Jump to content

joaocordeiro

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    1810
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from decom70 in Running client on Linux   
    Steam supporting and pushing developers to support multiple platforms is not a bad example. 
     
    Ubuntu has a share of 0.2%.
    I would say that if the work needed to put it running on Ubuntu is lower than 0.2% then its worth it.
     
    As for testing, low budget games often say that the game "should work" on linux. 
    And knowing the linux share, linux users accept this. 
     
    But that is different from: "lets use visual studio proprietary libs and F you linux" 
     
    Windows has a monopoly in PC gaming.
    That wont end until developers do something about it. 
     
    Most triple A engines already support linux. Its just up to the end developer to opt not to include BS visual studio crap. 
  2. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from decom70 in Running client on Linux   
    Yet it appears that steam does not have any "too many distros" problems.
     
    "Valve officially released Steam for Linux on February 14, 2013. As of June 2020 the number of Linux-compatible games on Steam exceeds 6,500."

    Current games are already at 40GB size. And use 8GB+ ram
    Why should you even bother with depending on distro related libs? To save 1% disk space? Or 1% ram? Just pack your own libs with the game...
    All you need from the distro are a few libs that connect to the kernel and the graphics card. And those are common in all distros.

    If the engine (the part that really needs to use distro libs) supports linux. And that's a BIG IF.
    Then the game not working on Linux is a result of bad programming.
  3. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from decom70 in Running client on Linux   
    Yep, you are anti-linux
     
    Most current game engines will support Linux. 
    Its the game developers that will do hard-coded stuff instead of using the engine methods and break linux compatibility. 
     
    And there are allot of reasons to support Linux. 
    Steam link. Several current and future game streaming technologies... 
     
    And when ppl refuse to change 0.01% of the code to support Linux, it means that they dont want to. 
    Not that it makes no sense. 
     
    If you open steam on Linux, you wil notice that half of the games are supported. 
  4. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Aaron Cain in NQ contradicts their own Code of Conduct with new construct announcement.   
    I agree with the op 100% allowing an exploit to be used is bad for everyone. 
     
    Its bad because it gives an unfair advantage to those not using the exploit. 
    Its bad because it creates an incentive for non exploiters to become exploiters. 
    Its bad because it sets a precedent that exploits can be used as long as NQ says nothing. And if an exploit is used by a large ammount of people, it can even become protected against NQ action. 
     
    @EpicPhail how about you debate points, instead of trying to dodge with "near insults"? It was not a rage topic. It was a quite logical one. And its about using an exploit. Not if its used in PVP or not. 
  5. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from kulkija in ELEMENT STACKING NOW PROHIBITED - NQ FEEDBACK PLEASE   
    I dont think any clarification is needed. 
    Stacking is against the rules. 
    If you bought a ship with stacked elements you should have to explain it to NQ or/and suffer for it. 
     
    I have seen topics like this for this last year. 
    A rule is applied and the infractors, that know they are breaking the rule, try to come up with a interpretation of the rule that gives them margin to continue to break the rule. 
     
    Everyone that has stacked items knows or can easily find out. 
    There are places to see the element count. 
    If you cant be sure if a ship has stacked elements, dont buy it and/or dont use it. 
     
    But you are definitely not allowed to pleaded ignorance and continue to break the rules..... 
     
    Got it? 
  6. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Metric in Concern about the future of the game   
    Its about winning and loosing. 
    One generates happiness the other generates frustration. 
     
    If the same group of 20 guys keep stacking wins, against 100-1000 players you end up with 20 happy guys and 100-1000 unhappy victims. 
     
    Its not sustainable. 
     
    Ofcouse good PVPers should use their skills and friends to win against everyone. 
    But a game solely developed around this pvp is not sustainable and will fail. 
     
    Loosing players need a chance to restock ships, weapons and most importantly happiness. 
    They need interesting PVE. 
  7. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Captain Hills in Concern about the future of the game   
    Its about winning and loosing. 
    One generates happiness the other generates frustration. 
     
    If the same group of 20 guys keep stacking wins, against 100-1000 players you end up with 20 happy guys and 100-1000 unhappy victims. 
     
    Its not sustainable. 
     
    Ofcouse good PVPers should use their skills and friends to win against everyone. 
    But a game solely developed around this pvp is not sustainable and will fail. 
     
    Loosing players need a chance to restock ships, weapons and most importantly happiness. 
    They need interesting PVE. 
  8. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from merihimRefin in Concern about the future of the game   
    If the density of ore in the pvp zone was 5 times higher than in non pvp zone, you will still have a reason to fight. 
     
    What you want is to "fight to survive" instead of "fight to have an advantage" 
     
    You want everyone to be forced to fight. 
    Why? For you to have pray. 
    But those guys you think should be your pray will simply quit the game instead of being your pray. 
     
    You are "exhausting" your own food. 
  9. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from CptLoRes in Concern about the future of the game   
    Thats something the JC's vision failed to understand. 
     
    I have given this example before and i will repeated
     
    For lions to have zebras to hunt, zebras need to have plants to eat. 
     
    Full pvp players are the lions
    Non pvp players are the zebras
    NPCs are the plants
     
    If non pvp players dont have any source of joy and accomplishment(by killing easy npcs), thet will eventually quit the game (no more zebras) 
  10. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from DrDerp in Frequency of game crashes are intolerable   
    I can confirm he is a member of NQ's white knights. 
  11. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Snipey in LEGION has won DU   
    I don't understand the relevance of the question.
     
