EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 With a previous topic I made, outlining a large chunk of the issues in terms of DS and DST and their learning curve as well as game play and so on, I thought it would be a good idea to post some suggestions in terms of game design/redesign of current features in the game. These will be aimed at creating a learning curve for the game and so that even professional players have things harder for them within the game: * Energy stat and other character stats to make the game harder - with sleeping and resting being optional, it really makes it something that you just do to kill some time if you need stats regenerated and don't want to waste food or some other stat regenerating items. With energy stat, the game would become significantly harder, as you would lose energy from simply running, crafting or working to obtain various resources. It would probably require something like the Straw roll to be craftable from the beginning, of course and some other ways to regenerate the energy bar, like stumps, sittable logs or chairs to sit on, especially for someone playing Wickerbottom. Of course, having some foods which regenerate energy would be great, but to an extent where sleeping and sitting can simply be postponed and not replaced with eating foods. Post-poning could include a mechanic of simply not being able to eat food if your hunger is at like 95% or above or perhaps a disgust stat to come along with it, which would cause vomiting and resulting in loss of other stats, like health, sanity or something along the lines. I we're making the game more realistic, perhaps thirst, oxygen, blood, excretion (intestines and/or bladder), flesh (so, certain things attacking you might bite off a piece of your arms or something, which would need to be taken care of) and bone stats for a lot of the individual body parts. Either way, creating more stats for the player to take care of is ought to make the game harder, like sanity kind of did when it was first introduced. And how about if you regenerated health and hunger with something like a dragon pie 1 hp per second for 40 seconds and have bleeding effects and hence various bandages (like, basic bandages made from something like leaves and grass and more advanced ones out of silk). * More equip slots - in and of themselves, this might make the game easier, but going along with the point above, you would probably need this to survive as well as game being made harder. So, imagine, things like temperature needing to be taken care of for each body part. During winter, you'd need to wear at least rabbit earmuffs, some thin scarf, dapper vest, some form of thin mittens, and some form of thin boots (perhaps even some form of pants) in order to have all of the body parts kept warm from the cold at a minimum and something like a beefalo hat, hibearnation vest, some form of thick pants, scarf and boots as well as some thick mittens (the mittens/gloves, pants, boots and scarves are not elaborated concepts, just labeled as "thick" and "thin" for example purposes). Of course, thermal stone working on all of the body, perhaps simply enhancing the warmth of the clothing you're already wearing or whatnot. Same goes for Summer, things like sandals, shorts and perhaps even some form of sun cream. Spring, of course, rain hat, rain coat, some wellies, rain pants or something and some rubber gloves. To give an example of what each body part being kept from getting wet, for example, keeping your hands from getting wet would ensure that you can continue working without things slipping out from your grip, whilst wellies would keep your feet dry, hence you wouldn't trip every so often if they get wet and/or the ground gets wet, wet legs would slow you down, wet head drain sanity, of course, wet arms means harder to work and wet torso affecting energy stat, which would start to drain faster. So yeah, more realistic look on temperature and wetness/rain. * Reworked inventory - whilst for the amount of stuff in the game you might want more inventory and having the current amount makes things pretty well balanced for what the game provides, imagine this: you have 5 large slots. You can scroll to separate them into 4 medium slots, which can be scrolled into to give 4 small slots each. Scrolling out would give an opposite effect, obviously. Now imagine backpack providing 9 extra of those large slots. Now, each item would have size and weight to it. The heavier it is to carry, the slower you become. In order to not make things too hard, a log, for instance, could take up 1 medium slot per and hence 4 per large slot (so a board would take up 1 large slot), whilst something like a feather or a stinger could be stored multiple of in just a small slot. This means, you could carry a few large items, a decent amount of medium size items and a lot of small items, or whatever in-between of various types without having, something like, I don't know, being able to carry hundreds of moon rocks, but only a few cratered rocks before your character says "I can't carry anymore stuff!". To add to that, things that are pretty much technically giant things to carry, like turf or walls, could be carried like how you have the nose/heads of marbled clockworks being only possible to carry with your back and hand slots free. There's already basis for this, so, just applying this for more things could be a great way to make the game more immersive and a tad bit more realistic, imho. * Running, jumping/leaping and ducking - normal melee can get boring at times. Plus, you might want to leg it in some very dangerous times. If affected by the energy stat (which at 0 would collapse you, letting you be vulnerable until you regen enough energy or something along the lines), allowing the player to leap with using certain controls or jump on spot to avoid specific attacks from mobs for a bit, same with ducking and running would enable you to get away quickly, but would drain energy (specifically the leg/feet energy and oxygen stat to that, if those are implemented), so you couldn't sustain that whole running thing for very long. It would also increase the amount of skill you would need in order to combat some harder-to-fight things, like bosses for instance as well as make it more fun to simply survive. * Have things come to you due to your actions, not you coming after stuff, like with Dragonfly and Bee queen being raid bosses - things like hounds, deerclops and bearger come after you to keep you on the edge... other than them, there's not too much for things coming after you in that sense. You do also have tree guards coming after you if you chop down trees too much (or, they really should, with karma, similarly like with krampus, otherwise it's just random chance and chopping a few trees for some logs results in unwanted angry trees)... Imagine if Bee Queen worked like that: If you killed all of the bee hives nearby it/created by it, the giant bee hive would turn into a bee queen and attack you. And with Spider queen, if you kill more nests, the other nests becoming more powerful/faster getting to a higher tier, so essentially a spider queen would emerge to avenge. Think of them as the guardians, rather than just another optional boss (although, like with tree guard, having the ability to passify bee queen and spider queen or whatnot would be a good idea then as well). * Balancing/rebalancing of tiers and types - there are certain things that are meant to be a tier or a type. You have backpack and piggy back, one doesn't slow you down but has more inventory, the other has less inventory but doesn't slow you down (with the aforementioned mechanics, piggyback might become a tier better item than backpack), you have a weapon which doesn't have durability but instead spoils over time, whilst some other weapons with durability and another which loses it only while you hold it, you have pretty parasol, an easier to craft umbrella, which is also slightly inferior to its counterpart, then you have a similar case with grass suit and log suit, whilst log suit and marble suit are kind of like a kiting and tanking version of each other (I say kind of, because marble suits seem to be something a bit more desirable now). Now, what if this was kept being applied to other things that are deemed quite useless or not worth it right now? Lets say, Insulated Pack could work fully like a portable ice box, but with less slots than a backpack, whilst a thermal stone could be cooled down, but only affect your body if it's in your pocket inventory and not in your backpack. And may be making it inflammable or at least loot all of the realistically non-flammable items (e.g. gears, doodads) upon burning down! * Making recipes harder and/or more realistic to their design and functionality- this might be very easy for certain recipes, like pan flute (so, like 1 bamboo, 1 reed and 1 mandrake) or walking cane (1 walrus tusk, 2 gold, 1 bamboo... yes, it's a bamboo, not a twig that you're leaning against! Although both of these recipes would require sw to be brought in first, or at least some of the content from it) or even shadow manipulaotr (it basically just needs like 3 gold on top of what it already has... like literally, look at the machine's aesthetic!), but for something like an ice box or especially pig houses and rabbit hutches you might have a bit of a problem. Because of that, I've two suggestions: first, add in some code so that if a recipe requires more than 3 types of items, it fits in well within the crafting window, which displays this. Secondly, having the ability to place down something like a pig house as a bone structure and gradually building up on it, could work well too. This is already present for the new skelletons brought in, so how about if this is brought in for things like crafting machines (e.g. science machine, pig house) and at each stage, the player could examine the structure to find out what they need to add to the structure to complete it even more or something. * Loot from objects//fauna and mobs as well as the ways to kill/destroy them - imagine chopping down an evergreen for a bit longer than usual, with your typical axe that now has much more durability, then having to get rid of all of the branches, twigs, pines and pine-cones per segment of the chopped down tree (resulting in you getting the aforementioned loot) and then chopping the stem of the chopped tree in segments to get logs. Then taking a rest on the stump and either digging it up and removing the roots in order to get another log (and roots which could have some form of use, be a fuel source or these could simply be vines from SW) or leaving it there and letting the rain decompose it over time. The logs you could simply use to craft on variant of a