Jump to content

Let's talk about Don't Starve multiplayer..


Recommended Posts

No reason for repeating the title..

 

Now before some of you rip me a new anus for dare not loving multiplayer and criticizing the decision I would like to express my opinion on the matter. I know most of you seem positive the multiplayer will be completely perfect in every way and gang up on us who don't really like it (Oh the irony) But remember that constantly multiplayer threads popped up, which got annoying. Plus often the OP's of these threads weren't so nice either.Now I'll admit I've been harsh towards these kinds of people before but that gives you no excuse to criticize those who don't have much fondness for multiplayer. I however do not think multiplayer would "ruin the entire game and condemn it to the 12th level of hell", heck it might be good actually, although I doubt. (I do feel a bit betrayed though..but that's a personal problem though) but multiplayer would definitely ruin the lonely atmosphere for game though. Being stuck in a word with CoDplayerButtlover while he burns down everything for fun and spams the chat kinda ruins the feeling. (AND YES I STILL KNOW IT'S OPTIONAL) Another problem I see is the game not being difficult anymore really. DS is already very compromising to begin with, how to the deerclops strike terror if there's twenty people waiting to maul him? How will any monster be able to scare you when you have ten other people armed to the teeth behind you? Sure resources might be scarce but that still won't be very difficult, Unless the AI is overhauled i don't see the game being difficult anymore. of course adding multiplayer also adds the problem with internet connection, wireless and server porting too.

 

The biggest beef with multiplayer for me being added is that it's being added now..and lots of stuff haven't. Now I know the devs can't listen and even when they support and idea it can't guarantee it goes into the game, (like when Kevin said he wanted to add snowman in, the sprites exist in the files but they haven't been added in) it also wouldn't be wise to add everything the community suggests. However things like:

 

-Tallbird life cycles.

-buffing krampus

-making the game more difficult and less uncompromising.

-More lore to the game.

 

Were heavily supported by the community and aren't bad ideas in the least, Klei also has supported them. But you don't see tallbirds raising smallbirds, or people complaining about krampus being hard (Heck most new players don't even know he exists) The game has also become more easy and compromising with each update. However none of these things have either been added (and I doubt they ever will),and yet multiplayer is, the thing about 80% of the forum members argued against for almost two years. Also that puzzle was extremely disappointing, was hoping for Wilson to actually return home or something but instead we get a "here's an advertisement for multiplayer!". It also feels a bit contrived too, I mean why all of a sudden open arms to multiplayer? Now I know the devs have the right to determine what path the game takes but something feels a bit off to me about this. I know it's free and completely optional but this seems like something EA would do..(Anyone remember maxis adding worthless multiplayer in Simcity which caused massive controversy?) I'm sorry but this was one of the few moments I actually felt angry at you guys. I know you guys are awesome and take care of the community but that doesn't mean I can't criticize your choices if I don't like them (And I know some of you are thinking I'm being entitled at the moment so don't think about playing that card)

 

I'll try to stay optimistic of this but don't expect me defending the choice or liking any of this really, especially that quote; "Now let’s get on with making the best multiplayer game we can make!"

 

Something feels off about that for me. Still, maybe I'll be more accepting of this later but for now..well if you need me I'll be hiding until the forums calm down..

 

trapdoor_spider-12471.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

trapdoor_spider-12471.gif

 

By the way, you may want to spoiler the spider .gif, or people will freak out.

 

As to the rest of this, I've pretty much echoed most of it on the original thread, although I didn't really touch on the gameplay aspects of MP, and I agree with everything you said on that matter.

 

I don't hate MP. I disagree with it. For me, half the game is atmosphere and without the lonely atmosphere, it won't feel like the game I know and love. To be honest though, my main problem so far is people who support MP attempting to use it as a stick to beat people who are anti-MP with. It's frankly childish, and you are only making yourself look foolish. You may want it, but there's no need to use it to put others down, no matter how much they deserve it. All it's done is disappoint me, and I'm starting to lose respect for some people, who I thought were better than they've shown today.

 

As to the post, I agree that there are many things that have gained massive community support *cough* Team Krampus *cough*, and I'd much rather see those implemented. And Tallbird life cycles, no reason as far as I could see not to add those.

