May be the games should be merged? And how about surveys?

[TheKingofSquirrels]

5 hours ago, PillsStealer said:

Why are you trying to relight the fire that's been extinguished months ago.

4 hours ago, Zeklo said:

First off I think DST more or less is the sequel. It's the next page in the story building on the previous content.

However to write to what you mean... in order to justify a true sequel, the game would need to have significant core changes, because DST is basically DS multiplayer, but can also be played single player. A sequel would need to be a truly new game with new core mechanics, and because of that we'll have the same issue. People playing on the old DS/T games because there is something they prefer compared to the newer. So we'll have the same situation of people wanting those old ones to not be abandoned.

If DST is sequel....DON'T RELEASE PAID DLC FOR THE PREVIOUS GAME THEN. 

 

[Zeklo]

4 minutes ago, TheKingofSquirrels said:

If DST is sequel....DON'T RELEASE PAID DLC FOR THE PREVIOUS GAME THEN. 

Nothing prevents someone from telling an untold story that takes place in the past. A story may be linear but it doesn't need to be experienced that way.

[TheKingofSquirrels]

41 minutes ago, Zeklo said:

Nothing prevents someone from telling an untold story that takes place in the past. A story may be linear but it doesn't need to be experienced that way.

It's not to do with story...

It's to do with the fact that in an open world survival game, you want your world to have all the content possible. Which is made impossible, when when you decide to split your content between two different games.

[Sinister_Fang]

23 hours ago, Zeklo said:

However to write to what you mean... in order to justify a true sequel, the game would need to have significant core changes,

Well, not necessarily. There's a lot of sequels that are pretty much the same game, but with a different setting/levels, slight tweaks to gameplay mechanics, new content and more story.

DST kinda fits in all of that. Although I will admit it doesn't quite feel like a sequel because of the same setting and it didn't add that much in the way of additional content.

[Zeklo]

12 minutes ago, Sinister_Fang said:

Well, not necessarily. There's a lot of sequels that are pretty much the same game, but with a different setting/levels, slight tweaks to gameplay mechanics, new content and more story.

That's just my personal bias. I'd rather they keep these sort of changes to DLC. Shipwrecked is pretty good example. It's a new setting with a few new mechanics. I don't think it justified making an entirely new game, which it didn't. It was suited enough to just be add-on content.