Multiplayer Petition.

[neo_child]

I know and quote Toaster Fu on this,

"The Devs have never said they were against multiplayer, it's just that, if I remember correctly, there are two coders and two artists and that's it. Multiplayer would be a HUGE time sink for the Devs, which is why the Devs just want to focus on singleplayer and make it the best it can be.

The Devs have said that they have NO plans for multiplayer where multiple players are in one world at the same time. But they do have long-term plans for some form of asynchronous multiplayer, what this may be no one knows."

But maybe if we can get enough people on this, they might get more people on the job to add multiplayer to the game.

Just one thing, I know they are improving the Singleplayer experience but maybe they can start with creating a stable multiplayer server while adding new features.

So sign up and lets see if this might change their minds!

1. neo_child

[themastadon85]

Not yet. Just wait for the game to be finished, Then its time to think about stuff like this.

I do agree with you that it would be fun, but just wait a bit longer, this game is still in beta. Let it progress, we'll see how it goes

[JebusTheFrog]

Second what themastadon said

[neo_child]

Not yet. Just wait for the game to be finished, Then its time to think about stuff like this.

I do agree with you that it would be fun, but just wait a bit longer, this game is still in beta. Let it progress, we'll see how it goes

Hmm seems reasonable but this is just to get it out there that we want a multiplayer made out of this game. I agree that we should wait till beta is over but this petition is just to tell the devs that you should start making some plans.

[Stroke]

Multiplayer is good. M'kay?

[501105]

Hmm seems reasonable but this is just to get it out there that we want a multiplayer made out of this game. I agree that we should wait till beta is over but this petition is just to tell the devs that you should start making some plans.

Trust me, the devs know the demand for multiplayer.

[themastadon85]

Yah they do, there has been tons of people asking about it, and this isn't the first thread suggesting multiplayer!

[neo_child]

Yah they do, there has been tons of people asking about it, and this isn't the first thread suggesting multiplayer!

You don't know how many related threads I got while typing this up.

Trust me, the devs know the demand for multiplayer.

I can get that but I am just saying that the devs should start making plans. As I read, they don't plan to do any multiplayer in the near future. Presenting some work on the multiplayer servers maybe by mid 2013 will really help though.

EDIT: Who else here hates Krampus?

[DJoyzM]

It will be so fun to attack other players for survival in the night. Or well, harmony.

[501105]

You don't know how many related threads I got while typing this up.

I can get that but I am just saying that the devs should start making plans. As I read, they don't plan to do any multiplayer in the near future. Presenting some work on the multiplayer servers maybe by mid 2013 will really help though.

EDIT: Who else here hates Krampus?

Well honestly, that makes it sound like you expect them to have changed their stance on adding multiplayer. We dont even know if it will be implemented in the game at all. All we do know is that if it comes, it wont come anytime Soon. The last I heard from them about multiplayer was on their twitter stating that they are focusing on a singleplayer experience.

I dont mean to dampen your spirit, but multiplayer is no sure thing currently, all you can do is wait basically.

Edited December 13, 2012 by 501105

[Syd]

I'll more-or-less copy what I had posted in another thread, hopefully to help people understand why adding multiplayer wouldn't be a simple thing for the devs to do:

Adding co-op would be a difficult task (much more difficult than you might think) for the Don't Starve team. The budget they have to work with is small and there's (I believe) only 4 people working on Don't Starve full-time (and like Toaster Fu has said, only two of them are programmers, and those programmers don't have any experience making multiplayer games). It would require a good portion of the game code to be rewritten, a lot of rebalancing game mechanics, it would harm the single player by taking resources away from its development, and it would also go against the main idea that the game is being developed around (being stranded alone on a strange island).

You never know what they might be able to do with the game post-release if they can find the money and resources, but up until release it's very likely that they're going to focus completely on making the single player experience the best it can be.

[TeaDaYo]

Maybe not right this instant, but I would love to be able to play together with my friends in the future

[LadyD]

Children. Stamp your feet. Picket your lines. Cry your hearts out.

I dont think any of this is going to change the reality that Don't Starve is best enjoyed... ALONE.

Its not really made for a co-op or multiplayer. It would take away from the isolation. The loneliness. The sheer artistry of the game that is Don't Starve.

In other games adding co-op worked and benefited the game.

In this case the devs have said and I agree that they just don't think it would suit this game.

I also stand by the idea that its better to have a well fleshed out and great single player game than to have a rushed and rather crude multiplayer game.

So. No. I stand against co-op. I think the repeated discussion of it over and over does nothing but make the normally lovely community seem well... like children denied sweets.

Why not enjoy what we have?

[Little Teemo]

as much as i love playing with friends, i still think that this game is better off solo......it's already manageable doing it alone.....more player is just way too easy.....no challenge

[rojvol]

Taking the stance of "Only think we can is wait" is lame in my humble opinion. Dont take me wrong, I understand how problematic it is, I understand it will need a lot of changes in game as we know it today and I understand that it would somehow "brake" the feeling. But not

necessarily. As I wrote to another threads before it would kick the game right to the heaven.

I love this game. And true love means letting go. I want the best for developers and the best for game itself. And trust me - multiplayer will bring a lot of money to Dev's pockets and a lot of fun to our rooms. And what I am about to say now, is kind of rude, I know it.. But it is fans who actually create the game, not Dev's - do NOT forget it. We are the ones saying things to add, things we dont like and so. Ofcourse Dev's dont have to care - but they do, because at the end of the day - it is their job. And we are here, to think out whole concept and everything..