 

And yeah, that quote seemed off to me as well. Almost as if they were mocking their past comments. That makes me feel as though their firm stance in the face of pressure wasn't actually something that I should of respected, more a facade they could drop when they realised it would make money. And don't come back with 'Oh, it's free', they will sell extra copies to friends of current players due to MP, and also the price will go up. So Klei stand to earn quite a lot here. I still trust them, but...I really don't know anymore. I don't know if feeling lied to is quite right, but I feel decieved for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to realize that other then DLC Klei is done with the game, it's last update was All's well thats Maxwell. (other then bug fixes)

 

They don't owe you anything, the fact that they're making multiplayer a thing is extremely surprising, but they didn't owe it to us.

 

At this point in Dont starve's development Klei will do what Klei wants, if the game becomes easier, then so be it. they do value player feedback and multiplayer has always been the biggest and most talked about topic. The devs add everything for a reason and you can change the world settings to make things more difficult if you please.

 

If you really think things in vanilla need to be changed, make threads about them. You're not going to get what you want by complaining about multiplayer or blaming it for completely unrelated problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to realize that other then DLC Klei is done with the game, it's last update was All's well thats Maxwell. (other then bug fixes)

They clearly aren't done with this game. If this is 'free', then it's a continution in a way of free updating from the devs.

 

They don't owe you anything, the fact that they're making multiplayer a thing is extremely surprising, but they didn't owe it to us.

At this point in Dont starve's development Klei will do what Klei wants, if the game becomes easier, then so be it. they do value player feedback and multiplayer has always been the biggest and most talked about topic. The devs add everything for a reason and you can change the world settings to make things more difficult if you please.

 

We are their customers. They do owe us something. We have paid money, and true in this MP thing, we don't have a right to anything, but if we buy their product, they owe us what they promised. And currently, I'd say the advertised 'uncompromising wilderness survival' is getting further away, not closer.

 

 

If you really think things in vanilla need to be changed, make threads about them. You're not going to get what you want by complaining about multiplayer or blaming it for completely unrelated problems.

 

http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/28384-wishes-for-the-last-update-thread/?hl=%2Btallbird+%2Blife+%2Bcycle

http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/22334-team-krampusfor-those-who-support-krampusget-a-free-t-shirt-upon-joining-aswell/page-15?hl=%2Bteam+%2Bkrampus#entry246232

 

These are some of the more prominent examples, but there are probably hundreds of suggestion threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the long run, I can easily see why they decided to go the multiplayer route. I have no doubt that Multiplayer will increase the longevity of the game whether it's balanced or not...way more so than the changes you mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They clearly aren't done with this game. If this is 'free', then it's a continution in a way of free updating from the devs.

 

 

We are their customers. They do owe us something. We have paid money, and true in this MP thing, we don't have a right to anything, but if we buy their product, they owe us what they promised. And currently, I'd say the advertised 'uncompromising wilderness survival' is getting further away, not closer.

 

 

 

http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/28384-wishes-for-the-last-update-thread/?hl=%2Btallbird+%2Blife+%2Bcycle

http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/22334-team-krampusfor-those-who-support-krampusget-a-free-t-shirt-upon-joining-aswell/page-15?hl=%2Bteam+%2Bkrampus#entry246232

 

These are some of the more prominent examples, but there are probably hundreds of suggestion threads.

 

I still don't get why you guys think multiplayer would cause a halt on everything else, as for the "uncompromising wilderness survival" It still fits the bill pretty well, it's more up to opinion then anything.

 

Also I think you misunderstand, they never promised us anything besides what they've already delivered and then some. And complaining about Multiplayer wont solve anything! Bring attention back to those suggestion threads, make new ones, if you feel like the game is too easy then by all means bring attention to that! The game's difficulty, unless its actually within multiplayer mode, has nothing to do with multiplayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't get why you guys think multiplayer would cause a halt on everything else, as for the "uncompromising wilderness survival" It still fits the bill pretty well, it's more up to opinion then anything.

