Shipwrecked Counterpart Idea + New Expansion Ideas?

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

so I saw the demand for more shipwrecked and signed up an account

 

I was thinking we could have a second, Klei-built Shipwrecked DLC, with a new name. Castaway, something or other.

it could add to RoG mainland as well.

4 characters like SW, and the Sea

But here's the twist.

None of the SW stuff carries over except the sea, but if both are used together, they combine to one big world

Say this had 7 biomes and SW had 7, the resulting world would have 14

the Volcano would be replaced by caves on beaches, like shown in concept art. We could also have that giant shipwreck from concept art, a thirst meter, rivers, etc. Maybe even hot air balloons! so Caves would get a second layer in this, ideally

The Lava Caves

If SW and Castaways is used, the Lava Caves are moved to the Volcano, but Dragoons and Lavae/Magma Pits could also be in the caves for some extra danger. And light. more dangerous caves and RoG mainland, ya can't go wrong.

Also, all boats would be new, no Obsidian in lava caves, maybe a new type. Gem tools, Diamond tools?

And an option to have the Islands around the RoG mainland, instead of in their own world. with SW support too. So we get an RoG mainland with a huge selection, and an absolute ton of stuff on the islands, volcano, etc, dotted around.

thx for listening

the klei-built part was because you can't deny it'd be cool to have a Capy & Klei synergy thing.

maybe an option for SW/CA (Castaway) biomes in RoG Mainland, with water sailable with new mobs, but no island.

[Nickolas2600]

I dont know about a thirst mechanic. This has been discussed and i dont like it that's much.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

45 minutes ago, Nickolas2600 said:

I dont know about a thirst mechanic. This has been discussed and i dont like it that's much.

I think it could work in the sense that Hunger is nerfed, and Thirst uses the old Hunger mechanic (Last only a few days, if that) but Hunger should last like, 2x as much as it does now. All foods would give a little thirst, but no water would give any hunger

[DeputyDeath]

1 hour ago, Nickolas2600 said:

I dont know about a thirst mechanic. This has been discussed and i dont like it that's much.

Same here. It also seems useless because a lot of the water we consume is from the food we eat anyway.

Come to think of it, maybe that's why it only takes 2 days to starve I'm this game. You're actually dying of dehydration, as you don't drink anything else.

The rest of the suggestions are cool, although I always imagined the next expansion to be a winter-focused survival map. It would be an interesting challenge, with freezing being a constant threat (varying in severity throughout the year) and food being plentiful in the early game but more scarce later on, with a plant taking ~10 days to regrow.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

2 minutes ago, DeputyDeath said:

Same here. It also seems useless because a lot of the water we consume is from the food we eat anyway.

Come to think of it, maybe that's why it only takes 2 days to starve I'm this game. You're actually dying of dehydration, as you don't drink anything else.

The rest of the suggestions are cool, although I always imagined the next expansion to be a winter-focused survival map. It would be an interesting challenge, with freezing being a constant threat (varying in severity throughout the year) and food being plentiful in the early game but more scarce later on, with a plant taking ~10 days to regrow.

Funnily enough I had that idea myself for a DLC called Don't Starve: Snowed In - Would feature Snowman mob Kevin promised

[Scrimbles]

I don't want to pay for another DLC if its just what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

23 minutes ago, Ogrecakes said:

I don't want to pay for another DLC if its just what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place.

So on this forum we have the self-entitled and the fanboys. Self-entitled believe they should get a full new game for $5 - Fanboys think there shouldn't be another way to get more. If anything, THIS is how it should be done. Since this works without SW too.

[Scrimbles]

4 minutes ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

So on this forum we have the self-entitled and the fanboys. Self-entitled believe they should get a full new game for $5 - Fanboys think there shouldn't be another way to get more. If anything, THIS is how it should be done. Since this works without SW too.

I'm sorry, but what is this supposed to mean? I can't tell if you're insulting me or siding with me.

 

How should this have been done?

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

Just now, Ogrecakes said:

I'm sorry, but what is this supposed to mean? I can't tell if you're insulting me or siding with me.

You're the entitled one who thinks "Shipwrecked should have been THIS, more than Vanilla."

I agree we need more content there but updating it into something we only payed $5 for is not the right move.

[martinezxerxes]

i think your suggestions are awesome. it does pose the idea that SW falls more in the confines of a diversified Vanilla experience then a full RoG expansion. i think it is wise to see SW as the ground work for future expansion. Klei has time and time again worked towards creating the experience we desire while amazing us in how they bring it to fruition. I have loved joining the forums and seeing people express themselves and what they want from the game. i just think right now we need to have a little patience and let Klei, with the much appreciated colaberation from Capy, amaze us once again.

[NoQuitting]

Spacewrecked; now we finally get to see where those meteors come from.

[Scrimbles]

30 minutes ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

You're the entitled one who thinks "Shipwrecked should have been THIS, more than Vanilla."

I agree we need more content there but updating it into something we only payed $5 for is not the right move.

Work on your English, I still have no clue what you are trying to convey to me.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

1 hour ago, Ogrecakes said:

Work on your English, I still have no clue what you are trying to convey to me.

English is my first language, and I am conveying it perfectly. Shipwrecked ,the 5 dollar DLC, should NOT contain content equal to Vanilla.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

3 hours ago, NoQuitting said:

Spacewrecked; now we finally get to see where those meteors come from.

If you mean Dry Season, they're Dragoon Eggs from the Volcano. Otherwise, you mean DST Meteors, which, although slightly offtopic, would come from the moon presumably.