campfire or you could chop them into wood and perhaps even take the bark off them for, say, crafting a torch. And imagine if trees, upon death would fall over too to decompose over time or something. How cool would that be?! Immersive survival, more loot and logs per tree you chop, more taller versions of each tree (with the possibility of them falling on you and you having to struggle to get out of its grip if it falls on you) and just cool survival game mechanics overall! Or mining a rock for longer, but getting more loot each time you destroy a segment (similarly to how in DST, you get some ice each time you mine a segment, just that they would take longer to mine and would too give more loot in return). You might just take like 5 mins to chop down like 3 pretty large trees and you would have a decent amount of wood very quickly! Woodie doing this even quicker would make him very great (not only in chopping down and chopping up segments, but also harvesting... hey, him harvesting faster could be a cool feature, so that Maxwell doesn't outweigh him in every way or something). * More complex mob AI - imagine if pigs would have their very own monarchic system and survival tactics, with each of them having stats as well! You could trade with them, befriend them when they aren't busy, perhaps shave a layer of skin while they're asleep to get some pig skin, so you don't have to kill them for it and overall would just make them cool dudes! What if you could also have Pig king as some form of a weaker type boss, which when killed would have pigs focus on having a new king put in place or something. Making your base near them might not be a good idea though if you're more vulnerable due to the aforementioned game mechanics and them during full moon not being so friendly at all... Something similar could apply to bunnies and merms. * Resurrection and graves - imagine if you could set up a grave in some way that you could... literally dig yourself out, sort of like a zombie from a grave to resurrect... wouldn't that be cool? I've actually tried to make an animation for a mod I'm working on, although with a cranky result (e.g. using existing and existing images which have been edited to create the animation and Wilson turned out to be of too small scale when I tried to animate this...). But graves having more impact and something more to do with the world would be great, other than just digging them up for trinket and gem goods. Imagine being able to bury player/generated skeleton bodies, and may be even within a coffin and restore sanity or something like that... I don't have this thought-through very well, but the concepts would be cool to have in the game, imho. Some more involvement of ghosts, which techinally act as guardians for graves, would be cool too. * Larger world and some other stuff - This is getting pretty long already, so I'll try to keep it straight-forward... what if the world is larger and you have more to explore, including the seas, and islands surrounding main land (with SW implemented, I mean)? What if the map would be something you would need to craft, like with compass and keep it on you in order to see where you've explored. Or how about a magical map (perhaps called Map of Revealed Secrets), which would require your map and with it, you could see things in the entire world, where you've explored happen as you see them... might be a bit laggy, but may be there's something that could be done with this? This would mean that at first you would not be able to see where you've been nor track where you've been, which would make the game ever more uncompromising at the beginning . Imagine hound mounds in the woods with packs of wolves and a Warg leading each pack... then on each full moon (which more realistically could be every 28 days and not some random amount of days), a closest pack woudl come after you and would follow you until you kill them/beat their pack enough for them to retreat or, say, hide in a berry bush like a wimp until the full moon ends, after which they would all retreat :P. Having a larger world for this and with more mounds, which in some ways could be renewable naturally (or may be simply indestructible) could be cool and make a bit more sense than some hounds spawning in nearby at a certain moment to hunt you down. Similarly, seasonal giants could be raid bosses, but each would come after you or a friend of yours to kill you and destroy things between a certain period of time on their specific seasons (perhaps near the middle or end of the season. Being totally random might be too tough, but being very specific might make things a hunch easier and you would know when to get prepared exactly). This, of course including Dragonfly... They could perhaps also act differently when going after you, as, say whilst the Dragonfly is at her base, she could summon lavae, whilst going after you she could act like the single player dragonfly, meaning fighting the same giant the second time could be different. * Longer days and seasons - with all of the tasks at hand, day-night cycles being only 8 minutes long and seasons being 15 - 20 days long by default could make it very stressful. Some might not like this and want to toggle it, but by default, perhaps day cycles could last 24 minutes, (so seconds being minutes and minutes being hours in the game, technically) and seasons being each roughly 90 days long. This would mean you have more time to prepare, but you would also need more prepared if you want to thrive... otherwise, a tent, a firepit, a crock pot perhaps, some chests, science machine and a few drying racks, whilst you're trying to keep the flame alive during winter would keep you very much on the edge for a large portion of the season. More time to focus, more to embrace. Why not have this in a survival game? Some other games, like The Long Dark have longer time periods too, embracing more of the survival aspect, which I really think Don't Starve sort of lacks and short days and seasons is just one of those reasons. * More traps - why this wasn't expanded on in the game, I am not sure. Everyone knows toadstool, right? What if in caves there were actual spore trees of two kinds and one of them would look like the cap, which you chop to get toadstool. This could mean that he could act like a trap type boss for you chopping down mushrooms and would also make him harder to find. Having boomshrooms that you can harvest would be great too. Some mushroom explosives that we could use would be pretty cool, imho! A little off-topic, but I honestly think being able to craft an armour which rots slowly instead of having durability via shroom skin would be pretty great. Other types of traps could include nightmares (things displayed on your screen that aren't actually happening in the game and if you die in a nightmare, you wake up), which could be induced due to traps in the world, you being very insane and going to sleep or something along the lines. But not really being able to tell whether a nightmare has started or not until you wake up and you questioning what's real anymore would be cool as all hell and how about a plant, similar to lureplant, but it would hold some form of a berry and look like itss real berry plant counterpart, which you can harvest (like with depth worms), but for the lureplant counterpart, the moment you try to harvest its berry, it would enravel its leaves with teeth, which would close up to slowly drown you or something if you are not prepared to fight it from within... or you could run and leap out of its grasp if you have enough energy at the time. So, basically being something a lot like this: I think that's it for now... I might add more later on, but for now, this is how I would really love the game to be like in its design. A lot of what I mentioned is already presented in some new content recently added, but not within the old content, meaning that it's not too large of a game-changer. Realism might not be something to fully try and reach... that would just make it irl simulator with some magic scattered here and there because plot, but taking realism to apply to to the game, could make more sense to newbies so the learning of the game is more easy due to real-life experience, whilst at the same time, making it harder for professionals, who might not be able to even conquer the world at this point. Let me know what you, other members think and hopefully you, devs take at least some of these ideas and put them in the game after/during ANR development to make the game more immersive, uncompromising and work for people playing for longer long-term, whilst still exploring new things. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninjanemo Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 1: I think the three already existent stats are just fine to be honest. There's no need to make the game more complicated with more stat-types. 2: Again, no need to make the game more complicated than neccesary. 3: Sounds cool, but I think it should require some kind of item/bossdrop in the form of armor. 4: I totally agree. Maybe the Varg should come running with the ususal hound pack after a certain amount of time, too. 5: Sounds cool. I think DST would benefit from a rebalance like that. Especially for all the useless boss drops out there. 6: I guess that could work. I don't really think any of the recipes are that easy to make. 7: Once again, 2complicated4me 8: Yeah that'd be great. I think pigs are pretty useless anyways at the moment. 9: Sounds super cool! Maybe the coffin would require some boards and nightmare fue or somthing, instead of 40 life. 10: Nah. I think the worlds are fine atm. 11: 90 day seasons?? No. I think however that autumn and spring should be longer so you have more time to prepare for summer and winter. At least in eraly game. 12: I like it. DST could defientely do with a few more plant traps. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-837159 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecu Posted November 15, 2016 Share Posted November 15, 2016 Honestly, I feel like a lot of these ideas are added complexity purely for the sake of complexity. One of the golden rules of design is K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid). In general, you want to keep mechanics simple and intuitive, so that players do not need to read a wiki to play the game and instead can easily learn through experimentation. Regarding that, I don't think a lot of your suggestions really help the experience. We don't need another stat to make sleeping valuable as sleeping already replenishes sanity and health, which makes tents extremely useful for many characters. We don't need grave resurrection as we already have effigies. We don't even really need more difficult recipes. Regarding the recipes and your suggestion for longer days (and even larger worlds, to a degree), do you realize that in general servers do not even achieve much over 100 days of play? It takes roughly 10 hours of play time to get through a single in-game year in DST, as generally accepted primary method of play is survival (and how the official servers are setup), this means that under your suggestion people would rarely even get out of autumn, which is just silly. I have the feeling that your suggestions come from playing on a endless server, where you and/or your friends have accomplished most everything and are now feeling like you need more to do. Overall, that isn't the standard/average gameplay of DST and I would recommend playing survival mode more. