PSA: Do not "invest" into exclusive skins

[Cheggf]

2 hours ago, Kaioh said:

The practice of selling physical goods with exclusive digital items needs to be condemned. If Klei wants to give people proof of buying authentic products, they should just hand out codes for common skins like with regular winter hats or something along those lines, adding exclusive rewards will just keep fueling the competition for supply between skin collectors and merch enjoyers, ensuring there will be less physical goods for the people who truly want physical goods.

I agree with everything except this part. I see no issues at all with there being skins made specifically for items, as long as they're also obtainable as just the skin. In an ideal world it'd be like "Buy this $70 board game and in March 2027 we'll ship you it, and inside there's free codes to get these 10 free skins we made for it or whatever! The skins will be available for purchase in-game at a normal price at the same time we start shipping the games out". 

[Kaioh]

2 hours ago, Cheggf said:

I agree with everything except this part. I see no issues at all with there being skins made specifically for items, as long as they're also obtainable as just the skin. In an ideal world it'd be like "Buy this $70 board game and in March 2027 we'll ship you it, and inside there's free codes to get these 10 free skins we made for it or whatever! The skins will be available for purchase in-game at a normal price at the same time we start shipping the games out". 

But then it's not actually exclusive if you can purchase the skins separately in-game. Exclusivity is the actual problem as opposed to the theme of the skins, which is my main argument

[loopuleasa]

9 hours ago, Kaioh said:

But then it's not actually exclusive if you can purchase the skins separately in-game

More people are starting to get it!

[Gashzer]

2 hours ago, loopuleasa said:

More people are starting to get it!

... that Klei is false-advertising? 

[CobaltCreations]

2 hours ago, Gashzer said:

... that Klei is false-advertising? 

Others are trying to have a mature and polite discussion and being rude to strangers on the internet is not cute or endearing. It is just rude!

Crazy to call a code for a digital product coming with a physical item being titled "Exclusive" when it can also be purchased in-game elsewhere false advertising. Where's my justice for the fact Webkinz let you purchase the pets in game too??

Rewarding 'brand loyalty' is just as bad a practice. How fair is it to me that just because I didn't get invested in DST years ago I don't get to complete my set of skins? Like sure having an exclusive skin is cool, for like, 5 minutes when you tell others it shows you played the beta or whatever but if you stretch that conversation out just to brag about it you 100% are making others uncomfortable.
Why is the ideal world one where DST gets a set of exclusive players who get to brag they're better than others like it was a kid's virtual world [Animal Jam, Club Penguin, etc] where members get super cool perks and then it instantly becomes full of bullying and belittling cause it turns out dividing your playerbase into 'super special cool people with things only they get' and 'normal people' kinda encourages people to be mean to each other! So many games have done exactly what you're saying Klei should do and it has never turned out well!!!

It's gonna be exclusive for a set amount of time, talk about how cool it is to have backed the board game for that time and show off your skins and stuff, then when it becomes available to others... Move on! That's it. It's cool to be one of the first people to receive an item, to tell people you got it cause you did something. That's where its value should come from, not the fact others cannot access it. It's the difference between using something to tell a cool story vs flaunting to others you spent 300$ on a watch and it makes you better than them cause they don't have it. Maybe it shouldn't use the word exclusive but this is literally how that word was used for digital codes coming with physical products since digital codes coming with physical products have ever existed.

[JeezSorry]

This really has been the Don't Starve Together exclusive skin discourse of all time. I don't know guys, start a boycott or something. Forget the game existed at all, so you never missed out on anything. This thread was the reason I figured out it existed, you can do it too!

[reddocc]

real post the skins really unbalance the meta, this game has become unplayable

[cybers2001]

6 hours ago, CobaltCreations said:

Others are trying to have a mature and polite discussion and being rude to strangers on the internet is not cute or endearing. It is just rude!

He's...  not wrong though. If a company bundles an exclusive skin with merch, knowing full well that it will increase sales of that merch, and then later sell the exclusive skin separately, that's just straight up double dipping, and quite disingenuous.