The only thing that we need to hear is:"Okay, lets say there will be multiplayer. But how it would look like?"

[501105]

Children. Stamp your feet. Picket your lines. Cry your hearts out.

I dont think any of this is going to change the reality that Don't Starve is best enjoyed... ALONE.

Its not really made for a co-op or multiplayer. It would take away from the isolation. The loneliness. The sheer artistry of the game that is Don't Starve.

In other games adding co-op worked and benefited the game.

In this case the devs have said and I agree that they just don't think it would suit this game.

I also stand by the idea that its better to have a well fleshed out and great single player game than to have a rushed and rather crude multiplayer game.

So. No. I stand against co-op. I think the repeated discussion of it over and over does nothing but make the normally lovely community seem well... like children denied sweets.

Why not enjoy what we have?

I could not agree more, we have an amazing singleplayer experience that is getting better and better each update. We will even get different modes, including one with a story and still have our freeplay mode to survive in. I love the vibe that comes with the alone survival in the game. I can see why people would want a multiplayer though, but not every game is suited to have multiplayer in the first place.

[Little Teemo]

Don't mean to sound rude or anything but who do you think you are? telling the devs what to do with THEIR game.

Ofcourse you can give suggestions, that's what this forum is for. but please change your tone, don't go demanding things.

Let the devs do their thing and then we wait patiently to see what is going to be the next addidtion to this wonderful game.

what's wrong with his tone? i don't c anything wrong with it...he's not being rude or anything...

[Excess]

Ok. Let's say they do make a multiplayer. Let's say they do a kickstarter and we all pay AGAIN so they can gather enough money to hire someone upfront with networking experiences (because Klei has none, as far as I know).

That would mean 6 months (if we are lucky) of work where we won't see another singleplayer update because they will be too busy rebuilding the game from ground up, figuring things out and fixing bugs.

I'm not willing to wait 6 months on a half-baked singleplayer experience only because some people want multiplayer and steam achievements to show around.

Let them finish the game, and once it's finished, ask again about multiplayer. In the meantime, all this constant new threads discussing the same 3 co-op ideas over and over again are redundant and only make background noise.

Also, Klei Entertainment are the makers of Shank, Shank 2 and Mark of the Ninja, between other titles. And they didn't have to ask around how to make those games. They know their stuff. Suggestions are always welcome, some of them may even get to the game, but we are suggesting upon THEIR idea, upon THEIR game. And ultimately, they'll do what they know how to do best: amazing singleplayer experiences.

It is a job, yes. But if I had a company which excelled at something, I would be milking that something and focusing on that. I wouldn't risk my companies reputation to make something I don't know how to do nor I have done before because a bunch of customers decided it would be cool. At least I wouldn't make it my number 1 priority and even less so if my current product is in the eyes of everyone right now.

What would happen is they don't quite make the multiplayer a mind-blowing experience, but just a regular one? %99 of those who cried for multiplayer would say "ughh, this is booooring, Klei sucks" and go play Minecraft or Terraria.

There is so much more at stake than just "the customer is always right". That's BS. Even then, I'm a customer too, and I say DON'T DO MULTIPLAYER. Save that for Don't Starve 2 or for Don't Stab (your steam friends).

Edited December 13, 2012 by Excess

[overcoreMacic]

Yes. When singleplayer is done multiplayer would be outstanding.

[Seerox]

I just want a coop.. one player more and the world is wonderful hihi

[NoNameTryLater]

Ok. Let's say they do make a multiplayer. Let's say they do a kickstarter and we all pay AGAIN so they can gather enough money to hire someone upfront with networking experiences (because Klei has none, as far as I know).

That would mean 6 months (if we are lucky) of work where we won't see another singleplayer update because they will be too busy rebuilding the game from ground up, figuring things out and fixing bugs.

I'm not willing to wait 6 months on a half-baked singleplayer experience only because some people want multiplayer and steam achievements to show around.

Let them finish the game, and once it's finished, ask again about multiplayer. In the meantime, all this constant new threads discussing the same 3 co-op ideas over and over again are redundant and only make background noise.

Also, Klei Entertainment are the makers of Shank, Shank 2 and Mark of the Ninja, between other titles. And they didn't have to ask around how to make those games. They know their stuff. Suggestions are always welcome, some of them may even get to the game, but we are suggesting upon THEIR idea, upon THEIR game. And ultimately, they'll do what they know how to do best: amazing singleplayer experiences.

It is a job, yes. But if I had a company which excelled at something, I would be milking that something and focusing on that. I wouldn't risk my companies reputation to make something I don't know how to do nor I have done before because a bunch of customers decided it would be cool. At least I wouldn't make it my number 1 priority and even less so if my current product is in the eyes of everyone right now.

What would happen is they don't quite make the multiplayer a mind-blowing experience, but just a regular one? %99 of those who cried for multiplayer would say "ughh, this is booooring, Klei sucks" and go play Minecraft or Terraria.

There is so much more at stake than just "the customer is always right". That's BS. Even then, I'm a customer too, and I say DON'T DO MULTIPLAYER. Save that for Don't Starve 2 or for Don't Stab (your steam friends).

Took the words off my mouth.

[Quincy]

I would be ok with co-op if, and only if it didnt detract from them making the single player game as good as possible.while multiplayer is a nice feature and ill admit its nice to play with friends this game has real potential and i dont want it going down the tubes due to the devs spending to much time and resources working out multiplayer.

[Artem]

There should be some kickstarter page for it. I'd pay some, definitely.

[Howard313]

coop would be a nice addition, but the single player experience should be priority as of right now.