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-837840 Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 15, 2016 Author Share Posted November 15, 2016 11 hours ago, Ecu said: 1) Honestly, I feel like a lot of these ideas are added complexity purely for the sake of complexity. One of the golden rules of design is K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid). In general, you want to keep mechanics simple and intuitive, so that players do not need to read a wiki to play the game and instead can easily learn through experimentation. Regarding that, I don't think a lot of your suggestions really help the experience. 2) We don't need another stat to make sleeping valuable as sleeping already replenishes sanity and health, which makes tents extremely useful for many characters. We don't need grave resurrection as we already have effigies. We don't even really need more difficult recipes. 3) Regarding the recipes and your suggestion for longer days (and even larger worlds, to a degree), do you realize that in general servers do not even achieve much over 100 days of play? It takes roughly 10 hours of play time to get through a single in-game year in DST, as generally accepted primary method of play is survival (and how the official servers are setup), this means that under your suggestion people would rarely even get out of autumn, which is just silly. 4) I have the feeling that your suggestions come from playing on a endless server, where you and/or your friends have accomplished most everything and are now feeling like you need more to do. Overall, that isn't the standard/average gameplay of DST and I would recommend playing survival mode more. 1) They are not ideas for complexity purely for complexity. They are ideas for complexity, because more immersive game experience kind of requires it. And actually, the complexity I've described makes more sense in corellation with reality. The game already requires you to read the wiki and with things being either simple in a sense that it doesn't make sense at all is a key component of game being confusing. With more complexity reflective of reality, largely one thing you could be asking yourself during the game-play to resolve issues would be "how would I resolve this in reality if I was in such a situation?" and perhaps even "what does the game offer me as a counterpart of this?" instead of "oh, what does this do?" and when/if you find out "that doesn't make any sense at all in any capacity, but if it works, why not?". A great example would be the way you heal your wounds. In reality, you would probably gather materials out of which you can keep your wounds bound like with a bandage or a plaster. So, knowing some things about the game, and looking at the survival tab, you could craft a basic bandage out of leaves and grass and a better one out of silk, which makes sense, right? But no, in the game, you kill butterflies with your fist and eat their wings and other cooked meals as more than likely your main ways of healing... complete common sense, right? 2) They are useful, but they are optional. A lot of the time, a lot of players, especially professionals, in my experience would nearly never use them because food can take care of it all already, including hunger and sitting there, sleeping would just equate to killing time. Energy stat would make the game significantly harder, not only because it would make restful items/structures necessary for survival, but also because it would be another thing to keep in mind while playing, along with sanity, health, hunger, wetness and temperature. 3) I do. And there's ought to be ways that the mechanics for the servers could too be reworked in order to let others play longer, even if they have no experience. And as I mentioned before, more sense-making is ought to make even the most noobish of players understand its flow. Like, how long would it take for you to understand the core mechanics and principles behind The Long Dark before you can fluently play, whilst the challenge is still there? How many times would you die to that game before you learnt at least something decently valuable? The logic and the simpleness of DS/DST making zero sense (if you don't focus on all of the weird and magic stuff), rendering understanding how to avoid the thing that you died from before much harder or even make no sense at all. I know at least one person who's been playing DST for quite a while with us and though they have been dying less and less lately, the game keeps killing them in stupid ways they can't put their finger on. 4) The game gets boring to just do the same stuff over again when you've done it plenty of times, but it also gets boring if/if you can reach a point where you've pretty much won the game. I've played survival mode and its mechanics suck, because one noob can join the server whilst everyone else is asleep, die, exit the server and everything is now lost. I don't see how any of this is good game design, unless you're playing on a private server with your friends. And again, quite the bit of my suggestions are applicable to various items within the game, as I mentioned earlier, namely: Mini glacier gradual mining, carrying of heavy objects like actual heavy objects with marbled nose/heads of marbled clockwork pieces, jelly beans and their gradual health bonus, sculptures and their crafting mechanics (as wll as them being carried like actual heavy objects that they are) and possibly other things I cannot recall right now. Plenty of my suggestions are simply complex expansions similar to some others already existent in the game for a lot of the simple mechanics that are within the game. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838113 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecu Posted November 15, 2016 Share Posted November 15, 2016 31 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said: 1) They are not ideas for complexity purely for complexity. They are ideas for complexity, because more immersive game experience kind of requires it. And actually, the complexity I've described makes more sense in corellation with reality. The game already requires you to read the wiki and with things being either simple in a sense that it doesn't make sense at all is a key component of game being confusing. With more complexity reflective of reality, largely one thing you could be asking yourself during the game-play to resolve issues would be "how would I resolve this in reality if I was in such a situation?" and perhaps even "what does the game offer me as a counterpart of this?" instead of "oh, what does this do?" and when/if you find out "that doesn't make any sense at all in any capacity, but if it works, why not?". A great example would be the way you heal your wounds. In reality, you would probably gather materials out of which you can keep your wounds bound like with a bandage or a plaster. So, knowing some things about the game, and looking at the survival tab, you could craft a basic bandage out of leaves and grass and a better one out of silk, which makes sense, right? But no, in the game, you kill butterflies with your fist and eat their wings and other cooked meals as more than likely your main ways of healing... complete common sense, right? 2) They are useful, but they are optional. A lot of the time, a lot of players, especially professionals, in my experience would nearly never use them because food can take care of it all already, including hunger and sitting there, sleeping would just equate to killing time. Energy stat would make the game significantly harder, not only because it would make restful items/structures necessary for survival, but also because it would be another thing to keep in mind while playing, along with sanity, health, hunger, wetness and temperature. 3) I do. And there's ought to be ways that the mechanics for the servers could too be reworked in order to let others play longer, even if they have no experience. And as I mentioned before, more sense-making is ought to make even the most noobish of players understand its flow. Like, how long would it take for you to understand the core mechanics and principles behind The Long Dark before you can fluently play, whilst the challenge is still there? How many times would you die to that game before you learnt at least something decently valuable? The logic and the simpleness of DS/DST making zero sense (if you don't focus on all of the weird and magic stuff), rendering understanding how to avoid the thing that you died from before much harder or even make no sense at all. I know at least one person who's been playing DST for quite a while with us and though they have been dying less and less lately, the game keeps killing them in stupid ways they can't put their finger on. 4) The game gets boring to just do the same stuff over again when you've done it plenty of times, but it also gets boring if/if you can reach a point where you've pretty much won the game. I've played survival mode and its mechanics suck, because one noob can join the server whilst everyone else is asleep, die, exit the server and everything is now lost. I don't see how any of this is good game design, unless you're playing on a private server with your friends. I'll use your same numbering... 1 - I agree with the general concept of utilizing real-world logic to make game mechanics more intuitive. However there is a large different between creating realistic gameplay mechanics and using reality to make gameplay mechanics intuitive. What you are doing is making realistic gameplay mechanics. You are adding complexity governed by real-world logic to make things more challenging when the challenge can be achieved so much more simply. If you feel you should be able to carry less of a resource, because it is larger, don't let it stack. If you feel is very large, have it take the back slot, like statue pieces. One of the greatest things about Don't Starve (and Together) is that the core gameplay mechanics are very simple. You have a basic inventory along with three equipment slots. You can craft items based on nearby crafting stations, and interact with items via left or right click. With the addition of the tooltips that show up informing a user as to what left and right click does when used on another object/item, it makes the game really easy to pick up. This is why I feel your mechanics are complexity for the sake of complexity. They don't really improve the gameplay, just make it more complex. Anyways...this is my opinion on this aspect. 