6 hours ago, CobaltCreations said:

Crazy to call a code for a digital product coming with a physical item being titled "Exclusive" when it can also be purchased in-game elsewhere false advertising.

You know what exclusive means, right?

[CobaltCreations]

31 minutes ago, cybers2001 said:

He's...  not wrong though. If a company bundles an exclusive skin with merch, knowing full well that it will increase sales of that merch, and then later sell the exclusive skin separately, that's just straight up double dipping, and quite disingenuous.

You know what exclusive means, right?

Doesn't matter whether or not he's wrong, he can be polite and kind about it. This is not the first time others asked him to be less rude to them. Multiple have and he has literally admitted to being rude and having no intent to change. Read the forum guidelines, that's very much not allowed. Hence why I stopped the conversation. 

Also yes, I know what exclusive means and for now the skins are exclusive, that doesn't mean they will be forever. It's not promising nobody else will ever be able to get them, it's promising that you will be one of the first to receive it and there's value there, just undeniably.
Nobody would be bragging about getting a console on the day of its release if there wasn't something cool about knowing you were one of the first to receive something.
If someone really spent 100$ just for the skins attached to the board game, I would say they're silly and that's not Klei's fault. If someone who is willing to spend 100$ on DST skins also doesn't realize they probably won't be exclusive until the end of time, well I don't know how they're willing to spend that much money on a franchise they clearly know very little about. I think Klei just assumed nobody needed the clarification, maybe they should clarify that, but I don't blame them if they don't, cause anyone whose that invested in skins should know the history of exclusive skins becoming available to the public over time.

Once again I ask, is it a good idea for Klei to create some sort of exclusive members club skins for people who just so happened to be lucky enough to be into the game and had the money to buy these skins at the time of their release? Do you not think that would create an obnoxious amount of people being rude to others or bragging just bc they had the money to spend on it and others didn't? Cause every other virtual world or game with exclusive skins proves otherwise and I think splitting the playerbase in such a way would be way worse than the other crime of 'false advertising'.

[cybers2001]

6 minutes ago, CobaltCreations said:

Also yes, I know what exclusive means and for now the skins are exclusive, that doesn't mean they will be forever.

That's a convenient loophole. So "exclusive" could mean "exclusive for 10 years" or it could mean "exclusive for 1 week."

6 minutes ago, CobaltCreations said:

Once again I ask, is it a good idea for Klei to create some sort of exclusive members club skins for people who just so happened to be lucky enough to be into the game and had the money to buy these skins at the time of their release? Do you not think that would create an obnoxious amount of people being rude to others or bragging just bc they had the money to spend on it and others didn't? Cause every other virtual world or game with exclusive skins proves otherwise and I think splitting the playerbase in such a way would be way worse than the other crime of 'false advertising'.

I dunno. Do you think players would do that for a pickaxe skin? Considering we've had exclusive backpack skins for years, exclusive funko skins, and extremely rare login/playtime reward skins for like 10 years now, has this been a problem for you?

Again, the emphasis here is that I'm not saying Klei should release exclusive skins. I'm saying if Klei chooses to release exclusive skins, then they should be exclusive.

Edited October 3, 2025 by cybers2001

[CobaltCreations]

11 minutes ago, cybers2001 said:

That's a convenient loophole. So "exclusive" could mean "exclusive for 10 years" or it could mean "exclusive for 1 week."

It's not a loophole. It's exclusive, what that means depends on the context around it and what kinda history the developers have. For Klei we know it likely won't be exclusive forever. Words have this funny way of changing meanings depending on context, the words around them, the tone and who is speaking them. That's how words work, you asked me if I knew what exclusive meant and I do. Now it's a loophole cause the word is being used in a way you don't like? Are we scared about the scenario someone is both willing to drop 100$ on DST skins but also doesn't know the history of other exclusive DST skins? How are they so invested in cosmetics but also know nothing about them? Does such a person exist that Klei is taking advantage of? Or is this a problem we made up and are now concerned about?

