Zeddrick
-
Posts
700 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Zeddrick
-
-
This one is my personal favourite. No diagnostic at all. It seems to appear when you put your username and password in so quickly it thinks you might be a bot, although people who actually are using automation to log in to their account still seem to be able to do so, so who knows what this is for? Perhaps it's just yet another poor-quality cockup? -
On 2/23/2023 at 5:08 AM, Gr1IvI said:
Its EasyAntiCheat error. Occures on trying to launch the game after crash. This happens to me in Apex. Try to restart your pc. If it wont help i recommed you to google:
" Error Code: 30005 (CreateFile failed with 32.) " Its a lot of possible sotulions.Yes, thanks. I did eventually restart the PC the next morning and that did, in fact, make it go away. I was just really cross with the game at that point for other reasons and this was the last straw.
I set out with my shiny new repair unit to see if I could 'create some content' but all I got were freezes (3 minutes to exit a seat?!), stuttering (my previously-OK-for-the-whole-life-of-DU machine can't run the game properly any more as it takes up a lot more resource now) and wierd behaviour for the disassembler that surely can't be intended and then finally I got locked out.
At least I didn't get the element stacking thing again yet ...
-
Tried to play, was having a wierd error where my ship bounced up and down for a couple of minutes with controls/panning/etc locked every time I tried to get out of my seat. Eventually I got fed up and started doing 'end task' and restarting. Now I get this:
Happens every time I try to run before I even get to the login window. No obvious reason why, and at this point I can't even be bothered to investigate it, This type of thing isn't a big surprise any more really. I'll just unsub again and go back to Stellaris because at least it works.
-
5 hours ago, blundertwink said:
Fair enough, I didn't realize this was during maintenance. My mistake!
That said, it isn't like the numbers are better today. If it's only 19 during maintenance and only about 60 otherwise...that's not substantively different. The fact is that DU's DAUs have fallen consistently since release.
Apparently we agree that their numbers are bad and that the game is not growing, so I'm not sure what your point is in decrying "doomsayers" that declare that the game is dead.
There's no evidence that the game is alive or growing...certainly a few hundred new player claims between several weeks is not. In my opinion, 1 PvE mission 5 months after release is not nearly enough growth in terms of actual feature depth.
If the idea is that DU can bounce back and stick around for years and years even with mere hundreds of players or will magically explode its player count....well, that's just not a perspective that I understand and to me doesn't align with NQ's 8-year history of slow development and improvised design. There's no way in my mind that NQ's trickle of slow and small updates will bring this game around.
I just don't understand the idea that the game might rebound "somehow" or even more baffling...the idea that it actually has a growing player base and is fine because Steam doesn't matter.
I genuinely appreciate the optimism of those that believe the game still has a future, but I personally can't see how the math will ever work to make this game a viable product commercially. When even 20,000 subs seems like a hopeless moonshot, it's safe to say it's dead as a subscription product.
I notice you added 'as a subscription product' on the end of that statement as though there were any viable alternatives to it being one. What would you do instead. As I see it the alternatives are:
- make it a one-off payment. In this case the initial investment is significantly *higher*, probably 4+ months of sub. How does that make it more likely to attract new players? Seems to me this is mainly of interest to the players who stopped playing and as you said those aren't enough.- make it f2p with a cash shop or whatever. Seems like a cash shop would struggle for the same reason the game struggles, lack of content. I mean, if they can't afford to make enough content to keep things interesting for subscribers, how would they afford it with less money. They'd sell a few things up front sure, but what do I keep coming back and buying? DAC? Isn't that like a sub?
And even if you could do something other than a sub, things like mining units, missions, etc would be even more broken if you could run an ever-increasing number of characters by adding a new one every few months which you could then keep forever. And right now some of those things are primary content for a lot of players.
I don't know if anyone thinks there is a growing player base here, or even disputes the decline. It's just that some of us think it could get better because it's not dead yet. Personally I can see a change in the pace of development and a genuine attempt to turn things around and I'm hoping that they come up with a winning formula soon. It's a shame we're here after so many chances to get it right but it is still possible for the game to do a No Man's Sky IMO. They just have to use their limited resources effectively and come up with some genuinely engaging gameplay.
-
On 2/19/2023 at 9:27 PM, RugesV said:
In the two weeks since my last post another 200 paying account have joined the game.
We are not talking hot numbers here. And these numbers are not going to be the savior of NQ.
But people keep making accounts. Despite top comments of "is the game ready dead?" "So the game is scame?" "Now that te game has flopped, will they drop subs?" Heck scroll on down the first page on steam, and negative, negative, negative. If I was looking for a new game and knew nothing about the game and looked at those forums, I would walk away. Yet in the last 2 weeks 200 people still said I will give it a try. Or even if they are alt accounts people said I enjoy this game so much I am going to throw more money at it.
