Jump to content

Where I think Don't Starve franchise went very wrong...


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Toros said:

@spideswine the reason I take some issue is you initially stated that you couldn’t find any good mods of note, and speculated that they simply didn’t exist.

However, your criteria exclude all character mods (balanced or not) ,

The reason I completely exclude characters mods is due to a combination of other smaller reasons which makes me not want to deal with them:

1) Anyone joining that server is gonna see the custom character icon when checking people in that server, that tends to be very off putting to many players.

2) I don't want to deal with furries/weaboos/primadonnas(special snowflake characters which make everyone feel out of place).

3) I don't want to deal with op chars.

4) I see no reason to add weak chars(wilson level of weak), I don't intend to play them, and it's more likely to deter other players from joining than encourage them to join.

5) And naturally I'm not interested in bland characters/characters with subpar art.

Which more or less rules out all modded characters.

1 hour ago, Toros said:

However, your criteria exclude all character mods (balanced or not) , all mods that don’t add multiple items (which also excludes balance tweaks), and all mods that are unbalanced.

Only your last criteria would’ve been assumed from your initial post, which makes it very misleading.  When you elaborate later it’s clear what you mean.  There are a number of mods with either high quality art and/or code that I consider good but wouldn’t use.

I'm not against balance tweaks as long as there's enough of them, the problem with minor mods is ultimately you need a lot of them to actually make the game feel different, but anyone wanting to join such a server is going to be intimidated by the large list of mods.

On top of that to actually make something feel different you generally need more than a minor change to it, and a lot of small mods changing a lot of unrelated small things will often just amount to nothing.

There are definitely good mods there from the perspective of newer players, for those of us who are not so new, not so much(in large part because again, the more exprienced players tend heavily towards the purist side of things, so not much of an audience).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Toros said:

This is a popular attitude on the forums, and it seems people confuse the *right* to having an opinion with the *value* of that opinion.

Basically flat earthers, some of them. But most of them are just plain stupid. Some believe it to troll others. But the more you give evidence the more they disagree.

Hmm... Now that you think of it you can make some analogies here. I won't say who is who, that's up to you guys to decide. Shmurator

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/11/2017 at 1:52 AM, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

I mean, what's with the humongous amounts of decorative stuff, optional bosses, gaps in wrapping content well into the overarching game and

I really agree with this. The push for stuff that is cosmetic really baffles me. People make a huge thing out of Portraits and skins...I never get it, they mean nothing to me. 

On 22/11/2017 at 1:52 AM, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Exploits don't make a game good, it destroys the experience, we all know it, but many of us are compelled by it, because for some reason, it is to some level ingrained into us that being an elite 1000 day mega-base player is somehow getting yourself immersed with a well-crafted gaming experience.

Yep.

On 22/11/2017 at 1:52 AM, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Really, why should we continue to support the game, if at the end of the day you'll just end up with more farted out content and a bunch of skins than an actually improved experience to the game? Just so it can all be swallowed up, whoop whoop the hype train for whatever else is going to come out and be left unfinished and with half-baked and re-skinned content. I mean, The Forge is going away soon, and that's a moba experience, not a survival-adventure one as the game was and is still advertised as. And what we got from that was, well, basically another boss fight, just an exclusive one. Seriously, what is with the developers and the countless boss-fight introductions? It's just one boss fight after another, have you really ran out of good ideas for this whole thing?

You can call me negative as much as you want, but that's not going to put the games into a position where they are well-crafted experiences. I think it's at least good for one person to speak out about this rather than there being complete dead silence to keep squeaking the wheel of the blatantly obvious cranky ride that is Don't Starve franchise.

The way I see it, it's a perpetual cycle of supply-and-demand between Klei and the fandom, rather than well-designed experiences by the developers to be experienced and critically reviewed.

I agree so much with everything you are saying.

There is a solution to this. I've mentioned this before, and people are going to get pissed off at me bringing it up again:

PORT ANR CONTENT TO DS.

DS is so much harder, but let's face, nobody plays it anymore because all the new stuff is DST. And unfortunately, DST is a much easier game in terms of surviving...mainly for one reason:

Perma-death.

In the transition to Multiplayer, they lost the perma-death mechanic. It's like the ghost from Spelunky that he mentions in the video. The mechanic restricts you from breaking the game. In DST, because you turn into a ghost when you die, there is no fear of death in Don't Starve Together, there's no risk in this game anymore, so you can push it to its limits. You just die and you can just get someone to revive you. Easy.

And while they tried to balance this by buffing the bosses's health, because they are optional as you say, it doesn't change the difficulty of the core game at all. All it does is put people off from ever fighting those bosses.

And I say that they should port the ANR content to DS, because I don't think DST should change. It makes no sense having perma-death on multiplayer.

It's sad. Don't Starve used to be in the same rankings as Dark Souls, Spelunky and Binding of Isaac, but that's no longer the case. Don't Starve is now Don't Starve Together, because all the new content is there and inevitably, that makes the game a lot easier. 

On 22/11/2017 at 2:15 AM, SuperDavid said:

In my opinion as long as Klei allows mod support for DS then I'm happy with anyway they take Don't Starve since mods can make DS the way you want, & I don't think the way Don't Starve franchise is heading is bad.