[DeputyDeath]

5 hours ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

Funnily enough I had that idea myself for a DLC called Don't Starve: Snowed In - Would feature Snowman mob Kevin promised

Hah. I like that name.

It would also mean that they could play around with animal migratory routes and stuff. We could have scarabou (somewhere between a caribou and a scarab beetle) that travel in huge herds, and wolves that feed on them (and you, of course).

And bears. There could be a season where all the bears come out of their dens looking for food, meaning that you're constantly in competition with them. Maybe there could be rivers that would thaw in some seasons, and the bears would fish for salmen (fish noodles) in them.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

Just now, DeputyDeath said:

Hah. I like that name.

It would also mean that they could play around with animal migratory routes and stuff. We could have scarabou (somewhere between a caribou and a scarab beetle) that travel in huge herds, and wolves that feed on them (and you, of course).

And bears. There could be a season where all the bears come out of their dens looking for food, meaning that you're constantly in competition with them. Maybe there could be rivers that would thaw in some seasons, and the bears would fish for salmen (fish noodles) in them.

I like this idea.

[Scrimbles]

2 hours ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

English is my first language, and I am conveying it perfectly. Shipwrecked ,the 5 dollar DLC, should NOT contain content equal to Vanilla.

It doesn't have to? Who said it had to lol.

Also, your grammar is off, which falls under the category of 'Poor English'

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

15 minutes ago, Ogrecakes said:

It doesn't have to? Who said it had to lol.

Also, your grammar is off, which falls under the category of 'Poor English'

You did:

"I don't want to pay for another DLC if its just what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place. "

Quit arguing and leave the thread.

 

[Scrimbles]

59 minutes ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

You did:

"I don't want to pay for another DLC if its just what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place. "

Quit arguing and leave the thread.

 

OP said there should be a DLC that adds the ocean, boats, and islands aspect of Shipwrecked onto the main game, and I said I don't want to pay another 5$ for what Shipwrecked should have been. I don't know how that isn't clear.

If Klei and Capy wanted to they could have made what OP suggested, which is what everyone wanted and was expecting, and if they were to make a third DLC it would be pretty shifty.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

2 minutes ago, Ogrecakes said:

OP said there should be a DLC that adds the ocean, boats, and islands aspect of Shipwrecked onto the main game, and I said I don't want to pay another 5$ for what Shipwrecked should have been. I don't know how that isn't clear.

If Klei and Capy wanted to they could have made what OP suggested, which is what everyone wanted and was expecting, and if they were to make a third DLC it would be pretty shifty.

You like to contradict yourself huh...

[Scrimbles]

4 minutes ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

You like to contradict yourself huh...

It's not a contradiction if you get the wrong message from a very clearly written post.

It's clear your grammar isn't the best and I'm not here to judge, but to me that suggests that you simply misinterpreted my original comment for whatever reason, and that's totally fine.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

20 minutes ago, Ogrecakes said:

It's not a contradiction if you get the wrong message from a very clearly written post.

It's clear your grammar isn't the best and I'm not here to judge, but to me that suggests that you simply misinterpreted my original comment for whatever reason, and that's totally fine.

You said you want all this in SW a $5 DLC making it more than Vanilla, then say you never said you wanted it to have the same amount as Vanilla, then say all of a sudden you do again *facepalm*

[Scrimbles]

Just now, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

You said you want all this in SW a $5 DLC making it more than Vanilla, then say you never said you wanted it to have the same amount as Vanilla, then say all of a sudden you do again *facepalm*

So, again, you misinterpreted what I said.

Let me walk you through this very carefully, this threads author (OP, or, original poster) said he wanted a DLC that adds oceans, boats, islands and things that are in Shipwrecked (or at least similar to) on top of the main game, similar to how Reign of Giants added more seasons, items, biomes, and mobs to the main game.

I then commented that's what Shipwrecked should have been (and what everyone THOUGHT it was going to be) in the first place, and I would not like to pay another 5 dollars to get what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place.

Hence my original quote "I don't want to pay for another DLC if it's just what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place."

I was posting as a reply to the authors original comment.

Does that make sense now? I'm not upset that you don't get it, I just like my comments to be understood by whomever might not get them.

[CheeseburgerCockatoo]

27 minutes ago, Ogrecakes said:

So, again, you misinterpreted what I said.

Let me walk you through this very carefully, this threads author (OP, or, original poster) said he wanted a DLC that adds oceans, boats, islands and things that are in Shipwrecked (or at least similar to) on top of the main game, similar to how Reign of Giants added more seasons, items, biomes, and mobs to the main game.

I then commented that's what Shipwrecked should have been (and what everyone THOUGHT it was going to be) in the first place, and I would not like to pay another 5 dollars to get what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place.

Hence my original quote "I don't want to pay for another DLC if it's just what Shipwrecked should have been in the first place."

I was posting as a reply to the authors original comment.

Does that make sense now? I'm not upset that you don't get it, I just like my comments to be understood by whomever might not get them.

I am the OP.... you can't understand my comments is the issue. All of this would make SW more than Vanilla, but you say you don't want that.

[Scrimbles]

17 minutes ago, CheeseburgerCockatoo said:

I am the OP.... you can't understand my comments is the issue. All of this would make SW more than Vanilla, but you say you don't want that.

oh, didnt realize you were op. Well, your post doesn't make sense in general then, because if what you are saying is true, your structure in your first post didn't properly convey what you meant.

So I guess I misunderstood, not because I don't logically understand what you are saying, but because your sentence logic doesn't make sense.