 

Also I think you misunderstand, they never promised us anything besides what they've already delivered and then some. And complaining about Multiplayer wont solve anything! Bring attention back to those suggestion threads, make new ones, if you feel like the game is too easy then by all means bring attention to that! The game's difficulty, unless its actually within multiplayer mode, has nothing to do with multiplayer.

Complaining and stating your opion are apparently the same thing..Also I'm complelty stating what I feel about multiplayer mode.

 

Then again I've never been good at making points about what I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the long run, I can easily see why they decided to go the multiplayer route. I have no doubt that Multiplayer will increase the longevity of the game whether it's balanced or not...way more so than the changes you mentioned.

True, Multiplayer will increase the games longevity, but I rather have the game known for it's uncompromising nature than "10 ten Don't Starve multiplayer rages!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I want to know is you are doing it co-op and if you can use the same character as your friend/ stranger? there was a question I thought could have been asked and that would be if mods can be implemented on multiplayer version if the other person has them installed as well?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And complaining about Multiplayer wont solve anything!

 

This is my problem with trying to get points across when against something. I'm not complaining, I'm stating my opinion. I'm guessing this was unintentional, but from a linguistical point of view, by using this word, you automatically promote yourself above opposistion, and that's not how debates work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think someone brought up a tweet from them saying that because of the multiplayer addition, there's now things they could do in single player that weren't possible before? I'm not sure what those things would be, but there is that. 

Seeing as it's optional, I don't see why there's all the complaining? I know I'm excited for it due to have a close circle of friends that are more than willing to partake in multiplayer shenanigans. 

 

(edit: when I say complaining I don't mean you Arctic. I can tell the difference ;))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think some of us may change our opinions over time on how they feel about multiplayer. We know next to nothing about the actual mode, how it will work, or simply how it feels

 

I don't want to be quick to condemn it before it even comes out, but I'm not going to praise it to the heavens as I'm not going to just follow something blindly. I suppose you could say I am neutral on the debate for multiplayer until we get some more information. I like to know what I'm following before I follow it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I he seen anyone actually "complaining" about multi-player, as much as so many people don't know what to expect, or had expected at least some of the bugs or other issues to be addressed first. (Myself I wanted more back stories)  Until more information is known those for and against multi-player should be a little nicer to each other.....or at least try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I was in a convo with Xjurwi and I guess I might as well post my opinion. To keep things straight: I am not opposed to multiplayer, and I admit that it would be fun with friends. In fact, I'd support it if they manage to handle it well. The things below are why this even riled me up a bit.

 

See, when you have a game that starts out explicitly with a singleplayer vision, and you build a fanbase that understands why you had this vision, it's not a concrete promise but it's as good as one. The game was - is - hinged on aloneness and the truly loyal players from the beginning of development understand why this vision was generated in the first place.
 
And if multiplayer was a possibility, why not? But they've been adamantly denying it all the way until now, and as the fanbase grew they suddenly throw this in on one of the best puzzles ever. That had the potential (and was hinting, even) for further backstory, but gave the players none.
 
[EDIT: I know there are people who argue this is not a story-driven game, but remember the last puzzle? Intermission? You could argue that adventure mode is meant to be cyclical. But if there wasn't even an inkling of significant backstory to Wilson/Maxwell (the main characters), why should they (or we) care so much about fabricating that entire previous puzzle about William Carter, and Charlie, and everything? It's a tease with no closure at all, and the least they could do after creating another awesome puzzle like this that joins the community together is to tie something up somehow. Throwing an ad, especially a controversial one like this into the puzzle motif of each trailer is NOT closure.]
 
Yes, I admit that playing with friends would be fun, but I really hope they deal with this well. It just feels like a peer-pressure breach of their original vision for the game that somehow changed, and was deliberately kept from the players who started with them in the first place.
 
Side-note: The best course of action right now, in my opinion, is that we all have to take a step back and watch how they handle this and help them handle multiplayer the best they can.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 that Multiplayer will increase the longevity of the game 

This                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to realize that other then DLC Klei is done with the game, it's last update was All's well thats Maxwell. (other then bug fixes)

 

They don't owe you anything, the fact that they're making multiplayer a thing is extremely surprising, but they didn't owe it to us.