I hate this. Mods are a pain in the ass personally and I can never rely on them. 

Unlike bigger games like Minecraft, there is that many of them, and most of them are either crappy character mods or buggy as hell. 

I think we should never use "It's ok, cause of Mods" argument. While maybe one day they'll be something that satisfies the OPs needs in the mod community, it will never be as reliable or as quality as something made by the devs.

On 23/11/2017 at 5:37 PM, Lumina said:

Thanks for insulting me for no reason at all, i always appreciate it in a debate.

I don't dislike microtransaction and i'm happy Klei choose a fair system with Forge. I just hope they will never sell loot boxes, because it's a totally different thing. I trust Klei, it doesn't prevent me to encourage them to continue to be fair, because it's important.

He always does this.

On 23/11/2017 at 4:58 PM, Toros said:

 

 

22 hours ago, Toros said:

Neither this post nor your original one actually makes any points at all, and thus is impossible to refute or in some cases even discuss.

You list a bunch of statements that are purely opinion wishing for undefined changes that you never go into detail on, other than a strange hate for skins you wish you could block seeing (but again never explain what ones you don’t like other than calling them “low quality” which could mean anything)

For example, I could say “I wish balance in Don’t Starve was better” which is not a point nor even really clear what I’m talking about.

”I wish character balance was better” is STILL not a point, but at least the reader could assume that I have some unclear issue with character balance.

”I think Wickerbottom should do less damage because she is too mechanically strong and her current downsides are ignored by the majority of players as sleeping is inferior to other sanity restoration methods and the penalties for stale and spoiled food are already significant enough that more makes no difference.  In addition, it is easy to get fresh food and especially since wickerbottom can force plants to grow.”

This is specific enough we could call it making a point, has supporting information that can be debated or refuted, and I’m making a suggestion that could be imagined in the game.

What I challenge you to do, as you have well over a thousand posts complaining about some aspect of Don’t Starve’s design, is to describe in detail 3 specific changes you would make that would solve some of the concerns you have.  They should be specific enough to qualify as points.

 

20 hours ago, Rellimarual said:

OK, so you don't want other players to be made to play the way you want them to play (which was the whole point of the original video you posted, forcing players to play differently), but you're sad that you can't play the way you want to because other people want to play differently? I'm with @Donke60-- that is so muddled that you contradict yourself. Klei doesn't do enough to encourage players to change the settings, which is the players' fault because they don't want to change the settings, so they don't demand that Klei encourage them to do something they don't want to do?

If one of the points you're trying to make is that the settings should be more incremental, so that turning some mob to "more" doesn't cause the map to be overrun by that mob (or setting a resource like flint to "less" doesn't cause it to nearly vanish from the map) then that is a good point, and one that has come up more than once on the forums. It's possible that more players would want to play with settings that are somewhat more challenging If it were possible to fine-tune them better. But it's also possible that they wouldn't

Or you could play something like the caveman challenge mod, which disables the building of both the science machine and the alchemy engine.There was an SU server that ran that for awhile. Klei *does* actually encourage the customization of the game through modding quite a lot. But you'd still have to find group of players who want to try Lights Out or other mods that make the game more difficult, and that seems to be your real complaint: That most of the people who play DST don't want to play it the way you want to and so you want Klei to redesign the game to make, or "direct," them to do it the way you prefer. No one is forcing you to build a megabase. If the servers you play on seem focused on that, then get your own server and make your own rules, don't demand that the large number of people who really like playing that way be frustrated. Yeah, it's true that you might not get many takers, but it's preposterous to claim that this indicates some major, urgent design flaw that must be fixed, when so many other people have clocked hundreds of hours playing it as is and enjoy it a lot.  We all get that you wish it was a different game, and there's a really easy solution to that: play a different game.

 

19 hours ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Have you SEEN my older threads? Like, very old ones, even just like half a year or year ago? I went into SO much detail, to a point where people started to hate me for nitpicking things. And I do nitpick things. It all builds up to give a ****ty experience. I will give examples, but if you want to see me make a wall of text, or rather, an even longer piece of text about what I find wrong with the game, I can provide that to you. Question is, do you want to see that ****?

It's all a result of Klei leaving broken and unfinished game mechanics.

No, it was to encourage them to use different methods with the default settings. Certain things must be forced to keep gameplay afloat, but a lot can be left to letting the player choose various approaches to surviving. Encouraging the players to change their world options too would contribute to getting a better experience of what you are looking for. Yes, I am sad that basically every player who knows the game wants to play in the exact same way; grind, make the bosses your punching bags, farm, exploit, grind more. If it's the vast majority of the playerbase, then I think that would be the game's fault for not meeting the standards of attractions. It is onto the game to lead the player, even when you give a ton of choice, because otherwise, everyone's going to try to find the most efficient way and then everybody plays the exact same. Blame the game, not the player.

There's not much choice in The Forge either; you either use the very same tactics that professionals use to win, or you accept defeat. It's not entirely linear, but linear enough to be called one type of approach. You and everyone else keeps saying the exact opposite, which is complete bollocks.