2 - I have to disagree here. I am perfectly fine with tents being optional and as I do see them used frequently during my play experience, I feel they provide a useful addition to the game as-is. I think an additional stat would only serve to add additional unneeded complications. If the goal was to make actions take stamina, it could be easily achieved by having actions drain hunger and still have similar ties to real-world logic without adding additional complexity to the game mechanics themselves. 3 - For one, the game killing you in ways you didn't expect or cannot quite understand is actually great. DST is a roguelike survival game and killing you should be something it is reasonably good at. I personally feel DST is actually quite easy to pick up and have had very few friends have much trouble doing so. On the subject of the servers... In my experience, a majority of the runs I've done have ended because I simply didn't have the time to keep playing, not because I died due to game mechanics. A few reasonably experienced players on a run can make it pretty easy to survive to summer. It taking roughly 10 hours to complete a single game year is already a pretty daunting amount of time to sit down and play and with survival servers restarting between when you quit and when you can play again (by design mind you), you generally do not continue sessions and instead start new ones. Extending the seasons to 90 days would only mean that only Autumn gets played and the other months aren't experienced really at all. To be completely honest, it sounds quite silly to me. 4 - Survival mode is the primary mode the game is played, and the mode Klei supports officially on it's servers. As such, I think it is pretty fair to say that it is the mode that game mechanics should be designed around. Given an average of one game year per play session (in my experience), I really think that said mechanics should be focused around that year, with various mechanics like disease and boss assaults being used to put strain on bases and force people to rework parts of their base as the years go by. At the end of the day, DST is a roguelike survival game and should really not be treated like a base building game. It should get progressively harder and continually cause pseudo-restarts of aspects of the base to force people to constantly fight against the world to survive, with the eventuality being that they die. Such a game style might not be for everyone, but the repetition in continually starting over is exactly what roguelikes are about...they are about sitting down and seeing how far you can get in a session usually and most roguelikes are quite a bit more challenging when compared to DST. All in all, I respect the amount of information you offered with your design, but I don't really feel like it fits with DST's gameplay style. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838126 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnWatson Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 @EuedeAdodooedoe Your post was really hard to read, sorry. You should really split up paragraphs such that they only contain a few sentences per paragraph instead of having one giant wall of text with 20 sentences. And keep the content of your paragraphs concise, don't overelaborate on something. Trust me, you don't need to explain in great detail, it's easier to understand a quick short 2-sentence explanation than an entire 20-sentence paragraph of it. Delete unnecessary detail if they don't add anything but length. Just advice. About your ideas, I think that they just add unnecessary complexity. I believe that more features gives the game more depth, but they need to be kept simple. While you think complex features might fix issues in the game, adding more complexity may actually increase the number of issues. Amount of Features × Complexity of Features = Amount of Potential Issues Energy Stat - Sanity is already practically the energy meter. You cannot fight monster for too long, wander around the dark for too long, and do certain actions for too long. You also regain Sanity from sleeping and eating food. Energy meters of other games serve to limit the actions of the player, just like how the Sanity stat in Don't Starve works. Stats for Disgust, Thirst, Oxygen, Blood, Excretion, and Flesh - No thanks, this is just unnecessary complexity. And Don't Starve is a game with simple mechanics and those stats don't fit in with the rest of the game. Different Equip Slots - Again, just unnecessary complexity in a game of simple mechanics. The game is fine with the current inventory system, I don't see anything wrong with it. Size and Weight for Inventory - The inventory should never be a puzzle game because it's supposed to be a UI. A good UI is a UI that is easy to use. And stack limits for items already act like size and weight, no need to make things complicated. Anything about Realism - Always remember that we play games for the sole reason that because it isn't real life. Mechanics can be realistic to an extent or be based around a realistic concept, but you can't make and shouldn't aim for perfect realism. I never understood why everyone wants every game to be hyper-realistic, just go outside your house if you want realism. Gameplay > Realism That's all I bothered to read - I'm sorry, but your post is really hard to read. Anyway, I'm mostly just agreeing with what @Ecu says. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838274 Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 16, 2016 Author Share Posted November 16, 2016 15 hours ago, Ecu said: I'll use your same numbering... 1 - I agree with the general concept of utilizing real-world logic to make game mechanics more intuitive. However there is a large different between creating realistic gameplay mechanics and using reality to make gameplay mechanics intuitive. What you are doing is making realistic gameplay mechanics. You are adding complexity governed by real-world logic to make things more challenging when the challenge can be achieved so much more simply. If you feel you should be able to carry less of a resource, because it is larger, don't let it stack. If you feel is very large, have it take the back slot, like statue pieces. One of the greatest things about Don't Starve (and Together) is that the core gameplay mechanics are very simple. You have a basic inventory along with three equipment slots. You can craft items based on nearby crafting stations, and interact with items via left or right click. With the addition of the tooltips that show up informing a user as to what left and right click does when used on another object/item, it makes the game really easy to pick up. This is why I feel your mechanics are complexity for the sake of complexity. They don't really improve the gameplay, just make it more complex. Anyways...this is my opinion on this aspect. 2 - I have to disagree here. I am perfectly fine with tents being optional and as I do see them used frequently during my play experience, I feel they provide a useful addition to the game as-is. I think an additional stat would only serve to add additional unneeded complications. If the goal was to make actions take stamina, it could be easily achieved by having actions drain hunger and still have similar ties to real-world logic without adding additional complexity to the game mechanics themselves. 3 - For one, the game killing you in ways you didn't expect or cannot quite understand is actually great. DST is a roguelike survival game and killing you should be something it is reasonably good at. I personally feel DST is actually quite easy to pick up and have had very few friends have much trouble doing so. On the subject of the servers... In my experience, a majority of the runs I've done have ended because I simply didn't have the time to keep playing, not because I died due to game mechanics. A few reasonably experienced players on a run can make it pretty easy to survive to summer. It taking roughly 10 hours to complete a single game year is already a pretty daunting amount of time to sit down and play and with survival servers restarting between when you quit and when you can play again (by design mind you), you generally do not continue sessions and instead start new ones. Extending the seasons to 90 days would only mean that only Autumn gets played and the other months aren't experienced really at all. To be completely honest, it sounds quite silly to me. 4 - Survival mode is the primary mode the game is played, and the mode Klei supports officially on it's servers. As such, I think it is pretty fair to say that it is the mode that game mechanics should be designed around. Given an average of one game year per play session (in my experience), I really think that said mechanics should be focused around that year, with various mechanics like disease and boss assaults being used to put strain on bases and force people to rework parts of their base as the years go by. At the end of the day, DST is a roguelike survival game and should really not be treated like a base building game. It should get progressively harder and continually cause pseudo-restarts of aspects of the base to force people to constantly fight against the world to survive, with the eventuality being that they die. 5) Such a game style might not be for everyone, but the repetition in continually starting over is exactly what roguelikes are about...they are about sitting down and seeing how far you can get in a session usually and most roguelikes are quite a bit more challenging when compared to DST. All in all, I respect the amount of information you offered with your design, but I don't really feel like it fits with DST's gameplay style. 