Tayburro Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I've been thinking about how the worlds for DST should be bigger than the standard size world and I came up with an idea.What if the world had more unique and large set pieces and biomes?Currently some that come to mind Pig kingdom/Throne roomThe location of the pig king in the multiplayer could be a kind of Throne room with a hall leading up to it with pig torches. It wouldn't necessarily perform any new functions but man it would be cool, plus I don't see a small village holding the king of their people unguarded (I think he is guarded in adventure mode.) ColosseumA large circular area with obelisks surrounding it that close when enough players enter to trigger the event, indicated by signs alongside the Colosseum.Examples of events could be things as simple as a fight against a current boss mob or some sort of coded team of several hostile mobs (Imagine match vs all 4 giants at the same time for the prize of being able to choose the next season or some such season related prize.) The great plainsAn absolutely massive savanna which contains several large herds of beefalo and a ton of grass obviously if the players were to shave the beefalo at night they would have an ample supply of beefalo wool to use for clothes and/or fuel. The hedge-mazeA largely dilapidated mess of overgrown and impassable hedges, which has been left so long that the very pathways have been enveloped in the resulting thicket. Filled with goodies and marble turf pathways. Also as a small addition how about temperature variations in accordance to location such as the more northern parts of the map being generally cooler (Not OP cooler but just a slight variance to encourage migration to seasonal encampments) Anyway tell me what you think below, try not to be rude about it, tell me what you think though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NikMik Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I strongly disagree that they should add something special to people who play online while having we who enjoy playing on our own miss out on potential content. How is it at all fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbeetle Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I strongly disagree that they should add something special to people who play online while having we who enjoy playing on our own miss out on potential content. How is it at all fair? Because they're separate games. How is it fair to not implement something that would help DST become a better game just because it would suck in single player? "Single player Don't Starve will not be affected by the addition of multiplayer except for content or features not specifically related to multiplayer gameplay. Balance changes and content aimed at creating an interesting multiplayer experience will not be added to the single player game." - JoeW Adding things to DST doesn't go against what JoeW said. As a matter of fact, JoeW pretty much says that any content they add to DST won't be added to singleplayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NikMik Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Because they're separate games. How is it fair to not implement something that would help DST become a better game just because it would suck in single player?Same game, just with multiple people. I'm not saying "Your ideas are bad and you should feel bad", I just don't understand why they should punish players for choosing single player by leaving them out of certain things to explore. If they add new content, it should be for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbeetle Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Same game, just with multiple people. I'm not saying "Your ideas are bad and you should feel bad", I just don't understand why they should punish players for choosing single player by leaving them out of certain things to explore. If they add new content, it should be for both. They are effectively two different games. When one "game" is being developed without the other in mind, it's a different game. You might be of the opinion that everything that suits multiplayer suits single player, that doesn't really matter since that's not what they think. Also want to clear something up. my responses weren't targeted at the OP's idea, just your general "everything in multiplayer should automatically be in singleplayer." In the OP's case, I agree that those specific examples would be fine in single player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NikMik Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 They are effectively two different games. When one "game" is being developed without the other in mind, it's a different game.You might be of the opinion that everything that suits multiplayer suits single player, that doesn't really matter since that's not what they think.Also want to clear something up. my responses weren't targeted at the OP's idea, just your general "everything in multiplayer should automatically be in singleplayer." In the OP's case, I agree that those specific examples would be fine in single player.Oh, so was I. I meant I don't think massive things like new biomes and big structures and all that should be just in multiplayer. Of course there would be quite a few things that would work in one but not the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayburro Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 I think that it would be nice to have more unique set-pieces and events that would encourage team collaboration, to make it a highly unique and engaging gameplay experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RalphKastro Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I think that it would be nice to have more unique set-pieces and events that would encourage team collaboration, to make it a highly unique and engaging gameplay experience.yes, but none of your examples were like that.Loved the temp. suggestion BTW. would be really cool(pun not intended), but I think that, in big worlds, extreme north and extreme south should have extreme temperatures.(although I don't think that would be possible to make happen, but who knows? I know nothing but the basics of programing anyway. They could think of something) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithy17 Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Extreme temperatures north and south? Is this an island or the earth? I like the idea of multi player unique set pieces but I fell you're heading in the wrong direction with temperature change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gudinito Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Extreme temperatures north and south? Is this an island or the earth? I like the idea of multi player unique set pieces but I fell you're heading in the wrong direction with temperature changeI think DS is in another dimension. Personally, i would not like new biomes, but i agree with the set pieces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidneyBeanBoy Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 If they were, they should have something to do with two players. Like a sanity puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.