[cybers2001]

1 hour ago, CobaltCreations said:

It's not a loophole. It's exclusive, what that means depends on the context around it and what kinda history the developers have. For Klei we know it likely won't be exclusive forever. Words have this funny way of changing meanings depending on context, the words around them, the tone and who is speaking them. That's how words work, you asked me if I knew what exclusive meant and I do. Now it's a loophole cause the word is being used in a way you don't like? Are we scared about the scenario someone is both willing to drop 100$ on DST skins but also doesn't know the history of other exclusive DST skins? How are they so invested in cosmetics but also know nothing about them? Does such a person exist that Klei is taking advantage of? Or is this a problem we made up and are now concerned about?

Yeah it is funny, because conventionally in any other sense, exclusive has no implied expiration date. I guess gamers are just used to abuse-by-marketing. Sad

I feel like you're constantly missing my point, man. I was pretty clear that its an underhanded tactic. What does my personal sentiment on the matter have to do with anything? My sentiment is that I don't really care, because I wouldn't use a pick-axe skin. Likewise, it doesn't bother me that I can't get the chinese exclusive figurine skins (though there are maybe 1 or 2 I wouldn't mind owning if I could)

Edited October 3, 2025 by cybers2001

[CobaltCreations]

20 minutes ago, cybers2001 said:

Yeah it is funny, because conventionally in any other sense, exclusive has no implied expiration date. I guess gamers are just used to abuse-by-marketing. Sad

I was pretty clear that its an underhanded tactic.

I don't know how else to address your point, you say it's underhanded but I say anyone who is gonna spend 100$ on skins surely must be invested in DST enough to know that historically exclusive skins do not stay exclusive thus it isn't underhanded? Cause nobody is being short-changed or hurt by it? They want to spend their money that way and aren't being tricked into doing so. No one is trying to hide information from them or pull the wool over their eyes anyone who knows how Klei has handled exclusive skins in the past knows this and they aren't trying to hide that information from them.
If it was a game marketed towards children I would say you're right, that playerbase could easily fall for FOMO and might not realize spending a bunch of money just to have skins earlier than others is bad cause they're kids who don't understand the value of money yet and probably don't have the idea to research whether or not the skins will be obtainable through other means. But these are hypothetical adults who you and the other user imply are being deceived based on Klei using the word exclusive. Proposing the scenario of someone is both obsessed enough with skins to sink a bunch of money into them based on FOMO But is also not invested enough to know historically Klei will eventually release the skins to be bought normally. 
What I'm saying is I think that's unrealistic and the problem of Klei taking advantage of people or harming anyone through their use of the word exclusive on the campaign is silly cause anyone who is even invested enough into Don't Starve to even know there's gonna be a board game probably knows Klei will release the skins to the public at some point. I don't think Klei didn't clarify in order to trick people through a loophole or anything like that, I think they just trusted people to spend their money wisely and know that they aren't gonna suddenly stop making all the skins accessible for everyone anytime soon.

[cybers2001]

10 minutes ago, CobaltCreations said:

I don't know how else to address your point, you say it's underhanded but I say anyone who is gonna spend 100$ on skins surely must be invested in DST enough to know that historically exclusive skins do not stay exclusive thus it isn't underhanded? Cause nobody is being short-changed or hurt by it? They want to spend their money that way and aren't being tricked into doing so. No one is trying to hide information from them or pull the wool over their eyes anyone who knows how Klei has handled exclusive skins in the past knows this and they aren't trying to hide that information from them.

This implies that:

A) Klei is unashamedly scummy
B) Players should be well aware that Klei is unashamedly scummy.

Except general sentiment is that Klei is not, in fact, scummy, and is actually a nice company of well-intentioned staff.