1) Now it makes a bit more sense. Although I would disagree that more complexity wouldn't add to harder game play and a more neat game design. As I mentioned with my example of TLD (The Long Dark), understanding key logics of reality would enable the player to better understand the game. Yes, not everything needs to be 100% accurate nor can it be 100% accurate, but if the sort of mechanics were applied, it would enable better learning of the game. I understand the game being very punishing to the player and having perma-death and all of that, but the player not learning from their mistakes and it being easier to understand them not being part of game design? Why? This, as I mentioned just fuels the need to ask online or read the wiki. Someone playing the game for ages might not be able to get anywhere simply because they tried to get better by playing over and over without any external tips or information. This is exactly what part of my suggestions are about; the more realistically you interact with something, the better you'll understand how to do things generally and with more realistic death, you will be able to learn how to keep alive, because reality would be your wiki, not an external page, which describes mechanics which are weird and make no sense at all. 2) This really depends. It's often that professionals make them and then newbies use them. Most of the time in my experience at least. Yes, some newbies will craft them and yes, some pros will use them, both occasionally, but other than this, they're just pointless-to-craft time-killers. Hunger can affect this and it would be great if it did, but sleeping objects/items don't restore it in and of themselves, in fact they drain hunger faster. So, if it's an external energy stat, you would be put in hell of a larger dangers throughout the game. It wouldn't just make the game a little more complex, it would overhaul the game play quite the bit and make the game generally harder to survive. If what you described in point four is what you want, energy stat within the game will achieve this within the game for you for sure. 3) Unexpected? Yes, pretty great. Not understanding why and how you died even long after that? No, that doesn't teach the player anything. The player can just keep dying to the same thing and not understand why at all, or die very quickly every single round, not progressing at all, at which point the game becomes repetitive and boring, leading to rage-quits. The game needs to guide the player if they're interested in the game, not the wiki or some external source so that the game design has a good game path overall, which I'd argue it doesn't as I've seen some people trying to figure out things for themselves and they rarely do because they don't look at suggestions. If the game assumes the player has some decent knowledge of reality, then it can guide the player pretty well throughout with more real-life applicable mechanics and some basic indicators as to what you can do with what (like, I believe I suggested before, if you hover over something like a food item, instead of just "eat" action, you would have the following: Right Click image & "eat" text, Left Click image & "take" text, Ctrl + Left Click image & "split stack" text, Alt + Left Click image & "examine" text). 4) The 90 day thing... I believe I mentioned something about survival servers needing reworking if my suggestions were put in place or regardless being pretty broken and dumb. Restarting session doesn't seem like a thing of game design, but simply a thing that people do for god knows why reasons. A lot of servers do only last a year or shorter if they're survival and it's quite the bummer. I don't think that purposeful server restarts or one-noob dying thing is how survival servers should typically work. The idea behind it all was for "everybody to be dead" for when the server starts to reset, but I think it should really involve something like restarts due to the server being full of dead players (or if everyone dies and one player then exist before restart, the countdown still continues until someone resurrects or an alive player joins the game) and longer, but possibly not permanent runs should be in place. Along with that, escaping to the next world to take the stuff in your inventory be taken to the next world while the old world could be perhaps reset. This way the game mode reflects single player in a multiplayer fashion some bit better and with the suggestions I've provided or without them, this could work well, or at least better than it currently is in my opinion. Because I honestly hate losing progress because of just one person not knowing how to play the game when entering it and dying while me and others whom I've played with are doing some other business or, you know, sleeping irl. This way, actual dying by the idea of "everyone is dead" would be much more true to the game and resetting would be replaced with moving to the next world. You could simply empty your inventory as well if you don't want it with you and perhaps some way of forgetting how to craft things if you so choose to do. Or, with some of my mechanics, you not being able to craft something that requires a machine unless you're near the machine (like with statues that you craft, thulecite stuff, pets and maps) and not being able to precraft things and instead crafting components of the previously pre-craftable structures to then place down. 5) "most roguelikes are quite a bit more challenging when compared to DST." <= precisely what the whole complexity thing is about. You can only get so far with difficulty if you want things to be pretty even (so, like sending 100 spiders after players each day or something insanely ridiculous like that). If the game was very well designed in its path and difficulty with the simpleness that it had, sure, I wouldn't even be thinking about the whole complexity thing. But because it doesn't, I've found that it necessitates it some bit of it for the path that the player takes, without any external information sources or the source code if they can read it and for more difficulty. Imagine bleeding to death after you come near the dragonfly with a "naked" body and her swinging at you, sending you flying off a few meters in the direction she swung. That adds to complexity, yes, but it also adds to survival aspect of the game and makes the game generally tougher, in particular with the giants. So, how do at least some of my suggestions not but "fit with DST's gameplay style."? The current one, yes, it's basically an overhaul, but in relation for what it was intended to be? You bet it has a lot to do with it! I guess it really doesn't matter unless it's put into practice and tested. I was working on a mod and thought about having these mechanics in, although I would need some serious help as so far I've been able to change some recipes and value variables for various items and mobs. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838299 Share on other sites More sharing options...
isthisworkingnow Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 I don't want to be rude but I'm going to put this bluntly: I honestly believe that these changes you want to make you would ruin the game. Just the energy stat in itself would destroy the game it would make the game feel very clunky and honestly I don't think I would be able to play it if it had one. You are trying to competely redesign the game- which it doesn't need what you are describing sounds nothing like the game I fell in love with. It sounds like an interesting game you are describing but it just isn't DS/DST. DS/DST isn't super realistic and if that is what you want I don't know why you play it also the game is wacky/weird on purpose and changing it to be more realistic frankly, I can't say it enough it is not DS/DST. I don't want to come off as super negative about your ideas I just feel it isn't the same game we all know (and hopefully love) and seeing posts like this which fundamentally change the game to the point it might as well be a new one well, it annoys me immensely. Again I'm sorry because this may seem very negative but it just annoys me to no end. This post honestly has made me angry. Spoiler You wouldn't like me when I'm angry. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838315 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecu Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 1 hour ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said: ~snipped to keep post short~ All of these points really represent the same thing, you want the game harder through complexity. I'm trying to explain that it isn't the right approach specifically for DST. To start with, games with the kind of complexity you are suggesting are better represented by single-player experiences. The ability to quit and continue where you left off is a big part of what allows such complexity to not be super overwhelming. For two, there is a difference in goals. Don't Starve, from what I can tell, is meant to be a rather simple game to pick up and play and the kind of complexity you are calling for would completely ruin that. I'll flat out state that currently, I would agree that a lot of Klei's design decisions have been on the poor side regarding creating a good experience for the time frame that an average session of play lasts. However, I disagree with your claim regarding the survival time frame being a poor choice. In fact, I think the current design of a 10 hour play session for a year and a year on average before restart is great. It gives you all four seasons to work with during an average play session (or at least three generally), and in addition to this it allows you to have an expectation of what people will be able to achieve. The issue I have with the current design is that it isn't complex enough to promote a good gameplay experience, it is that they have essentially neglected to follow their average play experience when designing content. They have not actually focused items, made sure all items get reasonable use throughout the different challenges offered, etc. I've already made a post on a few of these issues and how they could be made better without actually affecting the core simplicity of the game. A common misconception in design (usually be people more focused on development), given my experience, is that people end up feeling by making things more complex it will create better gameplay. However, in practice, it actually tends to be the opposite (which is why a lot of complex survival games are niche). Complexity, like you're suggesting, actually tends to overwhelm players. Instead, it is better to give people very simple generalized mechanics and add complexity through interactions and progress said complexity through emergent gameplay. Does Klei do this well currently in DST? I would say no, but as an indie company of their size, they have done a rather awesome job regardless. Their engine is impressive and offers a very simple set of interactions that allows the game to be picked up quickly. I have seen many people, brand new to the game, pick up the core aspects of surviving almost immediately upon playing. Only having to ask questions when dealing with more complex things like crockpots. Which, mind you, crockpots can be easily figured out via trial and error and it has a very obvious representation of success vs. failure. In fact, crockpot recipes are pretty much the only thing I've really used the wiki for during actual play (which is mostly cause my memory is crap). So I'm sorry, but I still feel your arguments for the complexity are just not valid here. The Lone Dark is an example of where complexity is better represented in it's design, as is say NEO Scavenger, but DST is not. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838316 Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 16, 2016 Author Share Posted November 16, 2016 14 minutes ago, Ecu said: All of these points really represent the same thing, you want the game harder through complexity. I'm trying to explain that it isn't the right approach specifically for DST. To start with, games with the kind of complexity you are suggesting are better represented by single-player experiences. The ability to quit and continue where you left off is a big part of what allows such complexity to not be super overwhelming. For two, there is a difference in goals. Don't Starve, from what I can tell, is meant to be a rather simple game to pick up and play and the kind of complexity you are calling for would completely ruin that. I'll flat out state that currently, I would agree that a lot of Klei's design decisions have been on the poor side regarding creating a good experience for the time frame that an average session of play lasts. However, I disagree with your claim regarding the survival time frame being a poor choice. In fact, I think the current design of a 10 hour play session for a year and a year on average before restart is great. It gives you all four seasons to work with during an average play session (or at least three generally), and in addition to this it allows you to have an expectation of what people will be able to achieve. The issue I have with the current design is that it isn't complex enough to promote a good gameplay experience, it is that they have essentially neglected to follow their average play experience when designing content. They have not actually focused items, made sure all items get reasonable use throughout the different challenges offered, etc. I've already made a post on a few of these issues and how they could be made better without actually affecting the core simplicity of the game. A common misconception in design (usually be people more focused on development), given my experience, is that people end up feeling by making things more complex it will create better gameplay. However, in practice, it actually tends to be the opposite (which is why a lot of complex survival games are niche). Complexity, like you're suggesting, actually tends to overwhelm players. Instead, it is better to give people very simple generalized mechanics and add complexity through interactions and progress said complexity through emergent gameplay. Does Klei do this well currently in DST? I would say no, but as an indie company of their size, they have done a rather awesome job regardless. Their engine is impressive and offers a very simple set of interactions that allows the game to be picked up quickly. I have seen many people, brand new to the game, pick up the core aspects of surviving almost immediately upon playing. Only having to ask questions when dealing with more complex things like crockpots. Which, mind you, crockpots can be easily figured out via trial and error and it has a very obvious representation of success vs. failure. In fact, crockpot recipes are pretty much the only thing I've really used the wiki for during actual play (which is mostly cause my memory is crap). So I'm sorry, but I still feel your arguments for the complexity are just not valid here. The Lone Dark is an example of where complexity is better represented in it's design, as is say NEO Scavenger, but DST is not. Okay, after reading all of that, I have 3 2 questions (was going to ask a third, but I forgot what I wanted to ask :P): 1) Could you present me thy solutions/suggestions you mentioned here about how Klei could improve in design some of the more cranky game items, mobs or whatever else? I really want to look into this to see if I can agree on how they fit well or whatnot. 2) What do you mean by "wllows for the game to be picked up quickly"? I way too often see people who cannot pick up pretty much anything from the game with some little help. It's rare that you actually see a newbie who actually tries to take your advice and see where they go in the game. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838321 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecu Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 5 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said: Okay, after reading all of that, I have 3 2 questions (was going to ask a third, but I forgot what I wanted to ask :P): 1) Could you present me thy solutions/suggestions you mentioned here about how Klei could improve in design some of the more cranky game items, mobs or whatever else? I really want to look into this to see if I can agree on how they fit well or whatnot. 2) What do you mean by "wllows for the game to be picked up quickly"? I way too often see people who cannot pick up pretty much anything from the game with some little help. It's rare that you actually see a newbie who actually tries to take your advice and see where they go in the game. You should check out my rant thread here on the suggestions forum. I offer a design overhaul of blowguns there as an example. In fact, I even had started implementing such overhaul myself and released the WIP source publicly. I had ran into issues understanding how to make animations at the time and just didn't have the time available to work through it. To give another example of a change would be say implementing SW style content into the game. Rather than using a new world and duplicating a lot of core resources in said new world, I would blend the concept of ship travel into the core world. As an example, I would add a Bog region in the swamp, which is where a majority of reeds would exist, along which fishing spots. I would make ponds actually just be small water areas, with fishing spots. I have a whole slew of various tweaks, overhauls, and changes I would like to see implemented into DST and many are only pseudo-solid concepts as of yet. I've not devoted a ton of times to flesh them out quite yet as I've not decided whether I want to dive back into modding yet. Regarding picking up the game quickly, I've not had a single friend (that I can recall) that had trouble picking up the basic mechanics of playing the game (and this is without wiki or YT to guide them). Sure, they don't generally grasp all the nuances of everything, but that is something you slowly learn as you go (or learn from others who've already learned it as this is a multiplayer game). Klei could do better with its progression, maybe, but I think they have done a decent job. I think if people actually want to learn...the tools are there. I think the problem is more on people and their need for instant gratification, which said people won't probably enjoy roguelikes very much at the end anyways. As such games tend to require a lot of restarting and probing things to really master. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838325 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donke60 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 So let me get straight you want me to baby sit the survivor and make the game a clusterfuck of stat balencing and make the game a completely different game I didn't read all of it I'll come back Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838327 Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 16, 2016 Author Share Posted November 16, 2016 @JohnWatson I did mention that some of the complex ideas I've presented here are in the actual game and most have been introduced recently: first are nose/heads of marbled clockworks act like actual items that are heavy to carry. If walls were reworked to hold a better purpose (e.g. craft roofs on top of them), you got more rock resources from mining rocks for a bit longer and walls took more rocks than they do now to craft, holding a stone wall on your back like the nose/heads would be pretty cool, imo, but I see why people wouldn't want it for the sake of simplicity. Glaciers, have been reworked in multiplayer to loot ice each time you mine one segment of them, similarly how I made some segmentation suggestion about trees and what I thought would be good if rocks had too. Jelly beans giving you health gradually instead of instantly like all other foods. 8 minutes ago, Donke60 said: So let me get straight you want me to baby sit the survivor and make the game a clusterfuck of stat balencing and make the game a completely different game I didn't read all of it I'll come back No, I'm hoping that the opposite would happen. I can see why people would think the other, but with the whole "more realism and complexity" thing, people understanding how things would work in the game due to how they work irl could enable newbies to pick up the game better and possibly even quicker, whilst putting professionals on the edge due to more micro-management. I think it's pretty hard to grasp, so I guess testing and demonstration of it would work out better. Like heck, even I don't know how well this would work in general. Like, I know why people would not want this specifically for DST, but the question is whether this would work well at all. @Ecu I can't find the post/topic you're talking about with your suggestions, could you please link it for me? Or may be rewrite the ideas here if you can remember? Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838332 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecu Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 1 minute ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said: @Ecu I can't find the post/topic you're talking about with your suggestions, could you please link it for me? Or may be rewrite the ideas here if you can remember? Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838333 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donke60 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 On 11/11/2016 at 10:24 AM, EuedeAdodooedoe said: immersive Do you know what immersion is I'll tell you immersion is feeling part of the world or feeling that what you do matters is short immersion doesn't = realism On 11/15/2016 at 2:59 PM, EuedeAdodooedoe said: And actually, the complexity I've described makes more sense in corellation with reality. The game already requires you to read the wiki and with things being either simple in a sense that it doesn't make sense at all is a key component of game being confusing. With more complexity reflective of reality, largely one thing you could be asking yourself during the game-play to resolve issues would be "how would I resolve this in reality if I was in such a situation?" :Games could be based in reality but they would have to be changed to be fun what you describe is me going outside and surviving in the willderness in real life. Also most people play games to escape reality not go into it but have the game also give them the middle finger while play the game On 11/15/2016 at 3:30 PM, Ecu said: taking roughly 10 hours to complete a single game year is already a pretty daunting amount of time to sit down and play and with survival servers restarting between when you quit and when you can play again (by design mind you), you generally do not continue sessions and instead start new ones. Extending the seasons to 90 days would only mean that only Autumn gets played and the other months aren't experienced really at all. To be completely honest, it sounds quite silly to me. I agree I guess according to you @EuedeAdodooedoe to experince this game I'd have to play this game a whole week without dieing to see all seasons you do relize most people don't have time for that right. 15 hours ago, JohnWatson said: @EuedeAdodooedoe Your post was really hard to read, sorry. You should really split up paragraphs such that they only contain a few sentences per paragraph instead of having one giant wall of text with 20 sentences. And keep the content of your paragraphs concise, don't overelaborate on something. Trust me, you don't need to explain in great detail, it's easier to understand a quick short 2-sentence explanation than an entire 20-sentence paragraph of it. Delete unnecessary detail if they don't add anything but length. Just advice. About your ideas, I think that they just add unnecessary complexity. I believe that more features gives the game more depth, but they need to be kept simple. While you think complex features might fix issues in the game, adding more complexity may actually increase the number of issues. Amount of Features × Complexity of Features = Amount of Potential Issues @EuedeAdodooedoe I think if you want backing for these "ideas" you have here is what I think you should or better yet do go online look at rogue games aim for successful titles and the mechanics of those games you would like to see in the game you know to show me and others proof that this mechanic could work and wouldn't be a burden because Kiel game is a finished product ok and when you want to change a product that already is fine as it is but you want to in your case make it "better" you have to prove or show that your ideas or the mechnics you made will make the game better and not turn new people away or turn fans away because its no longer the game they fell in love with and since these suggestions are not going to be in a mod because you special guy want them to be in the real game you have to make sure it works before you add it in dummy. 15 hours ago, JohnWatson said: Anything about Realism - Always remember that we play games for the sole reason that because it isn't real life. Mechanics can be realistic to an extent or be based around a realistic concept, but you can't make and shouldn't aim for perfect realism. I never understood why everyone wants every game to be hyper-realistic, just go outside your house if you want realism. Gameplay > Realism I agree with john on this one 10 hours ago, Ecu said: Regarding picking up the game quickly, I've not had a single friend (that I can recall) that had trouble picking up the basic mechanics of playing the game (and this is without wiki or YT to guide them). Sure, they don't generally grasp all the nuances of everything, but that is something you slowly learn as you go (or learn from others who've already learned it as this is a multiplayer game) Same when I first picked up this game I could just start and I used real world logic to start. I didn't have to read a magazine or walkthrough for don't starve I just with some slight button testing of 2 minutes I already had the basic control scheme and Ui down I didn't have to read a Manuel like if I wanted to play dwarf fortress. If I wanted to do something special the most I had to do was open up the pause menu and look at the controls. Also your slot manipulation made me want to hit you it sounds terrible I could cram more things in a backpack irl if your scheme was adopted Also I would hate it if DS had no nuances I don't expect to pick up a game like Rogue Legacy(Which I love its mechanics are even simpler then DS) and immediately know how all the bosses fight how the floors or laid what every stat effect does and the attack pattern of every game 10 hours ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said: heck, even I don't know how well this would work in general. Like, I know why people would not want this specifically for DST, but the question is whether this would work well at all. Well them look at games that have it and look to see if it did work so you could have a valid suggestion. All this sounds like is a disclamier of this might work I don't really know because i'm getting this from the top of my head because it sounds cool. blah blah blah. If you continue to judge this game so harshly and be a critique of it you need to point to why your suggestion works or why in game terms it doesn't work just the reason because later it feels boring is not a valid excuse to propose the radical things you are suggesting. Here this is what I think a suggestion should be more of just tweaking existing things. Spoiler This is how I see it the combat in don't starve is very clicker based and can be buggy at times because you have to click on the models which is really hard when it comes in my opinion tailbirds and terror beaks. While selecting a target differently might be unfixable do to the simple target system I would like to suggest using prexisting weapons in different ways. For instance the bird trap can function as a bear trap for tailbirds which would stop them for a few seconds allowing you to de aggro them quicker this would be very handy when all you want to do is take the eggs and not kill the mother because she follows you for a very long range when you have her egg. My second idea would be to make the spear throwable so that you can have some range combat with out the hazard of waiting for the boomerage to come back of course to balance this the spear would have to be picked back up close to the targert and lose duribilty so in the long run this makes boomrage still viable as you wouldn't have to be so close to the mob to pick it up 11 hours ago, isthisworkingnow said: This post honestly has made me angry. Same I'm getting real tired of you spamming the forums with the same thread over and over again you could make the agurement that I should not pay attention to your posts since nothing changes in them. But I have to defend a game I love and show you why your ideas don't work or should not be implemented. I've read everything you have posted here and I think not all your ideas are bad like more complex AI or more equipment slots. like one for amulets. But it seems to me that no matter what we the community says in response to your criticisms . You won't take our criticisms into account with your own and change your points accordingly to make them more agreeable so that we can have a really good discussion on new mechanics. and act like the whole time that its all faults for not understanding your ideas and liking them. While the meanwhile you just post the same suggestions again and again and thats why you get baclash from the commuity often its because we are tired of seeing it and again with the same attitude You can say that your a pessimist and judge games that you "like" harshly and say that your style is your own and say that signiture is a disclaimer. (which its not) but all those things don't stop you on having a clear understanding of what the commuity likes or stop you from having well thought out suggestions on the game.. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838458 Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 17, 2016 Author Share Posted November 17, 2016 14 hours ago, Donke60 said: Do you know what immersion is I'll tell you immersion is feeling part of the world or feeling that what you do matters is short immersion doesn't = realism Sorry, but your grammar really made me not understand concisely what you wrote. Are you saying that short term gameplay = immersion or what? :Games could be based in reality but they would have to be changed to be fun what you describe is me going outside and surviving in the willderness in real life. Also most people play games to escape reality not go into it but have the game also give them the middle finger while play the game Even with my realistic suggestions the game would still not be a real-life simulator. Survival games often have real-life mechanics, so I thought perhaps DST could be enhanced in its immersion and game design with some more realistic mechanics. I agree I guess according to you @EuedeAdodooedoe to experince this game I'd have to play this game a whole week without dieing to see all seasons you do relize most people don't have time for that right. It's just an opinion, calm your horses, geez. And yes, with such mechanics it would probably take a whole week to get through a year and yes it is a con to my suggestions as core game play unless the idea behind the game's creation is deviated a bit. Ecu has already told me enough and described things enough for me to understand the simplicity concept behind the game, so pretty much the rest you wrote down has been meaningless... @EuedeAdodooedoe I think if you want backing for these "ideas" you have here is what I think you should or better yet do go online look at rogue games aim for successful titles and the mechanics of those games you would like to see in the game you know to show me and others proof that this mechanic could work and wouldn't be a burden because Kiel game is a finished product ok and when you want to change a product that already is fine as it is <= this I would certainly disagree with. If not DS/RoG then at the very least Shipwrecked is an unfinished product imho and I know a certain someone who shares the same opinion. As for DST... well, we do have ANR going on, so... And some others I've heard have said that in their opinion "game (DST) launched fully too early" but you want to in your case make it "better" you have to prove or show that your ideas or the mechnics you made will make the game better What? No I don't. Nobody as far as I'm aware does or has done that. They can only reason, like you, me and