitions. I think it’s a pretty cool idea.

[Mysterious box]

4 hours ago, Radicaljoe said:

I'm not happy for the plot twist. I think through shorts and other storytelling tools klei could convey it just as easily without needing to destroy such a nice place to build and beautify.

 

We already knew wagstaff was very morally gray/had little morals at all. We see him pickpocketing everyone at the theater disaster. He looks nice but will scam you for everything you got.

Ruining places like that above doesn't highlight that more, it just makes it a little more clear of what we already knew.

That's okay for people who keep up with the shorts and such but many people like to see their choices have real meaningful impact on the world while learning as they play. This is a perfect example of that coming to life it teaches players that yes Wagstaff isn't a good person which is something that's lost on people who don't keep up with lore videos even more so because the survivors think of him as a good guy being just as oblivious as the player outside of Wx specifically but due to his personalty is easy to write off as part of his hatred of oragnic life. I'd personally like to see more of it like consequences spilling out to other npcs like the pig king or the monkey queen which could even extend to changing mob habits for example pigs could become more aggressive due to their king getting corrupted or something.

[Well-met]

2 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

That's okay for people who keep up with the shorts and such but many people like to see their choices have real meaningful impact on the world while learning as they play. This is a perfect example of that coming to life it teaches players that yes Wagstaff isn't a good person which is something that's lost on people who don't keep up with lore videos even more so because the survivors think of him as a good guy being just as oblivious as the player outside of Wx specifically but due to his personalty is easy to write off as part of his hatred of oragnic life. I'd personally like to see more of it like consequences spilling out to other npcs like the pig king or the monkey queen which could even extend to changing mob habits for example pigs could become more aggressive due to their king getting corrupted or something.

reminder that the wx short teased pig raids that we're never getting

[Mysterious box]

On a slightly different note while I know people wouldn't go for this because it would drastically affect the status quo but wouldn't it be even cooler if the piece breaking off from the moon, moon quay's island slowly spilling out from the portal, and perhaps even solving puzzles to unlock the ruins was how worlds started out instead of everything being spawned in completed?

2 minutes ago, Well-met said:

reminder that the wx short teased pig raids that we're never getting

Yeah...

[Mike23Ua]

6 minutes ago, Well-met said:

reminder that the wx short teased pig raids that we're never getting

I just wanted to point out that Klei likes to throw In these little nods to other games and franchises with in game Easter eggs and references, and I am beyond slow…

I'm just now realizing that the major Gardening update Reap What You Sow, is a nod to Atomicrops: Reap What You Crow.

Whats interesting about that is Atomicrops is a Gardening RogueLite, where you actually spend the entire game defending a garden from incoming waves of enemies so it’s very sad that pig raids are not in the game..

But I still have a sliver of hope that RWYS laid the foundation for an official Atomicrops collab. (Which would obviously feature garden defense raids) 

I know it’s me just with wishful thinking though  

[lowercase skye]

7 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

I'm just now realizing that the major Gardening update Reap What You Sow, is a nod to Atomicrops: Reap What You Crow.

"Reap What You Sow" is an expression meaning "you will eventually have to face the consequences of your actions". i.e you sow the seeds, you reap the fruits of those seeds.