10 minutes ago, CobaltCreations said:

If it was a game marketed towards children I would say you're right, that playerbase could easily fall for FOMO and might not realize spending a bunch of money just to have skins earlier than others is bad cause they're kids who don't understand the value of money yet and probably don't have the idea to research whether or not the skins will be obtainable through other means. But these are hypothetical adults who you and the other user imply are being deceived based on Klei using the word exclusive. Proposing the scenario of someone is both obsessed enough with skins to sink a bunch of money into them based on FOMO But is also not invested enough to know historically Klei will eventually release the skins to be bought normally. 
What I'm saying is I think that's unrealistic and the problem of Klei taking advantage of people or harming anyone through their use of the word exclusive on the campaign is silly cause anyone who is even invested enough into Don't Starve to even know there's gonna be a board game probably knows Klei will release the skins to the public at some point. I don't think Klei didn't clarify in order to trick people through a loophole or anything like that, I think they just trusted people to spend their money wisely and know that they aren't gonna suddenly stop making all the skins accessible for everyone anytime soon.

Marketing has plenty of gotchas that can trick people. Really a popular modern tactic of marketing is to be just deceptive enough to not trigger complacent consumers into action. Like Fritos selling bags of chips that have slightly less chips and slightly more air. People notice eventually, but if their desire to eat chips is greater than their anger of being ripped off, then they'll just continue to eat chips, and shareholders will get richer.

Edited October 4, 2025 by cybers2001

[CobaltCreations]

1 minute ago, cybers2001 said:

This implies that:

A) Klei is unashamedly scummy
B) Players should be well aware that Klei is unashamedly scummy.

Except general sentiment is that Klei is not, in fact, scummy, and is actually a nice company of well-intentioned staff.

Marketing has plenty of gotchas that can trick people. Really a popular modern tactic of marketing is to be just deceptive enough to not trigger complacent consumers into action. Like Fritos selling bags of chips that have slightly less chips and slightly more air. People notice eventually, but if their desire to eat chips is greater than their anger of being ripped off, then they'll just continue to eat chips.

Klei: So exclusive skins will always be temporary, we have a history with this we have never tried to cover up or hide. If you spent money on a skin expecting it will never be available to other players that is your decision and your mistake, we trust you to do the research or be familiar enough with the game to know that's not the case before you spend 100$ on it. The value you gain from it is the fact that you got it earlier than others, like what most creators do with stuff like patreon. You got it early, that's the exclusivity of it. So we will call it an exclusive skin, a term we have been using for forever and our playerbase is well aware of the meaning of in a campaign we're doing.

Some users: It is insane how Klei is so scummy. How could you lie to us like this, how could you trick us. You're being so deceptive right now, this is just like triple A games praying on people's gambling addictions. This will do the same amount of harm for sure. 

 

Like. Okay man, sorry but I dunno how u don't get it by now lmao bye.

[Siren11]

I backed the Kickstarter because I really want the board game, and I hope Klei makes the skins available to everyone. I wish they would just give the skins to everyone right now so we can all stop arguing about it.

I’ll take resurrecting them at some point in the future though. It would be nice if Klei also told us what skins were going to be resurrected, but I understand they’re relying on the FOMO factor from people who desperately want the skin. I don’t necessarily agree with the practice, but it’s understandable from a business perspective. 

[gaymime]

14 hours ago, cybers2001 said:

This implies that... Players should be well aware that Klei is unashamedly scummy.

Except general sentiment is that Klei is not, in fact, scummy, and is actually a nice company of well-intentioned staff.

so, a business can be less awful than its competitors and STILL invest in tactics that are pro-capital and anti-consumer in the same way a person can be generally nice and still have a job that hurts others to make rent. klei is not generally abusive towards its playerbase and generally uses less intense forms of manipulation to drive skin/merch sales BUT at the end of the day they are still paying their employees and their shareholders so they are still motivated to sell skins and merch. please don't get it twisted; they are not going to bankrupt themselves for social cache and they are not wholly evil because they participate in capitalism but they also are going to keep doing this because it keeps the business from failing and it keeps the business soluble enough to keep making the games which is the whole point.

at the end of the day the issue is expectation management and the breakdown of trust when those expectations are unreasonable but still expected to be met

[JazzyGames]

Yeah, there’s definitely an implication being made here that Klei is intentionally being misleading in their use of the term “exclusive.” It’s an assumption that’s not really supported by their history of skin transactions, word semantics aside.