Not just settings, but also set pieces. It should be obvious, VERY obvious. And if some form of world-hopping is integrated, so that after hopping a world you can change your world settings, may be through vote in some form, then some form of progression and new types of tactics due to the need to survive and escape the new world could occur.

They are not encouraged to play it, because the game ****s on newbies even early game. Everyone keeps saying that "making it easier for newbies but harder for late-game players would be near impossible to do", and I call ******** on that; supplying newcomers in some form with basic resources and protection (see this thread I made perhaps) while at the same time making the world for players who have survived for a longer period of time to get harsher and harsher challenges, could very well be possible. It would require a lot of coding obviously, at least for making challenge for the professionals, but if you're gonna have a good game design, you should be doing that anyway as a developer.

There is no such game that I know of that would actually provide the kind of gameplay feel that DS does while at the same time being challenging in the forms I have described. Care to point me to some, if any exist? Btw, mods you have to search for. It's cluttered, and the search options are complete **** both on the forum and on steam. Spending hours on end just to try and find something that goes well, just to then soon be disappointed as hell because something seems way too exploitative and I could be taking use of it without even knowing. The game not providing me with exploits would do quite well. For instance, those goddamn OP butterfly wings annoy the hell out of me, but I need to catch them for planting flowers, which is quite annoying. Then, you have punching bags we like to call bosses that for the most part you can just take use of either exploits for or just tank them a lot. Then again, you'll be tanking or kiting a lot anyway, which gets dull very fast.

Demand that others are frustrated? I never said that or implied that at any point. The game could have a preset that makes things easier, with most resources to more and less hostile mobs, and if the game can do a good enough job at making the change of presets when trying to host in-your-face rather than being laid out behind some obscure setting on a sheet that looks like a spreadsheet. Some people actually bother with the settings when they want to make things easier for them regardless, so if they are also well-balanced as well as very much encouraged for changing, then I don't see what the issue could be. Wherever did the whole "git gud" thing go? I remember when people on the forum were very much against making the game much easier. Now it seems like the fan base doesn't really care much and wants things easier for themselves.

* Mods will take hours to research, covered by ****ty with some character mods that we don't have enough of

* In a multiplayer setting where the . If I want to play the game to experience it with good game design, I won't be able to do so with other people, because none will want to.

* Many mods may be uncompattible with each other.

* The art for most mods is terrible, and since I value aesthetic a lot for this sort of game, for a large portion of mods that might have alright mechanics, won't have good aesthetics that suit the sketchy art style of the game.

* Having good game design doesn't involve just flipping variables. Good mechanics require a lot of work and effort, something most mods don't want to do. You can find some good mods, but in the grand scheme of thing, 

* Can you point me to a mod that actually generates a sense of story progression for the game? If not, you can rest your case.

As for using useless/less useful items, that'll just feel like completely wasted time. I've tried to rely on darts, but then got disappointed that it made me do another whole set of grinding just to be minimally reliable.

Nit-picky, but again, it all builds up. There isn't really a single specific issue with the game, it's a lot of little mechanical and aesthetic issues that all combine to degrade it all together.

And trust me; you don't want me to rant on about specific details of the game, like how Deerclops, Bearger, Gmoose and Tree guard are the biggest punching bags in the games.

Wouldn't all of this be resolved with a hard mode?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

I hate this. Mods are a pain in the ass personally and I can never rely on them. 

Unlike bigger games like Minecraft, there is that many of them, and most of them are either crappy character mods or buggy as hell. 

I think we should never use "It's ok, cause of Mods" argument. While maybe one day they'll be something that satisfies the OPs needs in the mod community, it will never be as reliable or as quality as something made by the devs.

Everything I want to change/add in dst I mod it myself or get help from someone, I wasn't trying to make a " "It's ok, cause of Mods" argument " just was stating my 2 cents :).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

I really agree with this. The push for stuff that is cosmetic really baffles me. People make a huge thing out of Portraits and skins...I never get it, they mean nothing to me. 

Yep.

I agree so much with everything you are saying.

There is a solution to this. I've mentioned this before, and people are going to get pissed off at me bringing it up again:

PORT ANR CONTENT TO DS.

DS is so much harder, but let's face, nobody plays it anymore because all the new stuff is DST. And unfortunately, DST is a much easier game in terms of surviving...mainly for one reason:

Perma-death.

In the transition to Multiplayer, they lost the perma-death mechanic. It's like the ghost from Spelunky that he mentions in the video. The mechanic restricts you from breaking the game. In DST, because you turn into a ghost when you die, there is no fear of death in Don't Starve Together, there's no risk in this game anymore, so you can push it to its limits. You just die and you can just get someone to revive you. Easy.

And while they tried to balance this by buffing the bosses's health, because they are optional as you say, it doesn't change the difficulty of the core game at all. All it does is put people off from ever fighting those bosses.

And I say that they should port the ANR content to DS, because I don't think DST should change. It makes no sense having perma-death on multiplayer.

It's sad. Don't Starve used to be in the same rankings as Dark Souls, Spelunky and Binding of Isaac, but that's no longer the case. Don't Starve is now Don't Starve Together, because all the new content is there and inevitably, that makes the game a lot easier. 

