So I'd like to know, in all honesty, if playing a run in DD without the item you *want* isn't fun? (not just from Lujo, but everyone)
Hi Aequitas. We don't get to hear from you much. Glad to see you around.
I think that much of the frustration comes from the dissonance between what we are saying and what you and the other devs are hearing. There seems to be a fundamental miscommunication here. No one is saying that you have the game can only be enjoyed with specific item x. I think it's driving us all a little bonkers to keep hearing variations of that put into our mouths.
What happens is that sometimes we can taken by a specific idea. Maybe its mana stacking, or resist stacking, or trying to leverage janky things like the bank ledger with an assassin. You get excited and want to try it. Like, right now, I've gotten interested in flat health effects from reading the dwarf thread. I'm think to myself, can I do something weird with a Health Pendant prep? Well, I don't have a Health Pendant in my locker, and I probably never will, because finding it is annoying and replacing when the experiment is over is annoying.
I remember when you first asked "How many lockers would be enough?" I'll give you the same answer that someone (Darvin I think) gave you back then. The answer is "As many slots as there are items."
Wait, stop. Don't leave. Hear me out. I've noticed that you and the other devs see this a "WE want unlimited resources" but what we are really saying is "We want zero grinding." We have
functionally unlimited locker space already. It doesn't even cost us resources to use. It actually has a negative cost because of the incidental gold and potions that you pick up. But it's not fun. Sp the question that the players are really asking is "How much non-gameplay make-work do we want in the game?" And the answer is "We don't want any of that."
Now, you can completely avoid such make-work if you always keep the same 6-9 items in your locker, but man that doesn't sound fun either. I know that you and the others have this ideal in your mind that the player will just play naturally and will only try new strategies if the item is already in front of them, but that is not how real people work. We get interested in ideas and want to test them while we are still interested. Maybe you see a movie based on a book and now you're really excited to read the original. You go to the book store and they don't have it. Do you say "ah well I'll just read something random instead"? Of course not! You go to the next store and try again because you don't want to read a random book, even if it is good. You want to read the thing you are excited about right now.
Maybe I approach playing things differently, but at the level that you guys are playing, why is a scumming run even a thing anymore? Why not pick a dungeon you find challenging (or the PQI, or the flaming dungeon) and just go play it. Now you're in there, and, win or lose, there's probably a shop item that could make for an interesting run. So buy it before you head out.
It's not an either-or thing. DTD encourages both specific prepped strategies and random runs. Sometimes I want to try specific ideas, sometimes I want to do random things. It's sort of like how I like both burgers and chicken, but would get sick of either if that's all I had and would be annoyed if there was some rule that said I have to eat a plate of chicken first every time I want to eat a burger.
Everyone is fine with you people having limited development resources and not wanting to spend them on something like this. Everyone is also fine with you just stone-cold not wanting to do it at all. What gives the issue its teeth is that the objections being raised do not reflect what we are trying to say. We aren't saying we don't like random runs (We do!). We are not saying that we want unlimited resources (We don't. In fact, we are specifically suggesting to add a resource cost of some kind to emulate a task that we can already do that current costs negative
resources). We are saying that part of the fun in DTD is being able to use the prep system to experiment with specific and consistent strategies and that the current implementation charges a "fun tax" on doing this in new ways.