 

At this point in Dont starve's development Klei will do what Klei wants, if the game becomes easier, then so be it. they do value player feedback and multiplayer has always been the biggest and most talked about topic. The devs add everything for a reason and you can change the world settings to make things more difficult if you please.

 

If you really think things in vanilla need to be changed, make threads about them. You're not going to get what you want by complaining about multiplayer or blaming it for completely unrelated problems.

 

I know your bias has been in favor of multiplayer.

I know you were particularly angry at people shooting down multiplayer threads in the past.

Considering, I understand, at least somewhat, where your post is coming form.

 

However, you have to understand that just a week ago anyone of us could be telling you in a pro-multiplayer thread that Klei didn't owe you anything and that their decision to reject multiplayer was final. This "Klei doesn't owe you anything," rhetoric really needs to stop. Of course they don't owe us anything beyond what we've already paid for as is per the course for any other exchange of goods and services.

 

We're "not going to get what we want by complaining"? Isn't that exactly how it went down for the inclusion of multiplayer though? Clearly people did get what they want through "complaining".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Don't Starve must have multiplayer... I really really really truly hope it's nothing like Terraria or Minecraft.

 

 

As for content becoming too easy with the inclusion of multiplayer, another fear I share, maybe it's time for Klei to also change it's position on Don't Starve not being a combat focused game. Maybe it's time for the giants to be more akin to bosses in Dark Souls: tough, hard, and punishing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just hope that after the multiplayer mode has been added the singleplayer mode will get new content and become more difficult. But If Don't Starve mutates more to a multiplayer game with happy farming simulator than a uncompromising survival game I will be really disappointed. But I try to be optimistic and wait how this will turn out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm excited for multiplayer on a technical level. Don't Starve was engineered as a single player experience, and seeing how they'll handle the transition (both codewise and in terms of gameplay changes) will certainly be interesting.

But insofar as actually interacting with the gameplay, experiencing Don't Starve Together as a player, I'm not exactly thrilled. I'll certainly try it, but I don't really see myself playing it (not surprisingly, since I tend to generally dislike multiplayer in games). And, on a deeper level, I quite agree with @aredshroom. This game was built on the premise of a single player experience, not only as a matter of engineering as I previously pointed out, but above all as a matter of vision. The rejection of multiplayer coupled with a resolute focus on the "best single player game they could make" mantra was a point of pride in this community, which supported the vision of developers brave enough to dismiss the easy and so often taken route of adding multiplayer, an obvious and almost certain way to increase a game's popularity and longevity, in favour of a design completely centered on single player, able to stand on its own merits and thrive from its quality alone. And in many ways Don't Starve succeeded: the immersive atmosphere of loneliness pointed out by @ArcticFox789 is a prime example of how this game leveraged its single player only vision as a feature, and not the lack of one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Don't Starve must have multiplayer... I really really really truly hope it's nothing like Terraria or Minecraft.

 

 

As for content becoming too easy with the inclusion of multiplayer, another fear I share, maybe it's time for Klei to also change it's position on Don't Starve not being a combat focused game. Maybe it's time for the giants to be more akin to bosses in Dark Souls: tough, hard, and punishing.

 

Alternatively, the first bump in the update can be called "101 new ways to screw you over" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to stick with single player games actually. May be the only MP game I have played is Brood War, but I still support this MP DS strongly.
Assume I'm viewing as devs what I actually care is make my product is better, include optimize game's popularity and longevity. There are no rule or restrict to me to add a new content to the game, even new game mode.

You love play alone, you stick with SP, you love play with other people, you stick with MP. But why not both? There are no restrict here to make MP is possible but the technical issues. It's the only matter. The game just has more option for player to choose, that freedom is what I love the most.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just hope that after the multiplayer mode has been added the singleplayer mode will get new content and become more difficult. But If Don't Starve mutates more to a multiplayer game with happy farming simulator than a uncompromising survival game I will be really disappointed. But I try to be optimistic and wait how this will turn out.

Most of games MP is for the experience player at SP actually. So you don't need worry about "the lacking of uncompromising" on MP. There will be "new uncompromising" in MP instead.