I hate this. Mods are a pain in the ass personally and I can never rely on them. 

Unlike bigger games like Minecraft, there is that many of them, and most of them are either crappy character mods or buggy as hell. 

I think we should never use "It's ok, cause of Mods" argument. While maybe one day they'll be something that satisfies the OPs needs in the mod community, it will never be as reliable or as quality as something made by the devs.

He always does this.

 

 

 

Wouldn't all of this be resolved with a hard mode?

Either you barely play DST in a multiplayer environment, either we somehow run into completely different people when playing it.

rollbacks aside(and you can always backup saves in DS), DST is the harder game, most players get in your way more than they help you, and by the time you yourself get to the point you aren't getting in the way of others, others start getting in your way.

Sure you can play in a server where people are experienced and won't get in your way, but by that point you don't really need their help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2017 at 11:37 AM, Lumina said:

Thanks for insulting me for no reason at all, i always appreciate it in a debate.

I don't dislike microtransaction and i'm happy Klei choose a fair system with Forge. I just hope they will never sell loot boxes, because it's a totally different thing. I trust Klei, it doesn't prevent me to encourage them to continue to be fair, because it's important.

I had missed this previously, but I didn't insult you.  I said you had a basic understanding of the situation, which is true and beyond what a number of other posters have.  You understand that Klei's system is fair and reasonable, you (at least at the time I said it) seemed not to understand that it's part of a larger pattern of pro-player and responsible behavior by Klei.  It goes without saying that unless they're bought out (in which case they'd have no choice anyway) they'll continue to do so without any need for encouragement.  They've done right by their players for years at this point.

58 minutes ago, Spaartan said:

Basically flat earthers, some of them. But most of them are just plain stupid. Some believe it to troll others. But the more you give evidence the more they disagree.

Hmm... Now that you think of it you can make some analogies here. I won't say who is who, that's up to you guys to decide. Shmurator

The issue I have is that if people are throwing out unsupported opinions, it degrades the quality of any discussion we might have.  It's much easier to tell a quality answer from a bad one on reddit, for example because weak responses get pushed to the bottom.  Here you always get massive incoherent posts or "both sides are valid" nonsense where it doesn't belong.  Questions themselves are somewhat curated because the front page isn't always "SW in DST?" "Question about 'think already covered by the wiki'" "Nebulous whining" and "But what about headcanon?"

There are a number of posters that I really like here, but there's too much noise to signal ratio to spend too much time.

30 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

1) I hate this. Mods are a pain in the ass personally and I can never rely on them.  Unlike bigger games like Minecraft, there is that many of them, and most of them are either crappy character mods or buggy as hell. 

I think we should never use "It's ok, cause of Mods" argument. While maybe one day they'll be something that satisfies the OPs needs in the mod community, it will never be as reliable or as quality as something made by the devs.

2) He always does this.

3) Wouldn't all of this be resolved with a hard mode?

1) I agree that many mods are low quality, but unlike minecraft it's easier to mod DS/DST and easier to share those mods via the workshop.  Minecraft mods that survive tend to be quite elaborate, involve a number of new mechanics, and often collaboration between multiple developers.  This community has less modders and generally less successful collaborations though DS has some interesting ones.

That said, if you're having issues you're installing crappy mods.  It's not hard to find quality ones if you sort by top rated all time.  The highly rated ones are very reliable and work as intended, and more than a few are made by people who are professional programmers.

2) I'm working hard to learn to give people more respect than they deserve.  These changes take time.

3) Can you define what a "hard mode" looks like to you and isn't already provided via Wes and light's out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toros said:

3) Can you define what a "hard mode" looks like to you and isn't already provided via Wes and light's out?

Personally, I would like a mode in which Telltale Hearts are not craftable and touch stones don't reset.

Essentially, if you die, and weren't prepared before hand like in the original game, you stay dead.

You can be a ghost and spectate, but that's it. 

I know that there are issues with this. If the admin dies, then that would be game over for everyone pretty much. Probably many other problems too. That's why, going back to what I said earlier, I don't think DST should be change, but instead the ANR content should be passed to DS so players can avoid DST and these kinda problems the OP is having.

That's my suggestion.

9 minutes ago, Toros said:

2) I'm working hard to learn to give people more respect than they deserve.  These changes take time.

Jesus Chirst...

How about:

"I'm working hard to learn to give people more respect than they deserve."

14 minutes ago, spideswine said:

Either you barely play DST in a multiplayer environment, either we somehow run into completely different people when playing it.

rollbacks aside(and you can always backup saves in DS), DST is the harder game, most players get in your way more than they help you, and by the time you yourself get to the point you aren't getting in the way of others, others start getting in your way.

Sure you can play in a server where people are experienced and won't get in your way, but by that point you don't really need their help.

Not anymore I don't. I got bored of public servers. I used to admin a server though. It was nice, we all had our different bases and traded items between each other. Probably the best experience I've had on DST.

But in that experience, it was never difficult. Dying is not a thing that happens when you can ask someone to res you all the time.

Also, I forgot about Rollbacks...I understand why we need them (grieffers), but that more than anything takes any challenge away from the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May be I'll try to reiterate once more, I'll try to get it as compact and coherent as possible.

