Suggestion: incentivize exploration directly

[omnom]

One of the acknowledged issues with the current build is that players tend to "turtle" in their bases after setting up enough farms to be self-sufficient. Then, with a repetitive daily routine, little danger, and no reason to explore the rest of the world, the players get bored.

Suggestion: why not introduce some kind of mechanic that directly rewards exploration -- specifically, revealing the dark areas on the map?

You could keep track of how much total area the player has revealed on the map, and factor that into the "score" somehow. In the most naive implementation, you could have research points, or XP, depend at least partially on the "total area revealed". (I know research points are being revamped, but this is just an example.)

Players are great optimizers, and will generally tend to find ways to "game" systems in order to survive with the least possible danger or effort. One of the biggest dangers in the game so far is exploring unknown areas. By making that kind of exploration directly necessary to advance in the game, you can ensure that players will continue doing that even in the endgame.

(PS: Don't Starve is an excellent game; I'm enjoying it a lot. ^_^)

EDIT: just to clarify, it doesn't matter to me what the "reward" is, or how it's implemented. The only key part of the suggestion is that "total area revealed" should be tracked explicitly; what happens after that is up to you. =)

Edited December 6, 2012 by omnom
clarification

[Bottlegnomes]

Well, in the world of human psychology there are four ways to get people to do things they don't want to do. B. F. Skinner lays them out pretty well as this:

1) Positive Reinforcement

-this is the general idea of a reward. If they do something good, you give them something to reinforce the good behavior.

2) Positive Punishment

-Here you're taking away something that irks the player. The best example is that beep you hear in the car when you don't have your seat belt on. They encourage you to put your seat belt on by making it get rid of the noise.

3) Negative Reinforcement

-You add something to make to punish them. Like making a child do more chores when they do something bad.

4) Negative Punishment

-This is taking something away from someone to punish them. Taking away a child's Xbox if they do something bad.

So keeping in mind that there are many different ways to encourage desirable behavior, reward isn't always the best method.

[watkinsgamer]

Well, in the world of human psychology there are four ways to get people to do things they don't want to do. B. F. Skinner lays them out pretty well as this:

1) Positive Reinforcement

-this is the general idea of a reward. If they do something good, you give them something to reinforce the good behavior.

2) Positive Punishment

-Here you're taking away something that irks the player. The best example is that beep you hear in the car when you don't have your seat belt on. They encourage you to put your seat belt on by making it get rid of the noise.

3) Negative Reinforcement

-You add something to make to punish them. Like making a child do more chores when they do something bad.

4) Negative Punishment

-This is taking something away from someone to punish them. Taking away a child's Xbox if they do something bad.

So keeping in mind that there are many different ways to encourage desirable behavior, reward isn't always the best method.

i found that all my friends have turtled. so this is becoming a major problem. what if a new creep was made that would give you a warning visit at night by coming on the outsirts of your view for the night. and if you stayed on that island the next night it would kill you?

[Bottlegnomes]

i found that all my friends have turtled. so this is becoming a major problem. what if a new creep was made that would give you a warning visit at night by coming on the outsirts of your view for the night. and if you stayed on that island the next night it would kill you?

Something like that might work, but I think a combination of them would be the best. However, I don't think having something that outright kills you would be the best course of action. The game is, afterall, about not starving, so I believe something more on the side of destroying infrastructure (something similar to the gobbler, but more efficient). I wrote a thread about some of these things a few days ago called "Objective and Antagonization" if you want to read more about what I think.

[watkinsgamer]

Something like that might work, but I think a combination of them would be the best. However, I don't think having something that outright kills you would be the best course of action. The game is, afterall, about not starving, so I believe something more on the side of destroying infrastructure (something similar to the gobbler, but more efficient). I wrote a thread about some of these things a few days ago called "Objective and Antagonization" if you want to read more about what I think.

i agree. there shouldn't just be one negative influence. a combination is definitely the best course of action. you wouldn't happen to have a link to said thread would you?

[Bottlegnomes]

http://forums.kleientertainment.com/showthread.php?3233-Objective-and-antagonization