anyone else here has unless facts are provided. and not turn new people away or turn fans away because its no longer the game they fell in love with and since these suggestions are not going to be in a mod because you special guy want them to be in the real game you have to make sure it works before you add it in dummy. Not going to be in a mod? What? If they aren't in the actual game, if I have the time to do it, I will try to make it into a mod, in fact I've been doing concept work as well as some art and a bit of programming with some others on the project. Although, modding community has more or less died for the game, unfortunately... I agree with john on this one Same when I first picked up this game I could just start and I used real world logic to start. I didn't have to read a magazine or walkthrough for don't starve I just with some slight button testing of 2 minutes I already had the basic control scheme and Ui down I didn't have to read a Manuel like if I wanted to play dwarf fortress. If I wanted to do something special the most I had to do was open up the pause menu and look at the controls. In DST you can't pause. If you're speaking about DS, it might be a bit easier to learn through the game, because you're alone and you need to focus on the game. In DST, you might be just brought inside a fancy base, everything provided for you to a point where you can just leech and you're not learning anything yourself. Also your slot manipulation made me want to hit you Well, I guess you're one person I should keep away from. Acting hostile because of saying something/holding a certain opinion... sounds very familiar... oh, it's social "justice"! it sounds terrible I could cram more things in a backpack irl if your scheme was adopted Well, it's your opinion, so good for you? Also I would hate it if DS had no nuances I don't expect to pick up a game like Rogue Legacy(Which I love its mechanics are even simpler then DS) and immediately know how all the bosses fight how the floors or laid what every stat effect does and the attack pattern of every game Well them look at games that have it and look to see if it did work so you could have a valid suggestion Nope, most suggestions don't actually necessitate this. And as I mentioned before, I already see some flaws that people might have with the whole complexity + more realism thing. Regardless, it's opinion on a game and not something you aren't allowed to disagree with. All this sounds like is a disclamier of this might work I don't really know because i'm getting this from the top of my head because it sounds cool. blah blah blah. Yeah, yeah it is? And your problem is? If you continue to judge this game so harshly and be a critique of it you need to point to why your suggestion works or why in game terms it doesn't work a lot of people know a lot of things about the game that don't work, myself included. The game design I presented is just one suggestion on how it could be handled (and I would agree now that it shouldn't be changed to what I suggested in this thread, thanks to Ecu). I never said "Klei, you have to do this because I know this will make your game totally perfect and will make everybody love it *insertmorebullcrapbullcrapbullcrap*" just the reason because later it feels boring is not a valid excuse to propose the radical things you are suggesting. How is it not? And since when do you have "valid things to propose"? Are you saying that there are things that people shouldn't even suggest at all? Suggestions are simply ideas, so you're suggesting fr ideas to not be allowed to be shared merely because you don't like them/hate them? What? Here this is what I think a suggestion should be more of just tweaking existing things. Hide contents This is how I see it the combat in don't starve is very clicker based and can be buggy at times because you have to click on the models which is really hard when it comes in my opinion tailbirds and terror beaks. While selecting a target differently might be unfixable do to the simple target system I would like to suggest using prexisting weapons in different ways. For instance the bird trap can function as a bear trap for tailbirds which would stop them for a few seconds allowing you to de aggro them quicker this would be very handy when all you want to do is take the eggs and not kill the mother because she follows you for a very long range when you have her egg. My second idea would be to make the spear throwable so that you can have some range combat with out the hazard of waiting for the boomerage to come back of course to balance this the spear would have to be picked back up close to the targert and lose duribilty so in the long run this makes boomrage still viable as you wouldn't have to be so close to the mob to pick it up So, are you basing the above spoiled all on facts that you've taken from other games/tested mods or just your opinion? Because if it's just "this might work I don't really know because i'm getting this from the top of my head because it sounds cool. blah blah blah." then you're contradicting yourself. Same I'm getting real tired of you spamming the forums with the same thread over and over again I am not, you simply think that because of your bias against me thanks to some other lovely forum members that want to "expose" me. you could make the agurement that I should not pay attention to your posts since nothing changes in them. But I have to defend a game I love and show you why your ideas don't work or should not be implemented. it seems to me that no matter what we the community says in response to your criticisms . You won't take our criticisms into account with your own <= I think I'm very well excused to say that this is ********. and change your points accordingly to make them more agreeable so that we can have a really good discussion on new mechanics <= that sounds something more like Vargling would do; changing their ideas very quickly just to push an idea through, without giving it enough thought. That isn't a thing I do, at least not that often and then again, I'm sure all of us can be guilty of irrationality at some point in our lives. and act like the whole time that its all faults for not understanding your ideas and liking them <= again, ******** . While the meanwhile you just post the same suggestions again and again and thats why you get baclash from the commuity <= False. I got backlash due to my teenagery past and then afterwards because of me getting angry at Mikedatrix. often its because we are tired of seeing it and again with the same attitude What attitude? I'm trying to be concise and keep a discussion flowing. It seems you're trying to fuel the flame here now because of all of these accusations that you're making. I swear, these accusations are starting to piss me off now. If you can PROVE TO ME that I've been doing something really bad against others recently, then I will apologize for it unless I have already. But if you're throwing claims just so you can fuel the hate flame that has been pushed towards me from various members of this forum, you're literally fighting fire with fire here; trying to push "how bad I am" by being exactly like what you're accusing me of yourself. Such behavior is known as hypocrisy, in case you didn't know. You seem to throw all of this "proof" and "evidence" stuff at me for a simple suggestion, yet you're presenting NONE of it in your own suggestions or claims. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838647 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vargling Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 5 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said: I swear, these accusations are starting to piss me off now. If you can PROVE TO ME that I've been doing something really bad against others recently, then I will apologize for it unless I have already. But if you're throwing claims just so you can fuel the hate flame that has been pushed towards me from various members of this forum, you're literally fighting fire with fire here; trying to push "how bad I am" by being exactly like what you're accusing me of yourself. Such behavior is known as hypocrisy, in case you didn't know. You seem to throw all of this "proof" and "evidence" stuff at me for a simple suggestion, yet you're presenting NONE of it in your own suggestions or claims. Mike deserved it. I could show you much worse about the little prick. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838648 Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuedeAdodooedoe Posted November 17, 2016 Author Share Posted November 17, 2016 @Vargling please, don't fuel the flame on the forum. If you want to "show me worse" of him, use PM, this isn't like youtube where you expose people of their mistakes/accuse people of things you have no solid proof of... or is it now? Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838652 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vargling Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Just now, EuedeAdodooedoe said: @Vargling please, don't fuel the flame on the forum. If you want to "show me worse" of him, use PM, this isn't like youtube where you expose people of their mistakes/accuse people of things you have no solid proof of... or is it now? Judging by this thread, yep it is. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838653 Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLERMZ Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838654 Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiddyGuy Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838656 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donke60 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I didn't know that my post would do this though my post was really angry and I'm sorry for that all I can say now is @Glhrmzz hand me some of that popcorn plz Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838685 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnWatson Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 I'm sorry for going off-topic, but what just happened? Why are things getting personal if we are supposed to just discuss the original topic? Remember that you can like someone without agreeing on everything they say, and that you can disagree with someone without disliking them. Also, something unrelated, but I'm a little bit confused by @Donke60 because he quoted my post but I don't know if his response is meant for me or @EuedeAdodooedoe. Anyway, I'd really appreciate it if the next post below me is actually about the original topic. Link to comment https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/71611-game-designredesign-suggestions/#findComment-838943 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.