Most players typically gravitate towards something being easier to do. This can lead developers to change mechanics to a point where the game isn't so much about being challenging, but more about the player being the god by default (take note of the word 'default'). This I see has happened here in terms of content production for the game up until the end of ANR. And most players suck it up, get defensive when someone who sees the phenomenon points it out, and nothing really changes. Because making suggestions hasn't really worked. It's usually when enough people complain about an issue that actually gets attention in terms of tweaks and content. And that's quite sad.

Another issue as a result of this is; leeway of microtransactions and lootboxes. They aren't "something to look out for", they are here. Not in the traditional sense of how these things are usually handled, but they are none-the-less that. Which is troubling because that seems to have been the focus way too much now from Klei; skins and more skins some of which are wishy washy and you can't disable them or individually select which to disable (and I don't see mods being able to or even allowed to do it if it is possible). Trashy skins, such as, @Toros:

* pretty much all of the chest skins

* the bowler's hat skin

* The animal skins (e.g. chester, hutch, glommer and kittycoon skin sets... I mean how much lower of a level of "****ty modded character look" can you really get than this?)

* Dragon skin

The ****ty thing about them being that they: look off when seen in-game, have the wrong art style, . Moreover, you simply get re-colours as different skin items. Simply cheap and lazy, but a good way to generate profit.

This cannot be solved with mods easily at all, because of the very nature of how mods can be produced doesn't fit it (although I'm myself looking into trying to get the experience I want through mod development, it isn't fair that a modder has to come in and "fix the game" and get nothing, while developers just fart out whatever first comes to their heads and get hell of a lot of cash for it). So, I want for anyone who likes the linearity of the playstyle of "aim for MLG mega-base day 1000" to see the other end of the spectrum of people like myself, who were hoping for and were led to believe that these games were going to have well-designed content, but were then disappointed, and think about what really makes a game good, not just from the sheer addiction to want to play more, but to enjoy the game by indulging themselves with well-designed content. Then may be we can get to a point where what is the "default" may be just a bit too easy for us, but a bit too hard for you, and through having good game world settings, tweak the game to create a fun and exciting experience for various types of players.

I also think pushing the developers to actually finish and balance what they've made would be beneficial for us all, but what the hell do I know, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

Personally, I would like a mode in which Telltale Hearts are not craftable and touch stones don't reset.

Essentially, if you die, and weren't prepared before hand like in the original game, you stay dead.

You can be a ghost and spectate, but that's it. 

I know that there are issues with this. If the admin dies, then that would be game over for everyone pretty much. Probably many other problems too. That's why, going back to what I said earlier, I don't think DST should be change, but instead the ANR content should be passed to DS so players can avoid DST and these kinda problems the OP is having.

That's my suggestion.

Jesus Chirst...

How about:

"I'm working hard to learn to give people more respect than they deserve."

Not anymore I don't. I got bored of public servers. I used to admin a server though. It was nice, we all had our different bases and traded items between each other. Probably the best experience I've had on DST.

But in that experience, it was never difficult. Dying is not a thing that happens when you can ask someone to res you all the time.

Also, I forgot about Rollbacks...I understand why we need them (grieffers), but that more than anything takes any challenge away from the game.

You do realize that wilderness mode exists right?  It’s as close to permadeath as you can have in a multiplayer environment.  You die and you get kicked back out and when you rejoin you need to repick your character and are dropped off in a random part of the map with no map data or prototyped items.

6 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

May be I'll try to reiterate once more, I'll try to get it as compact and coherent as possible.

Most players typically gravitate towards something being easier to do. This can lead developers to change mechanics to a point where the game isn't so much about being challenging, but more about the player being the god by default (take note of the word 'default'). This I see has happened here in terms of content production for the game up until the end of ANR. And most players suck it up, get defensive when someone who sees the phenomenon points it out, and nothing really changes. Because making suggestions hasn't really worked. It's usually when enough people complain about an issue that actually gets attention in terms of tweaks and content. And that's quite sad.

Another issue as a result of this is; leeway of microtransactions and lootboxes. They aren't "something to look out for", they are here. Not in the traditional sense of how these things are usually handled, but they are none-the-less that. Which is troubling because that seems to have been the focus way too much now from Klei; skins and more skins some of which are wishy washy and you can't disable them or individually select which to disable (and I don't see mods being able to or even allowed to do it if it is possible). Trashy skins, such as, @Toros:

* pretty much all of the chest skins

* the bowler's hat skin

* The animal skins (e.g. chester, hutch, glommer and kittycoon skin sets... I mean how much lower of a level of "****ty modded character look" can you really get than this?)

* Dragon skin

The ****ty thing about them being that they: look off when seen in-game, have the wrong art style, . Moreover, you simply get re-colours as different skin items. Simply cheap and lazy, but a good way to generate profit.