Or perhaps someone signed up 200 more alts to farm missions?
-
3 hours ago, SirJohn85 said:
A weird attitude. Forum posts, however, do not pay for the costs of the server. Despite a build event on Steam that ran for a week, not a single increase could be heard on the Steam charts.
Sure. Agree with all that. But forum posts don't actually run up server costs either.
The point I'm trying to make is that if you're here complaining or just talking down the game then the game still has you. And there are a lot of people in that category. Look at the numbers right after the wipe -- most of those people were bitching on the forums for months before and not playing and then suddenly wipe and a load of them came back and played.
So long as the game still lives in enough peoples' heads then it can't be a dead game. And the number of people making 'dead game' posts, ironically, shows that the game still lives on in quite a few heads, even if it does so rent-free because they aren't playing any more.
-
3 hours ago, T3mp said:
lol 64 players. this game is already dead
It will only be dead when you and the many others like you actually give up on it. You are here and even though you seem to be one of those who wants to help push it over the edge by putting others off playing you clearly haven't walked away yet and neither have many others. People are just waiting and if there's a turnaround they might still come back.
When I go 3 months without seeing a single 'game is dead' type of post here, on reddit or on the discord is when I'll think that the game actually is dead. I'm an infrequent visitor these days but I see them all the time right now.
- Shaman and Lasersmith
-
2
-
An interesting possibility would be to allow people to pilot and gun on ships while in VR. They would have no talents, so would be less effective than they could be, but you could, for example, put 5 gunseats on a mission ship and draft people in to defend it when it gets caught in the middle of PvP space.
Similarly allowing docked constructs to be protected from being attacked (at the expense that guns don't work until they undock) would allow various types of constructs to carry defensive fighters and draft people in to pilot them when they get attacked.
-
3 hours ago, NQ-Nicodemus said:
For repairing a construct, the repair function of the unit is not concerned about contents.
So, It would go like this:
You use the unit, doing a "scrap only run" first, to repair the construct.
Then you would have to manually empty all the contents.
Then you can use the unit to complete the disassembly process.
Hope the information helps!
Great, thanks for the reply and I'm looking forward to the update.
-
2 hours ago, NQ-Nicodemus said:
In the initial implementation of the unit, you would need to remove all container contents and schematics from industry schematic banks prior to disassembly.
This may change in future updates, but that is how it stands currently.Thanks. Presumably for damaged ships this also includes fuel in fuel tanks, ammo in ammo containers or guns and anything else which acts like a container? And all of these things will need to be tracked down, repaired to make them accessible and then emptied before I can auto disassemble a ship?
-
A Great set of changes. I have a couple of constructs I'm looking forward to auto-disassembling. Will the repair/disassembly unit also be able to empty containers and schematic bays as it disassembles? Or will I need to empty the 250+ containers in my starter factory one by one and then empty all the schematic bays before I set it to work?
-
23 minutes ago, Talocan said:
Here's a thought: what if plasmas were craftable by large quantities of high-tier materials? Similarly to CCP's response to OTEC when one conglomerate of entities monopolized most fo the technetium moons. Basically you could do "unrefined" reactions that would make intermediate components that normally needed technetium with larger quantities of non-technetium materials. Ideally holding a core should be the best source of plasma but this would help counteract a "snowball effect" where the only entity in game holding the cores is the only one with ostensibly more effective exotic elements.
Are you talking about Alchemy here? Wasn't that a feature that was broken because everyone was using an item duping bug in their refineries that CCP didn't know about so the calculations they used to work out the quantities was completely off. I don't think anyone actually used that feature did they?
People also seem to think that there is just one entity holding all the plasma in the game. What do you think the members of Legion would do if the alliance just sat on it all and kept everything like that? Do you think that they could keep doing that forever without people deciding not to show up to defend it? Do you think Lodestar could?
Plasma is a group activity which means whoever the group is who gets it they will eventually need to distribute it one way or another in order to keep their members happy. So regardless of who controls these things it's just a matter of time before they become widely available because either one group will be selling a lot of it or a lot of people will have some. And the same was true for OTEC -- the Mittani could control the price of technetium to some extent but not completely and it would never have been possible to completely stop the flow of it as the members of the alliances defending the moons would eventually want to get some of the rewards for that. -
1 hour ago, reggamm said:
You don't have to think that everyone should play the way you want. This game is not about PVP, no matter how much I would like it. PVP in DU is for a big fan, that's why not so many people participate in it.
And even if someone is ready to give up everything, work, family, (I'm exaggerating, of course) and not sleep at night to fight for plasma, this is his personal business. This does not mean that other players should do the same. For you, plasma is the pinnacle of progress in the game. For me, this is just one of the tools for a comfortable long-term gameplay, no matter what I do in the game, and there is a lot to do here. Resource extraction is only a small part. And I don't need plasma. I need warp beacons. If you think that plasma is the only thing that makes a PVP game, I can assure you this is the most depressing incentive.
