R.I.P Good Old DST!?

[Chesmu]

Welcome Modern DST with p2w mechanics and showoff (AKA: toxic) community!?


Golden question:
Is a Character DLC necessary to support devs for new content? (Not a new game.)
While there is:

1- 11 Skin set DLC's available in Store.
2- Merchandise to buy.
3- Forced data collection.
4- And the price of game itself.

In another form of question, Is adding a character DLC for DST brings more profit than 4 things mentioned above?
If not, then what is the need to lock a character for Spool or real cash.

[Luna]

solid_blob lähetti viestin:

Orderan lähetti viestin:

What, you'd prefer Klei to give up on developing more content for DST ?
I'd also want to point out that game developers and publishers always pulled out ♥♥♥♥ like that, except now they require 20+ persons putting a few hundred hours of work into something rather than 3 guys for 3 hours.

A lot has changed over the years but greed has been the controlling factor in the video game industry since the early 70's when people were cloning and reselling Pong over and over again. People would rather grift than work.

thats in every industry
every last one of them

[Chesmu]

Guys, these part of arguments needs some real data from developers to show sale rates and similar things, which we don't have.

What do you think about the 2nd part of the topic? the community.
For example, why do they decorate their comments with some personal attacks between their words, every time they respond to something?

[solid_blob]

P_Duyd lähetti viestin:

solid_blob lähetti viestin:

You guys tell me that Klei's not the only company doing this. You say that games are not a service they are a product. You say that there's nothing unethical about DLC characters.

Then what is with all these games? You can't claim not to see it all around you. Games are released broken and incomplete. Unplayable without patches and updates. New gaming breaking content added down the road. Kick Starters that never get finished. Micro-transactions and fake currency. Fake chores, waiting to play video games, and grind shaming. I just wanted Klei not to go this route, and denied for too long that they were going this route, and it feels like ethics have no place in gaming anywhere.

so other indie developers don't exist?
what world you live in hell?
open you're eyes roll up those sleeves and look trough the gardbidge
you will find plenty of good game's with no micro transactions or everything you mentiond
what you descirbed is you're problem wich you can solve by just taking you're time looking trough the catalog like its 1995

A bunch of unsupported defunct games and all the money goes directly to EA and Activision's huge pockets I'll pass.

[Luna]

🐉 Chesmu ☠ lähetti viestin:

Guys, these part of arguments needs some real data from developers to show sale rates and similar thing, which we don't have.

What do you think about the 2nd part of the topic? the community.
For example, why do they decorate their comments with some personal attacks between their words, every time they response to something?

bequese every community has toxicity
thats a part of life online
the internet is just a mean place for people to be jerks
everybody has atleast done it at one point

[Luna]

also solid_blob
look deeper
look more into indie game's
il give you a small start you enjoy farming sims? stardew valley
enjoy horror: there is plenty of that fnaf, batim, dark decpetion
want something simple?, super meat boy
you don't got to play just triple a game's

[Chesmu]

P_Duyd lähetti viestin:

bequese every community has toxicity
thats a part of life online
the internet is just a mean place for people to be jerks
everybody has atleast done it at one point

Yes that's very true. I also did it at one point. I was a toxic user of social media. But that was when I was very young.

Do you think DST attracts players from younger ages or from games similar to Minecraft? because the graphics and game play may be confusing enough for that matter.

I don't think age has to do with toxicity but I think it helps that matter a lot (being toxic) when someone is in young age.

[Luna]

🐉 Chesmu ☠ lähetti viestin:

P_Duyd lähetti viestin:

bequese every community has toxicity
thats a part of life online
the internet is just a mean place for people to be jerks
everybody has atleast done it at one point

Yes that's very true. I also did it at one point. I was a toxic user of social media. But that was when I was very young.

Do you think DST attracts players from younger ages or from games similar to Minecraft? because the graphics and game play may be confusing enough for that matter.

I don't think age has to do with toxicity but I think it helps that matter a lot (being toxic) when someone is in young age.

young people want to be edgy and seem cool by insulting people online and being toxic
and yes dst attracts kids bequese its similar to minecraft

[Wariat117]

P_Duyd lähetti viestin:

bequese every community has toxicity
thats a part of life online
the internet is just a mean place for people to be jerks
everybody has atleast done it at one point

chesmu is the best proof of this

[Orderan]

🐉 Chesmu ☠ lähetti viestin:

Guys, these part of arguments needs some real data from developers to show sale rates and similar things, which we don't have.

