Another theory regarding THEM

[Silentdarkness1]

So, I was talking with a friend about DS-related stuff a few days ago, and a theory popped into my head, regarding THEM.

 

What if They used to be members of the Thule civilization down in the ruins? And the nightmare fuel that they had grown accustomed to warped them so badly, that it turned the Thulists into the evil yet benevolent shadowy puppetmasters that exist now?

 

This would, of course, have been long before Maxwell.

[Maximum124]

Makes sense, They grew bored, so they kidnap an entertainer to entertain them

[oCrapaCreeper]

Quite possible. We already know that Nightmare Fuel is capable of changing something, as seen by the Ancient Guardian and Shadow Chester. The overuse of nightmare fuel is what caused the downfall, according to Maxwell. So there is something.

 

Although I'm thinking more that the ruins people discovered Nightmare Fuel like Maxwell did, overused it, became insane, and then attracted Them. You can kind of tie together everything starting from Maxwell's backstory, but the actual origin of Them is still quite blurry.

[Silentdarkness1]

True. Frankly, I imagine that They changed Charlie into a monster in a similar manner. By overexposing her to a massive quantity of fuel.

[d3v1n96]

I like this theory,but when questions like this are brought up I just want to kidnap Kevin and probe his mind for all the lore about don't starve that he has neglected to share. I just need more lore to fuel my addiction, even more so since the disappointment of a lore-less ending to the RoG puzzle.  

[oCrapaCreeper]

I like this theory,but when questions like this are brought up I just want to kidnap Kevin and probe his mind for all the lore about don't starve that he has neglected to share. I just need more lore to fuel my addiction, even more so since the disappointment of a lore-less ending to the RoG puzzle.  

I really don't see how much more lore they can share without delving into the things that are better off not explained. I mean, DS is not a very story driven game to begin with, for the simple fact almost all of the backstory is told outside of the actual game.

[Silentdarkness1]

I really don't see how much more lore they can share without delving into the things that are better off not explained.

Lore for other DS player characters, Chester, and what exactly happened to Charlie, to name 3.

[Al3x]

True. Frankly, I imagine that They changed Charlie into a monster in a similar manner. By overexposing her to a massive quantity of fuel.

I agree, that stuff is crazy powerful, and evil. I have no doubt that it can corrupt people. By the way, I really like your theory, clever stuff. 

[oCrapaCreeper]

Lore for other DS player characters, Chester, and what exactly happened to Charlie, to name 3.

That would qualify as the stuff that is better off not explained. Especially Charlie.

[d3v1n96]

I really don't see how much more lore they can share without delving into the things that are better off not explained.

I would like to know more about them, more about Maxwells creation of the world, more about Wilsons influence over the island once he becomes puppet master, official origins for all the characters, and the ancient civilization. And even if you think those things are better off a mystery you can't deny the need for intermission to come to an end.

[Al3x]

And another thing, Shadow Chester can be created via nightmare fuel on a full moon,it's a great example of it's corruptive power on living things.

[oCrapaCreeper]

I would like to know more about them, more about Maxwells creation of the world, more about Wilsons influence over the island once he becomes puppet master, official origins for all the characters, and the ancient civilization. And even if you think those things are better off a mystery you can't deny the need for intermission to come to an end.

I just don't think we need every inch of the story explained in a game where story is only worth a fraction when actually playing. A lot of it is just better off as player interpretation, like this thread for instance.

[d3v1n96]

I just don't think we need every inch of the story explained in a game where story is only worth a fraction when actually playing. A lot of it is just better off as player interpretation, like this thread for instance.

I see where you are coming from but still would like more answers, agree to disagree?

[Silentdarkness1]

That would qualify as the stuff that is better off not explained. Especially Charlie.

MMMMMMMMMAYBE i'll give you Charlie, but explain to me why the other characters should just be given the brush-off? And no, the fact that they are incidental is not a valid reason imo.

Also, how about the fact that Klei's canonizations of what happened in the DS worlds often blows my expectations straight out of the water. Can't even compete.

[Battal]

Well, keep in mind they still have a show in intermission. 

[Doctor H. Derp]

I just don't think we need every inch of the story explained in a game where story is only worth a fraction when actually playing. A lot of it is just better off as player interpretation, like this thread for instance.

 

I see where you're coming from, but there's very little I agree with in that sentiment.

 

Just because the narrative elements within Don't Starve are sparse doesn't mean the narrative isn't a driving force within the game. There's no rule that a narrative driven work of art must be X pages long or have a word count of Y. Take for example this nifty piece of flash fiction that's usually credited to Hemingway, "For Sale: baby's shoes. Never worn." As small a tidbit it is, it tells a story.

 

You say no more details should be revealed about Charlie but a similar argument could've very easily been made for delving into Maxwell's past. The idea that such things are better off left to player interpretation is just simply not necessarily the case, it's completely dependent on how Klei pulls it off. Yes, some of the mystery surrounding Maxwell's character was destroyed when we got the William Carter puzzles, but is anyone going to sit here and argue that revealing Maxwell's past made him a weaker character for it? I seriously doubt it. Whatever intrigue that might've been destroyed by such revelations was more than made up for and then some by the inclusion of other questions such as how Maxwell came into the possession of Codex Umbra? Did he ever meet up with Jack? Why did the Shadow Watcher only strike then and not sooner? And also how was Maxwell getting all the nightmare fuel to use Codex Umbra for his shows?

Because these answers led to more interesting questions, the narrative was made more robust and interest was maintained.

 

 

There is truth to showing and not telling, to letting an event reveal a bit of the nature of something as opposed to one of the characters just giving you a monologue about what's up... but... after adventure mode after the William Carter puzzles... it's clear as day that the narrative is far from over. There's absolutely no closure to this game and not in a good way.