You don't need warp beacons either. You just want one. Get a ship and fight for it or get in line and buy one off the market.
-
6 hours ago, reggamm said:
Most people play in different time zones, speak different languages. Everyone has a different amount of free time to play. Join some kind of coalition? that's if you're accepted. Even if they accept or there are 50 or more players, how much plasma will you be able to get until you are thrown off and who will share the loot? So in words, everything is simple, but in fact, if you don't have a group of people commensurate in number with the ability to protect what you get when you need it, all this will not give anything and will not close the needs. I understand that there are players here who are only for the sake of PVP, but there are also a huge part of people who are mostly PVE, and PVP is only occasionally for the sake of variety.
Some of the people who have plasma are literally getting up at 3am for fights, taking the day off work, etc.. this is endgame content and the people who want it without putting the effort in want it on easy mode.
Compared with what you have to do at the moment to get a plasma, no amount of the current PvE in the game could ever compare with it. PvE is just mining and trucking stuff about, perhaps occasionally getting exploded because you can't run away fast enough.
IMO endgame means competing against other players for something. If you put endgame content behind something where the primary challenge is to endure repetitiveness (like eve PvE, for example) then it diminishes the value of it and isn't really endgame content at all any more.
Feel free to disagree...
-
4 hours ago, Hagbard said:
I think risk reward is OK, but as the system is designed, it leads to a monopoly in the long term. currently most of the alien cores are usually in possession of just one group.
It should be possible as well for individuals to have a chance to get plasma, even if a high risk is involved. sure, the most powerful group should be able to have the best supply of it, but it should never be an exclusive thing. especially if then that brings with it additional power that makes it harder again to ever change the situation as it is usually.
and honestly. i assume it must be boring as .... to sit on the honeypot. 😉
this does not encourage people to challenge the current distribution of force. it mostly just keeps people from even thinking about getting involved in PvP, and showing some will to go out to the PvP zoneThere are like 30-40 people showing up to defend the cores maximum. There are hundreds still playing the game. If you can't take it back even for a short time then you are all bad and we should get to keep it all!
Seriously though everyone is talking like there is no possible way to get plasma because one group is hoarding it. I can think of at least two ways -- join one of the groups fighting over it or form a new group and try to take some plasma. Yes, that's hard, but this is supposed to be endgame content and it's supposed to be hard. Some people in here seem to just want some other way of doing it so they can just sit in the safezone and do a thing that will lead to them getting the endgame rewards without playing the endgame. If you want the reward without playing the game just be patient and wait until you can buy it off the market. It's bound to happen eventually.And yes, it's boring as ... to sit on the honeypot. Come and shoot at it!
-
21 hours ago, Kurosawa said:
maybe try and reply with something useful instead of stroking your epen
Actually there was a real point in there. Admittedly I didn't spoon feed it to you.
-
On 2/5/2023 at 10:53 AM, reggamm said:
Dear developers of the Dual Universe game!
What do you think about the resources that are owned by the two largest corporations?
Are there any plans to add a drop of justice for the rest of the community, which also needs rare resources? In particular, we are talking about plasma and the inability to build a warp beacon without this component. Or do you think that long flights add interest to the game?
Add the possibility of obtaining rare resources in other ways, even if with great risk, or exclude this resource from the components of the construction of a warp beacon.Dear NQ. Game too hard. I can has easy mode?
-
17 hours ago, Sethioz said:
there's no such thing as running good or bad code better, bad code runs bad and good runs good. reason why 2060 gives better performance, is due the architecture probably. which again points to bad / lazy developing. devs never bothered to test on multiple architectures, so even tho 2060 is a lot weaker than 1080, it might actually run DU better as DU devs only wrote it for newer architecture.
There very definitely is! And not just on GPUs. I've written plenty of bad code which ran better in some places than others and then tidied it up and optimised it and the gap closed. A good example is AMD vs Intel (a few years ago now) where the Intels were a lot better at running bad code than the AMDs but after optimising the code the gap would close. Anything that used a 'REP' instruction would do all kinds of bad things for AMD but not intel.
In GPU terms your bad code might make too many accesses accross PCI. One generation might do those 5x faster than the other, so you see it more. Then when you tidy it up and take those out completely the older gen catches up a bit.