What do you think about the 2nd part of the topic? the community.
For example, why do they decorate their comments with some personal attacks between their words, every time they respond to something?

If only there was a game to see if a game is currently popular on steam.
https://steamcharts.com/

[Luna]

this topic turned from a mess i didnt even know what it was about to a place of real discussion and advice
back to oke where the hell did things go so wrong
PARKOUR

[Wariat117]

P_Duyd lähetti viestin:

this topic turned from a mess i didnt even know what it was about to a place of real discussion and advice
back to oke where the hell did things go so wrong
PARKOUR

it turnet into mess around page 1

[solid_blob]

It can be hard to tell when one game company can have several names and change it's name and image. Is a game really an indie company or is it a major corporation? Both? Neither? Games change ownership all the time and so do companies. But who out there is looking up the past owner, who they own, and who owns them, who they used to be and what games they made under past names before they decide to buy that game. They say "Red Dead 2, I liked Red Dead 1." Game companies are made up of their people and that can change drastically. Where did those other people go? There's no transparency in games, what you see is not what you get, and it can change at any point down the line. Sure, we would know if EA bought Klei, but strangers to the game wouldn't. If they offered them enough money, who could blame them? Then they could just release even more characters since it's regular practice.

I pose you this:
If you believe games are a product and not a service, then you should be opposed to DLC characters like Wortox.

1. Wortox is better than the other characters. That's not an accident.
2. When you buy a product, you should own it right? Isn't that part of it?
3. They can change any part of the game in the future to make you dependent on DLC characters.
4. How much effort went into Wortox Vs. the rest of the game, price difference?

I think we're supposed to always feel like video games are ripping us off so that we desperately scratch at deals and sales and registration forms.

[Orderan]

solid_blob lähetti viestin:

It can be hard to tell when one game company can have several names and change it's name and image. Is a game really an indie company or is it a major corporation? Both? Neither? Games change ownership all the time and so do companies. But who out there is looking up the past owner, who they own, and who owns them, who they used to be and what games they made under past names before they decide to buy that game. They say "Red Dead 2, I liked Red Dead 1." Game companies are made up of their people and that can change drastically. Where did those other people go? There's no transparency in games, what you see is not what you get, and it can change at any point down the line. Sure, we would know if EA bought Klei, but strangers to the game wouldn't. If they offered them enough money, who could blame them? Then they could just release even more characters since it's regular practice.

I pose you this:
If you believe games are a product and not a service, then you should be opposed to DLC characters like Wortox.

1. Wortox is better than the other characters. That's not an accident.
2. When you buy a product, you should own it right? Isn't that part of it?
3. They can change any part of the game in the future to make you dependent on DLC characters.
4. How much effort went into Wortox Vs. the rest of the game, price difference?

I think we're supposed to always feel like video games are ripping us off so that we desperately scratch at deals and sales and registration forms.

1.They're redoing other characters (pulling them upward), custom characters are still valid, there's no competition.
2.Look at any game that got an expansion pack. Or even better, any old game that got a new version with 3 new characters. It's up to devs to decide, and unless they actively destroy what's existing, this claim can't be substantiated.
3.Go to point 1. Power is irrelevant.
4.That's a common pattern for dlcs, expansions and microtransactions.

The rest of you claimed can be aimed at a lot of industries.

[Chesmu]

Orderan lähetti viestin:

The rest of you claimed can be aimed at a lot of industries.

Exactly. So why not to complain about it all the time so that hopefully all industries will be fair again. Without ugly businesses. To reach a win-win condition for both user and provider.

[solid_blob]

Me I believe modern games are a service in that when we buy an unfinished game, it's like we're contracting the developers to finish making their game. I don't like or advocate this, but it is the modern practice. Games are being released unfinished and that is unacceptable if it is supposed to be a stand alone product.

Buying something then not getting it. I am talking about early access. I'm talking about pre orders. I'm talking about games dropping in price and pandering to new players. Locked unbalanced content in a game you already paid for? Now I advocate subscription fees for Don't Starve Together, but as an alternative, not just tacked onto current DST to drain us of our remaining money. Instead of the pay to win route, take the pay to play route. Take that money and put it back into the game.

These microtransactions and P2W mechanics shouldn't be in games, even in small amounts. Payment is not playment.