All of the recent Resurrected skins that Klei has re-released had original methods of obtaining that are no longer available (usually because the physical items are out of print). In fact they have added dozens of previously unobtainable skins for free via points redemption.

The only scenario I can imagine in which the GCE’s would become available to purchase is if the board game went out of print, and there would likely be a substantial amount of time passed before it happened. I find it less likely considering the only skins to get resurrected so far have been from products sold directly by Klei, where skins from Funkos and YouTooz have remained exclusive to those products. Not to say Klei wouldn’t want to do it, but there may be considerable obstacles in figuring out how to do so.

But assuming that Klei would start selling them in-game shortly after GC branded them as exclusive to the board game doesn’t strike me as a realistic expectation, and I can’t think of anything in the history of the game that would support that attitude.

Edited October 4, 2025 by JazzyGames

[Cheggf]

Hang on, why does the Lands Uncharted expansion include a gem deer but not Klaus? Are you to battle a lone gem deer? I thought the whole idea was Klaus is enslaving them, which is why they instantly become neutral when Klaus dies.

[Hungry French]

Pfft. If you're buying a figurine, then you should almost not care about some kind of skin. There are many beautiful skins, but few figures.

A card game is much more valuable than just a good game skin.

[alainmcd]

52 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

Hang on, why does the Lands Uncharted expansion include a gem deer but not Klaus? Are you to battle a lone gem deer? I thought the whole idea was Klaus is enslaving them, which is why they instantly become neutral when Klaus dies.

No proper bosses revealed so far. So maybe they haven't figured out how to make them work, or they're planning to reveal them later, or they'll be part of a future expansion.

Or (speculation, possible gameplay spoilers):

Spoiler

they'll be tied to scenarios, similar to the Pig King in the scenario that's been shown.

 

Edited October 5, 2025 by alainmcd

[Tigris Nano]

4 hours ago, Cheggf said:

Hang on, why does the Lands Uncharted expansion include a gem deer but not Klaus? Are you to battle a lone gem deer? I thought the whole idea was Klaus is enslaving them, which is why they instantly become neutral when Klaus dies.

You buy one gem deer in one set, other one in another set. Then you buy klaus bundle to get klaus. But you cant start fight because you need deer antler and klaus bag expansions

[DVGMedia]

I am only really buying it so I can keep the figurines and the pieces. They are really nice figures that we have not really had in a while. 
Its kind of unfortunate I have to buy a whole game for them.   

[AliceShiki]

On 10/3/2025 at 8:17 PM, cybers2001 said:

Yeah it is funny, because conventionally in any other sense, exclusive has no implied expiration date.

For what it's worth, when a 3rd party company releases a game exclusively on a console, most people automatically assume they have a 1-year exclusivity contract before they'll make the PC release and release to other consoles.

Except for 3rd party companies that have a history of permanent exclusivity, of course.

But well, usually speaking, everyone is happy to see the PC ports of games that have temporary exclusivity, so uhn...

Well, it's just common in the context of gaming to have exclusivity be temporary, and most people are happy with that... Like, one of the biggest complaints people have with Nintendo is that they don't make their exclusive stuff become available on PC later on, so, yanno... >.>

[loopuleasa]

On 10/6/2025 at 11:26 AM, DVGMedia said:

I am only really buying it so I can keep the figurines and the pieces. They are really nice figures that we have not really had in a while. 
Its kind of unfortunate I have to buy a whole game for them.   

You might as well play a good game while you're at it!

And also, make new friends to play with too!

I can only see benefits in your future