This cannot be solved with mods easily at all, because of the very nature of how mods can be produced doesn't fit it (although I'm myself looking into trying to get the experience I want through mod development, it isn't fair that a modder has to come in and "fix the game" and get nothing, while developers just fart out whatever first comes to their heads and get hell of a lot of cash for it). So, I want for anyone who likes the linearity of the playstyle of "aim for MLG mega-base day 1000" to see the other end of the spectrum of people like myself, who were hoping for and were led to believe that these games were going to have well-designed content, but were then disappointed, and think about what really makes a game good, not just from the sheer addiction to want to play more, but to enjoy the game by indulging themselves with well-designed content. Then may be we can get to a point where what is the "default" may be just a bit too easy for us, but a bit too hard for you, and through having good game world settings, tweak the game to create a fun and exciting experience for various types of players.

I also think pushing the developers to actually finish and balance what they've made would be beneficial for us all, but what the hell do I know, right?

While I appreciate you’ve elaborated on the skins you don’t like, and to a degree agree with you, you still haven’t made any concrete suggestions about changes you want made.

If I was a klei developer I’d have no clue what you want “finished and balanced”.

Let me try again, even simpler.

If you could tell the dev team what to do, what would you have them do, specifically?

Some variation of “add more story and fix things” is not sufficient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Toros said:
9 hours ago, Donut Steeve said:

but the truth is the subjectivity of 1 person is not worth more or less then anyone else. 

This is a popular attitude on the forums, and it seems people confuse the *right* to having an opinion with the *value* of that opinion.

To use a real world example, many people have the opinion that vaccines cause autism.  This subjective opinion supported by objectively incorrect facts not only is unhelpful but actually causes deaths due to loss of herd immunity that wouldn’t have occured.  I challenge the assertion that every opinion has value, as there are numerous examples of uninformed opinions being actively harmful.

Within this forum no opinion is going to be that important, but it doesn’t make the assumption that one person’s facts are worth no more than another person’s fables any more erroneous.

Toros, your defiantly the most arrogant and disrespectful person on this thread, I'd like to know what qualifies you to judge the value of other opinions. By the way your 'real world example' doesn't apply to me and I understand that many people believe lots of ridiculous things, Billions of people believe in an all powerful deity and Billions don't, like you I also rely on facts to base my opinion on but somethings are ENTIRELY subjective (like whether or not you enjoy an aspect of this game) when this is the case (which it is) then my point stands true. Please think before you type in future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bowler hat is an excellent skin. In no way does it clash with the aesthetics of the game. The costume skins are just that: costumes, a goof, meant to be worn on Halloween. I can’t remember the last time I saw any player wearing them when it wasn’t Halloween. But, you know, if you’re going to play with other people, then they are sometimes going to do things you don’t like and like things you don’t do. Sometimes people come on my server as Wolfgang, which is worse than any skin, as far as I’m concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Donut Steeve said:

Toros, your defiantly the most arrogant and disrespectful person on this thread

I mean he’s still right though there is a mod that disables hearts and amulets and effigies.

so far I’ve just seeing people unwilling to compromise 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Donke60 said:

I mean he’s still right though there is a mod that disables hearts and amulets and effigies.

so far I’ve just seeing people unwilling to compromise 

Why have you quoted me but not said anything related to the quote? :S Or have I missed something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Donut Steeve said:

Toros, your defiantly the most arrogant and disrespectful person on this thread, I'd like to know what qualifies you to judge the value of other opinions. By the way your 'real world example' doesn't apply to me and I understand that many people believe lots of ridiculous things, Billions of people believe in an all powerful deity and Billions don't, like you I also rely on facts to base my opinion on but somethings are ENTIRELY subjective (like whether or not you enjoy an aspect of this game) when this is the case (which it is) then my point stands true. Please think before you type in future.

...did you mean to say “definitely”?

I’ve made the distinction numerous times between subjective opinions and objective fact.  I’ve never argued that someone was wrong for enjoying or not enjoying something.  But calling something “good” or “bad” or even using a word to describe something implies you have a factual basis for doing so.

For example, is it arrogant of me to assume I know the game better than you do, by virtue of me playing since beta, regularly looking at the code, and having discussed mechanics with other players since 2013?

Statistically it’s extremely likely.  Assuming otherwise would be as foolish as assuming you had nothing you could teach me until you prove(d) it.

p.s. I wasn’t calling you an anti-vaxxer.  That wasn’t remotely the point of my post. The point was that every opinion isn’t inherently valuable.

This thread has been comparing the gift system in DST to lootboxes in other games, which is not a subjective comparison but an objective one and I don’t believe the simple presence of RNG equates to gambling when there is no risk of losing anything and rewards are at fixed intervals.  Those are typically never associated with gambling and irregular reward timing is actually a lot more effective in classical conditioning.

There’s been a lot of vagueness in what people who say they are unhappy with the game want changed and there’s been even less suggestion of specific things.  Many of us assume these people with vague gripes don’t actually know what they want or have any solutions to offer.

I prefer discussion of mechanical changes take more of a problem solving approach where reasoned arguments suggest concrete changes instead of everyone sharing half-baked opinions and their feelings.

One of these approaches leads to solutions, the other is an enormous waste of everyone’s time.

@Rellimarual we still need to play together so I can be the exception that proves the rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

...did you mean to say “definitely”?

Yes i did :p 

 

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

p.s. I wasn’t calling you an anti-vaxxer.