    Lets say the answer is: "yes, we the ABC org will fight them"
    What will change? Will you, the single player, be allowed to scan an asteroid? Or will "ABC org" kill you on sight too?
     
    How do you think "Legion" or "AC" was created?
     
    Here is the thing. Balanced war is not profitable for the fighters. It's a huge waste of resources.
    So why should any org battle with Legion when they can make an agreement, or even join ranks?
     
    Do you get it now? It does not matter who will be the next Alpha org, there won't be any prolonged war. PPl will only fight a quick battle for an overwhelming win, or they will make deals and not have a war at all.
     
    Unlike EVE, there are no borders, strategic sectors, stations to make a losing side hide in their bastion.
     
    Here all is within reach and war has devastating consequences.
     
    Unless the game design changes, this will be the future of DU, forever.
  12. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Snipey in LEGION has won DU   
    The game does NOT promote balance of power. 
    Sure some people can make the choice to fight them. But they will either quickly win or quickly lose.
    There wont ever be a "balance" 
  13. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from WhiteZeus in Frequency of game crashes are intolerable   
    I can confirm he is a member of NQ's white knights. 
  14. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from le_souriceau in Frequency of game crashes are intolerable   
    I can confirm he is a member of NQ's white knights. 
  15. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Cybob19 in DEVBLOG: THE FUTURE OF DU - Part 3 - Discussion Thread   
    Defending those priorities you show how you place a minor detail of game play in the same level of redefining the pillars to make the game viable. 
     
    In fact, you are so disconnected from reality that you dont even see that if the game fails, investment ends, servers close, you wont be able to kill those helpless and undefended freighters and noobs anymore. 
  16. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Cybob19 in THE FUTURE OF DU COMMUNITY FEEDBACK Q&A - Discussion Thread   
    Why do ppl still see this as a solution... 
    The is the only safety net noobs have... 
     
    If industrialists cant beat those "1 buy 10000 sell" orders then how will players not interested in crafting play the game? 
     
    Jesus. Would it be that hard to use your head for a 2 minute thinking before posting this? 
  17. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from BoomHeadshot in Thank you, Dual Universe.   
    Welcome to the club! 
  18. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from aliensalmon in Thank you, Dual Universe.   
    Welcome to the club! 
  19. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Haunty in The new Chair Surface...great idea, terrible implementation.   
    I think it should be adjustable with some combination of keys. 
     
    Or/and a scrollbar setting in options. 
  20. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Ving in The new Chair Surface...great idea, terrible implementation.   
    I think it should be adjustable with some combination of keys. 
     
    Or/and a scrollbar setting in options. 
  21. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from czaski in You've reached the max amount of core units you can deploy   
    You get +2 each "basic" level, and +1 each "advanced" level. So its 17 cores. 
    But those are "all" cores, no separation between static or dynamic. 
     
    Also keep in mind that orgs can own very large amounts of cores, way above 17.
  22. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Zarcata in THE FUTURE OF DU COMMUNITY FEEDBACK Q&A - Discussion Thread   
    There are areas levels of wipe. 
     
    1 - Terrain+ore
    2 - Constructs+container contents+territories
    3 - Quanta+Orgs+missions
    4 - Talents
     
    In my opinion the current ore model is unsustainable. We cant expect ppl to spawn on planets full of holes and have a good game experience. 
    So i would say that wipe 1 (terrain and ore) is 100% garantied. 
     
    With so many bugs and exploits, it would be fair to do a full quanta and construct wipe to make every one star from zero. Not even leaving "magic" blueprints. 
     
    But i would also agree with a full wipe at release date ( drop database level) 
    With everything you wiped, (including talent points) 
     
     
     
  23. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from The_Kurgan in Walking onto someone else's construct is now an exploit   
    No its not.
     
    If you see a "abandoned" construct you can walk all over it and explore it, it being a base or a ship. 
     
    But you cant stay there, by hidding or logging out. 
     
    This means that you should not "EXPLOIT" this mechanic to cause harm to that player and his ship. 
    You cannot use your logged out avatar to track a ship going into the pvp zone. 
    You cannot use your inventory mass to cause mass issues to that player. 
     
    In the end its quite simple to understand: if your action is going to cause damages to that player, you can be banned.... 
     
    If you fail to understand this simple thing, either you have some heavy cognitive issues OR you want a excuse to use this exploit to make someone miserable in a non fair way. 
     
    Either way, you should not be allowed to play. 
     
  24. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from Kruzer in THE FUTURE OF DU COMMUNITY FEEDBACK Q&A - Discussion Thread   
    There are areas levels of wipe. 
     
    1 - Terrain+ore
    2 - Constructs+container contents+territories
    3 - Quanta+Orgs+missions
    4 - Talents
     
    In my opinion the current ore model is unsustainable. We cant expect ppl to spawn on planets full of holes and have a good game experience. 
    So i would say that wipe 1 (terrain and ore) is 100% garantied. 
     
    With so many bugs and exploits, it would be fair to do a full quanta and construct wipe to make every one star from zero. Not even leaving "magic" blueprints. 
     
    But i would also agree with a full wipe at release date ( drop database level) 
    With everything you wiped, (including talent points) 
     
     
     
  25. Like
    joaocordeiro got a reaction from DrFrigoPorco in DEVBLOG: Asteroids - Discussion thread   
    Nice to see something i suggested to be implemented tnx for reading:
     
    'Add random events, like "an asteroid rich in T5 has entered the system and will exit the system in 10 days"' 
×
×
  • Create New...