You imply this game isn't narrative driven, but if it weren't, the character of Maxwell needn't exist and you certainly wouldn't need an introductory greeting, much like Minecraft and Terraria.

We don't need every inch of the game explained but we do need closure even if that closure is that there is no escape, you're forever in the grasp of the Shadow Watcher, GG. It just needs to be established.

[orian34]

Nothing more to say...

[oCrapaCreeper]

I see where you're coming from, but there's very little I agree with in that sentiment.

Just because the narrative elements within Don't Starve are sparse doesn't mean the narrative isn't a driving force within the game. There's no rule that a narrative driven work of art must be X pages long or have a word count of Y. Take for example this nifty piece of flash fiction that's usually credited to Hemingway, "For Sale: baby's shoes. Never worn." As small a tidbit it is, it tells a story.

You say no more details should be revealed about Charlie but a similar argument could've very easily been made for delving into Maxwell's past. The idea that such things are better off left to player interpretation is just simply not necessarily the case, it's completely dependent on how Klei pulls it off. Yes, some of the mystery surrounding Maxwell's character was destroyed when we got the William Carter puzzles, but is anyone going to sit here and argue that revealing Maxwell's past made him a weaker character for it? I seriously doubt it. Whatever intrigue that might've been destroyed by such revelations was more than made up for and then some by the inclusion of other questions such as how Maxwell came into the possession of Codex Umbra? Did he ever meet up with Jack? Why did the Shadow Watcher only strike then and not sooner? And also how was Maxwell getting all the nightmare fuel to use Codex Umbra for his shows?

Because these answers led to more interesting questions, the narrative was made more robust and interest was maintained.

There is truth to showing and not telling, to letting an event reveal a bit of the nature of something as opposed to one of the characters just giving you a monologue about what's up... but... after adventure mode after the William Carter puzzles... it's clear as day that the narrative is far from over. There's absolutely no closure to this game and not in a good way.

You imply this game isn't narrative driven, but if it weren't, the character of Maxwell needn't exist and you certainly wouldn't need an introductory greeting, much like Minecraft and Terraria.

We don't need every inch of the game explained but we do need closure even if that closure is that there is no escape, you're forever in the grasp of the Shadow Watcher, GG. It just needs to be established.

The thing is none of the story told through the puzzles has had any impact in-game. If we pretended Klei never told the William Carter puzzles, the game would not be different in any way aside from perhaps a few Maxwell quotes. The game doesn't focus on story. If it did, then 95% of the story would actually be knowledgeable to a player without looking it up on the internet. Literally the only trace of story that can be found in-game is chapter 6 of adventure mode and character quotes. The game is driven by gameplay, not story.

[Silentdarkness1]

The game is driven by gameplay, not story.

Indeed it is. Which is why I had hoped the future would be entailing some story to go with that gameplay. Instead, we get DST.

[XirmiX]

The shadow creatures as said in wiki refer to creatues seen by real insane people, I think. In other words the shadow creatures are demons.

[Doctor H. Derp]

The thing is none of the story told through the puzzles has had any impact in-game. If we pretended Klei never told the William Carter puzzles, the game would not be different in any way aside from perhaps a few Maxwell quotes. The game doesn't focus on story. If it did, then 95% of the story would actually be knowledgeable to a player without looking it up on the internet. Literally the only trace of story that can be found in-game is chapter 6 of adventure mode and character quotes. The game is driven by gameplay, not story.

 

Well then if we're operating under such a narrow view of what "narrative driven" is supposed to mean, then does that mean the only games you'd consider to be "narrative driven" would be interactive visual novels in which the only gameplay within is answering random prompts the game tosses at you from NPC characters like, say, in Jurassic Heart?

 

Because I don't understand why a focus in gameplay should mean that a game is not narrative driven. That's like discounting the entire narrative within Dark Souls because the narrative is sparse, a good chunk of the lore is explored only through item descriptions, and the cutscenes are few and far between.

 

Again, if Don't Starve wasn't intended to have narrative be a driving force, they wouldn't have created Maxwell, they wouldn't have a character greet you instead of just an omniscient box with a tip or 2 on how to survive, like say in the beginning of any given FTL game, and they certainly wouldn't have even bothered with any story bits in the puzzles because what would it matter? Since narrative isn't a driving force, no one would care.

[oCrapaCreeper]

Well then if we're operating under such a narrow view of what "narrative driven" is supposed to mean, then does that mean the only games you'd consider to be "narrative driven" would be interactive visual novels in which the only gameplay within is answering random prompts the game tosses at you from NPC characters like, say, in Jurassic Heart?

Because I don't understand why a focus in gameplay should mean that a game is not narrative driven. That's like discounting the entire narrative within Dark Souls because the narrative is sparse, a good chunk of the lore is explored only through item descriptions, and the cutscenes are few and far between.

Again, if Don't Starve wasn't intended to have narrative be a driving force, they wouldn't have created Maxwell, they wouldn't have a character greet you instead of just an omniscient box with a tip or 2 on how to survive, like say in the beginning of any given FTL game, and they certainly wouldn't have even bothered with any story bits in the puzzles because what would it matter? Since narrative isn't a driving force, no one would care.

I can take down just about every sentence of this, but we're derailing the thread.

[Doctor H. Derp]

I can take down just about every sentence of this, but we're derailing the thread.

 

Then let's take this over here.

[CaptainClam]

I can see a similarity between the statues and terrorbeaks. Support this theory all the way.

[Gazerrath]

I don't think that the people of the Ancient Civilization are them.  Mainly because Maxwell seems to know about them, which means they existed sometime around the time that he came to the world of Don't Starve, but They existed at the very beggining when Maxwell did arrive there meaning that They predate the Ancient Civilization.