I don't know what that means

 

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

The point was that every opinion isn’t inherently valuable

I also never claimed this. You took my quote out of the context I had placed on it (maybe I wasn't specific in exactly what context that was)

 

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

For example, is it arrogant of me to assume I know the game better than you do, by virtue of me playing since beta, regularly looking at the code, and having discussed mechanics with other players since 2013?

Statistically it’s extremely likely.  Assuming otherwise would be as foolish as assuming you had nothing you could teach me until you prove(d) it.

You are arrogant for many of the things you have said, and to me this just sounds like an 'i'm better then you because' sort of thing to say (pretty arrogant if you ask me), but I have never once even partially said anything regarding my knowledge of the game mechanics, but if it really matters to you then just have the opinion that your better then me :) 

 

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

 Many of us assume

Who are these many?

 

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

I prefer discussion of mechanical changes take more of a problem solving approach where reasoned arguments suggest concrete changes instead of everyone sharing half-baked opinions and their feelings.

One of these approaches leads to solutions, the other is an enormous waste of everyone’s time.

I agree with you that a proper debate with reasoned arguments is a much better way to go but I don't think this is the sort of discussion that you are currently engaged in as we have no solution and are wasting time.

 

20 minutes ago, Toros said:

This thread has been comparing the gift system in DST to lootboxes in other games, which is not a subjective comparison but an objective one and I don’t believe the simple presence of RNG equates to gambling when there is no risk of losing anything and rewards are at fixed intervals.  Those are typically never associated with gambling and irregular reward timing is actually a lot more effective in classical conditioning

Yes this thread has covered many areas and I don't think it's gambling either just to be clear

1 minute ago, Donke60 said:

Even if he’s arrogant and disrespectful I still think he is correct in his points 

In regards to my quote he's not in others he very well may be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Another issue as a result of this is; leeway of microtransactions and lootboxes.

We are talking about the same game developers that have been releasing free add-ons since the beginning of this games existence right?

Saying certain skins are "trashy" is self opinion, there is no evidence to back up the claims that skins are "trashy" by any amount and they are completely optional to try and obtain or use so no one is forcing you to use skins.

 

You have way too many things you dislike about this game that even if the developers did care enough and actually spend their time trying to cater to just you it would be the biggest waste of time with no guarantee that you would ever be satisfied. Every time you make a post (even in the same thread) you have another completely different issue that you are certain are all facts and not opinions. There is no nicer way to say this but maybe you should move on. Or, get busy making mods to make your experience more enjoyable if you actually seem to be as passionate as you are about this game. At this point it is seeming like you genuinely have nothing positive to say about this game so I really don't know why you would bother spending the time to make these essays constantly when you could be fixing the problem that you yourself are specifically having or move on with life and find a new video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Donut Steeve said:

By the way your 'real world example' doesn't apply to me

 

6 minutes ago, Donut Steeve said:

1) I also never claimed this. You took my quote out of the context I had placed on it (maybe I wasn't specific in exactly what context that was)

2) I agree with you that a proper debate with reasoned arguments is a much better way to go but I don't think this is the sort of discussion that you are currently engaged in as we have no solution and are wasting time.

3) Yes this thread has covered many areas and I don't think it's gambling either just to be clear

4) In regards to my quote he's not in others he very well may be.

1) See above quote, an anti-vaxxer is someone who doesn't believe anyone should be vaccinated (based on one retracted study and a few scam artists who continue to spread imaginary dangers that lead to real epidemics) http://www.startribune.com/in-measles-outbreak-a-misconception-about-vaccines-still-plagues-somali-community/420131133/

2) I've been trying repeatedly to get @EuedeAdodooedoe to make some actual concrete suggestions.  Thus far he hasn't provided any.

3) I'm genuinely glad to hear that

4) You're fairly new here, and there's generally a progression that happens for many people who are repeatedly exposed to this community.  You start out friendly and respectful but day after day of people asking the same stupid questions ("SW FOR DST WHEN?" "ROSE SKINS WHEN?" "THIS BELONGS IN BUGS BUT I PUT IT IN GENERAL DISCUISSION FOR SOME REASON") and posting about things that are clearly explained on the wiki starts to wear on you.  In the case of Squirrel and Euede, they're both infamous for exactly the type of posts you've seen here, on a frequent basis.

Euede has nearly 1300 posts in less than two years, and the vast majority are nebulous gripes.  For me, reading these similar posts over and over is like when a cashier hears a variant of "if it doesn't scan, does that mean it's free?" or a runner hears "run forrest run" yelled at them.  It's not one particular case that annoys me but the combined effect of consistent intellectual laziness.  Problem is, you never see posts about basic questions from people who know how to use the search function or read the wiki, they filter themselves out.  Similarly, people who have better things to do or are happily playing the game don't have time or motivation to post 1300 times about how they don't like it on the forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Toros said:

1) See above quote, an anti-vaxxer is someone who doesn't believe anyone should be vaccinated (based on one retracted study and a few scam artists who continue to spread imaginary dangers that lead to real epidemics) http://www.startribune.com/in-measles-outbreak-a-misconception-about-vaccines-still-plagues-somali-community/420131133/

Yeah I asked my GF after I posted that I didn't know what i meant (I thought it was a term for a forum warrior or something similar) but retrospectively I should of been able to put 2 and 2 together (vaxxer - vaccines). And to be clear again no I'm not anti-vaccines.