I think co-op and no PvP will be better. This is not a RPG-like game. And MP is not necessary unable feel lonely. They can make MP and still has variant way to make player feel lonely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to stick with single player games actually. May be the only MP game I have played is Brood War, but I still support this MP DS strongly.

 

"Developer has many way to improve the game and orientate it. It may be periodic update, mod improvement, new DLC,...etc. But the general, the popular and may be the easiest way is multiplayer mode."

 

Popular? Seems to be so considering this forum.

Easiest? Well evidently Klei didn't think so until recently.

 

"- I have already known the developer's philosophy that they want to provide an original - roguelike - single player mode Don't starve game. And the multiplayer mode will break the atmostphere of the game which for lonely experience or such, blah blah blah."

 

The truth of the matter is that adding multiplayer is the antithesis of an atmosphere of loneliness. It's like adding black to a canvas in the hopes of lightening it up.

 

"- I respect it but from the user's point of view, I just don't care. What make the game more fun, more live last longer should be focused on. It's the first point."

 

I'll assume when you said, "I just don't care," it wasn't meant to sound dismissive.

Adding multiplayer to a game is not a guarantee it will be more fun. It's merely a guarantee that you can now play with your friends. You might as well be arguing for the inclusion of realistic guns in the Mario franchise because you find first person shooters to be more fun despite it being entirely antithetical to the very universe of Mario.

 

"- Second, why can't we have both? A DS game which contain single and multiplayer mode respectively without conflicting of each other?"

 

Because that's not how it works. They influence each other, content must be balanced for both, concessions must be made, and compromises forged. Klei has neither unlimited resources, manpower, or time and multiplayer support will take away attention from singleplayer guaranteed. Is Klei up to the task of managing both experiences as best as possible? It remains to be seen, but I'd be hard pressed to believe Don't Starve wouldn't be different had the multiplayer door remained closed.

 

"If the game engine doesn't let us do a such action in the game, base on game mechanism..., we must accept it. But if the object condition meet the desire, and the lifetime of the game is more important than which if it has multiplayer or not, should we change our mind?"

 

There's a difference between adding longevity for the sake of longevity and adding content that makes players to want to come back for more. Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine had multiplayer. Did it add longevity to the game? Probably. Was it amazing longevity that people just couldn't get enough of? Not really.

 

Adding multiplayer is not game development on easy mode. Adding multiplayer is not an insta-win button for the best game of the year award.

 

"I know the developer may actually don't care much about that, because Klei has many other game than DS. If DS is short lifetime but help the revenue increase, multiplayer is not important. In that case, I feel regret about this great potential game."

 

That's the second time I've read a pro-multiplayer person talk about the "potential" of Don't Starve being wasted should multiplayer not come to Don't Starve. How come it is only now that multiplayer is going to be a thing that I feel that Don't Starve is teetering on the brink of wasted potential?

 

You love play alone, you stick with SP, you love play with other people, you stick with MP. But why not both? There are no restrict here to make MP is possible but the technical issues. It's the only matter. The game just has more option for player to choose, that freedom is what I love the most.

 

It'd be different if I was confident multiplayer was going to have absolutely no influence on the single player experience.

It'd be different if I was confident that Klei had all the time and resources in the world along with the inclination to continue to make the best singleplayer experience they can muster.

 

All of that is up in the air. For all we know, now multiplayer is taking center stage and we can kiss the "best singleplayer experience" goodbye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all we know, now multiplayer is taking center stage and we can kiss the "best singleplayer experience" goodbye.

 

I can't imagine how this isn't the case. Think about RoG. There were plenty of non-massive changes from RoG that could've been easily implemented into vanilla, but that won't happen, so that makes me think the same will go for multiplayer.

 

 

"The game was - is - hinged on aloneness and the truly loyal players from the beginning of development understand why this vision was generated in the first place."

 

This is something I've noticed, but many of the more prominent members that are anti-Multiplayer are the ones who've been here since Late 2012-Early 2013. A lot of the people who are for tend to have been around for less time. I'm not calling them out, I'm not suggesting older members are more loyal, but being around whilst the discussion raged originally (and the devs were more actively involved in such discussions) must count for something, and whilst there are a few notable exceptions, this is how it tends to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

×
  • Create New...