But you are right about the newer architecture thing, that happens too. They may be accidentally relying on something that doesn't happen on the older cards and profiling on all the different families is the only way to find some of that. -
On 1/26/2023 at 4:29 AM, Sethioz said:
what program and how do you monitor your GPU usage? i don't believe this for a second that 2070 can run DU with only 50% GPU use, no way. 2070 is worse than 1080 and mine is constantly under 100% use, even when looking in the sky or ground. altho i don't remember it being that bad in early access, so are you talking early access?
also i have never seen memory leaks. i have 16gb 3400mhz DDR4 and when i play DU, it's usually 50-80% full, never seen it creep over 80% and i have some background stuff running too, like firefox, fb messenger, steam, winamp, msi afterburner ..etc. i think the memory leak is specific to some PCs, because i have seen people talk about it in the game chat too, but i never had memory leak issues myself.
could also be that the more RAM you have, the more game uses, because windows is designed this way, if you have more RAM, it uses more before clearing older stuff out of RAM. so it could be that if you have over 16gb, then DU won't function properly anymore. just a speculation tho.
I'm just monitoring using the standard tools that come with windows. It turns out my card is a 2060 and not a 2070. It might have been tuned a little with MSI Afterburner a year ago to optimise for low power etherium mining, I can't remember. I just went over to the D6 market and ran around for a while. I didn't get any lag, but the GPU didn't go over 75% the whole time (it does seem to use more than it used to) and sat at 60% for most of it. The CPUs were in the high 80s most of the time.
What was more interesting is when I stopped moving and just stood still the CPU use went down to around 35% but the GPU use crept up to 100% (just rendering almost the same image over and over). As soon as I start moving the GPU utilisation drops off again, which is a sign that the CPUs are the bottleneck and can only drive the GPU at full speed when they don't have many calculations to do in order to render the scene.
I have seen people complaining before somewhere else about DU performance and saying they were using a 1080. In terms of 'better' and 'worse', that's a very subjective thing. a 1080 is an old card now (they're in the 4000s now I think?) and in my experience with programming for NVIDIA cards (admittedly doing business software not games) is that the generation does matter with these things. Usually the higher generations have faster memory, better handling of memory caches, memory read combines, etc and, most importantly, better and faster access to CPU main memory. So if you have a 1080 and you're running some optimised piece of software (a benchmark, for example) then the 1080 is going to really shine because it has a lot of SMs. But if the code is less optimised then the newer generations of chipset can add more value by accelerating the less well optimised operations. It might very well be that the 1080 is better at running well optimised code but a 2060 is better at running bad GPU code?
Memory leaks do happen for me (with 32G of RAM). I've seen the memory used by DU creep up over time (I usually have about 10G free but when DU creeps up it can take it all) and a lot of others report the same. In particular I noticed it when mission running, I would have to re-log after the 5 hour run through the PvP zone, even though the machine had done very little during that time, or I get bad framerates when trying to land. Also after PvP battles I sometimes need to re-log to get the framerate back to where it should be. -
9 minutes ago, le_souriceau said:
Nice one, actually! And interesting game from gaming history perspective. But I guess their running costs likely less, then NQ ones with DU?
Its true, that most of methodology here not solid (beyond steam data), but guessing/extrapolation game.
We can also use this:
https://twitchtracker.com/games/493826
Twitch views usually reasonably correlate to game population/time spend in (question only by what formula for every particular game).
I'd argue that while high twitch numbers do indicate success of a sort low ones might just indicate that twitch isn't really relevant to the people who play DU. I'm one of those, I'm not really interested in twitch at all but have been playing MMOs for decades. I think DU is the sort of game which is going to appeal more to the long-time gamers so it might very well be that a sizeable portion of the DU player base simply don't care about twitch at all.
-
2 hours ago, Neirin said:
Afaik, most players aren't using steam (most that I interact with, anyway) so I would hesitate to draw any conclusions from there.
My point here is we're just guessing because NQ won't tell us the real numbers. But if we all agree on one consistent guess then either that guess is a high estimate or it's lower than the real numbers. In the latter case someone will probably correct us.
I think it's unlikely that if, say, there are 100 players on steam at any given moment that there are also 2,000 logged in without steam. for me the idea that if the game is peaking under 150 on steam it is peaking at under 1,000 including non-steam sounds about right. We know that there have only ever been under 25,000 unique characters subscribed (and many of those will now be unsubbed, etc) so 1,000 concurrent is probably between 5% and 10% of the whole player base logging in all at once.
Feel free to suggest a better guestimate ... -
We should just adopt some sort of standard assumption like 'take the numbes from steamdb here: https://steamdb.info/app/2000270/info/ and multiply by 5', which is probably about right most of the time. If enough people quote the same stat and actual numbers are higher then NQ will want to correct it ...
-
Rather than making a ton of posts, why not post all of your ideas in one post? Literally half of the front page here is one person's ideas.
-
Why is 'sort by price descending' not a good way to filter the scams? Are you really suggesting there should be some sort of 'filter scams' button so only the people who want to be scammed will get scammed? Or that the game should be some sort of safe space where scammers are not allowed?
Really?
in General Discussions
Posted
When I tried to play in a VM it actually printed 'you can't play in a VM'. That looks pretty deliberate IMO, not just something broken by accident.