2) I understand that he may make the same none points over and over (or maybe I really don't as I have only seen maybe 50 of his posts) without any concrete ground to base them off.

4) I understand that you may get frustrated with constant stupidity but I would appreciate some respect at least where I am concerned as the point of my original post was to be more respectful and being constructive. I don't post on forums often (I find being around people forcing their opinion down my throat unhealthy). But I have also played since beta and DS beta before that so I could be a contributing member here (I may well have contributed directly to you without you knowing, but i'm not into swinging my d*** around so if your wondering how you'll have to ask privately) peace. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really know what to say. I've watched the video, and I thought I would post my insight on it, but between the talk with microtransactions and mods, I'm not sure where I follow.

But if there's anything I can be certain on, is that both DS and DST are sandboxes. There is no definitive play, and all playstyles, whether passive or active, have their own set of natural consequences and specific incentives to playing. Obviously there are many who settle down and perfect an ideal base layout, and that is what I would consider passive. Sure, it's fairly easy and laid-back and sometimes criticized as so, but I think the real deal killer is the lack of any true adventure.

The lack of a risk factor, unbound adventure, and the joys of discovering new places, species, and strange treasures. An active playstyle will easily satisfy all of those, and if there's anything I would say for myself, it's that there is indeed an incentive to go outside and experience the dangerous world, provided you think the loot is worth the effort. It doesn't have to be delving into the Ruins, just exploring a forest for some totally normal trees is a fine adventure on its own. Always a risk in itself, as you lack the conveniences of a base with crock pots and tents, but I think that's the fun part.

I would debate that you would be missing out on half the game if you linger in your base a thousand days, but with dozens of potential structures to craft, I'd say you'd better build your base to the content of your heart. Not like there's any true end-game, or a true end state aside from what can happen in "survival" mode. Rollbacks are easily possible, and there is no pressure to do the thing the lore suggests. That's why I disregard the lore, as it's not the story I play along with.

Just my two cents. I mean, we have 12 characters of entirely differing strengths and weakness. I think the real deal is that anybody can play to what is natural to them, and expect that the game will give them the freedom to do that. Hey, I find myself playing as Wilson and Willow waaaaaaaayyy more often than Wolfgang and WX. Why? Playstyle. Just, that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoiler
On 11/23/2017 at 8:40 PM, ImDaMisterL said:

Oh, and happy Thanksgiving!

First off, Thanksgiving was LAST month. Good gravy. :wilson_ecstatic:

1 hour ago, Donut Steeve said:

Why have you quoted me but not said anything related to the quote? :S Or have I missed something?

My presence is contagious. :3

Spoiler

I tend to quote people simply to let them know that I noticed and replied something they said. 

Doesn't matter if it's relevant or not, I do it anyways. :wilson_dorky:

 

Wholly cannoli das a lotta walls of text! Didn't bother reading most of it, because when I see improperly formatted walls of text my brain tends to shut off. So I'm just gonna leave a meme here, and I dunno, continue torturing my dupes. 

Image result for trump wall of text meme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand this whole 4 page argument. Maybe it's because I was around in the beginning, when DS was being created and DST wasn't even a thing. I have my opinions about DST, but whatever, I'm not a game developer at Klei. I'm just some random gamer who enjoys the break from real life, and doesn't take gaming as a reflection of my inner self.  


Klei, keep giving us fun stuff, help me break away from the drama and stress of my real life. Thank you for the past several years!  


Games are supposed to be fun, an escape from the drama and stress of real life. I don't understand why it's so important and serious to change someone else's vision. Let go, please. Just enjoy it and your life for a second. Change your IRL life as much as you need to, but please just let this be. This is not in your control, and you are interrupting others happiness every time you try to control it. If you don't enjoy it, move onto something else. You have that power. You have control over that 100%.     


For those who don't understand, who want to argue how the base mechanics of DS or DST *SHOULD* be... I beg you, read the attached article. It's an interview with Jamie (Bigfoot), about his and Kevin's (lead designer and developer) thoughts and directions with DS. DST is the love-child of DS, so you need to start there, home base, not from whatever the current iteration is or where your mind wants to take it.

 

Home base (DS) is what influences every decision they make with the genre. They're the developers, they had a vision, IT'S THEIR GAME. You are merely a participant in it. You don't get to change their vision just because it doesn't suit you.  

 

If you don't like it, and nothing is changing after numerous comments shared over months or years , well then, there's your answer. It's not changing. Stop wasting your time and everyone else's, and go play something else.

 

Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic rewards in Klei’s latest game; Don’t Starve.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

The push for stuff that is cosmetic really baffles me. People make a huge thing out of Portraits and skins...I never get it, they mean nothing to me. 

From a company's perspective, skins are a revenue stream and mean they can hire artists full-time with something to do while their programmers are working on another project.

Based on release frequency it doesn't look like they're trying to do the type of milking some microtransaction games are notorious for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

×
  • Create New...