Shredder
-
Posts
163 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Shredder
-
-
13 hours ago, Endstar said:
I'm against a wipe as no one has given a reason for why or how anything would be different than today 18 months post a wipe.
I will happily support a wipe if there was a reasonable why provided.
Wipe means more players at the start, which helps attract other players.Which means there’s a greater chance the game will still exist.
-
37 minutes ago, Daphne Jones said:
I see a number of posts saying to put the space market in the PVP zone. That will just insure that it never functions as a market since most of us won't be able to get there with the certainty necessary for successful business. Whoever the top PVP org is at any given time doesn't really need their own market for internal trade - they just do their internal trade internally. And no one else will use it.
It would have to have a big tax advantage. Maybe make it have 0 tax, and significantly increase taxes at all safe space markets.
-
1 hour ago, Vilhelm said:
Wipe will mean NQ cannot fix any issues in long term perspective which is bad If we think about playing DU in this long term perspective. NQ needs to learn how to fix the issues by introducing new game systems/loops/mechanics like other longterm projects do. Wipe wont help with that is just a temporary hype solution and then we will be back with new unresolved issues.
I agree that wipe helps with hype, which helps boost initial numbers, but there also needs to be additional gameplay loops within 6k on this of launch to keep them.
-
Pretty pointless poll as the majority of people that still play are builders.
Wipe is needed for the game to survive.
-
41 minutes ago, Doombad said:
Not one of those "things" remotely justify a wipe.
A wipe will attract more players, the game needs more players to survive.
Thats all the justification that’s needed. Period.
-
1 hour ago, blundertwink said:
Hard / impossible to estimate current subs (those MMO trackers aren't very accurate) but that seems within the likely ballpark.
Consider that NQ has two offices (in expensive locations!) staffed with a lot of expensive engineering talent and has ~50+ employees overall. Supporting 50 employees at only $80k/year is already $300k/month.
By comparison, the company I work for has fewer employees, no office, slim server costs, and only a handful of engineers -- and needs $900K+ in revenue still to make everyone happy and have some room to grow...that's with fairly good margins, too.
So...50k or even 100k subs isn't a ton of revenue for a company of NQ's size.
Plus, they need ~20% of their subscriber count in fresh subs every month until the end of time just to combat churn rates (assuming 80% retention, which is considered very good for a subscription product).
Unfortunately, I don't see how they keep going post-release without closing one of their two offices and doing some layoffs, which truly sucks.
Keep in mind that other niche MMOs with slim pops probably have far less overhead and have a more carefully considered monetization strategy like FTP + microtransactions --- you might not like these models, but they do work.
Well, if these numbers are even remotely correct, then NQ can’t afford to care too much about the current user base. They need to do everything they can to bring in significant numbers of new subscribers.
The VC company will be well aware of this, I assume therefore that there will be a huge advertising push before launch, which will include advertising a reset/wipe of the game to help attract people.
People seem quite down beat about the prospects of hitting 50-100k users, I’m not. This game is pretty unique with the freedom to build and the potential for pvp. If the VC company didn’t think significant numbers were possible then they would’ve cut their losses sometime ago.
NQ should hope to attract significant numbers from EVE at the very least, where there is a big desire to find a new single shard type game. And those guys tend to be long term subscribers. There are also many games that attempt to bring together building and pvp, because the market is huge (thinking ark/conan/atlas etc), DU feels to be the closest to achieving that in a single shard type environment.
-
5 minutes ago, kulkija said:
Source?
Anecdotal from discord & forums, nothing verifiable.
Actually the 4K current subs number I think is always quoted as that’s what those MMORPG tracking websites estimate.
I believe the 50k - 100k needed subs, is based on current costs, estimated by staff numbers at NQ.
-
1 minute ago, kulkija said:
I agree.
Any reason for a wipe will be bad and sends a messaged "we at NQ did not know what we were doing".
There’s an estimated 4K current subscribers, and DU need an estimated 50k - 100k to be viable. If NQ prioritise current players over new ones in any way, THEN they wouldn’t know what they’re doing.
New starters arnt going to care what NQ did during beta, release is when a promise of a ‘persistent world’ is deemed to truly start. Anything before then is fair game and the viability of the company is all anyone should care about. -
21 minutes ago, kulkija said:
When you start (after wipe) You have small ready configured base in your nano-pack. It has one MU ready configured and ready for use.
As you have played before you'll know how to deploy your free base and how to use MU.
You also get one free hover in you nano ready to be deployed and some gas.
Your tile is also ready.
Then you have probably 200k quanta. So you are ready to go rigth out of the package.
Just enjoy your game.
If you had participated last weekend PTU test you already know all this.ps. Wipe is wery wery bad idea, but if NQ decides to do it then there in nothing we can do about it.
I think a wipe is a great idea to attract new players, and I’d love starting off from scratch via this FTUE alongside them all.
-
1 minute ago, Nidhugg said:
Ah so a wipe is completely unnecessary. But if I understand you will need to do some of it yo be able to get on you way in game.
Don’t think you have to do any of it, as soon as the lander lands you’re free to do your own thing.
-
37 minutes ago, Nadbreath said:
i had the same issue has this been insergated at present Rev.
I couldn’t get the DU button to work at all, on either of my characters.
-
So many people seem to be blind to (or want to ignore) the fact that current numbers will not sustain this game, even double or triple current numbers will result in the servers being turned off within a year or so. Which is a de facto ultimate wipe.
This game needs 50k+ subscribers to keep the lights on. In order to do that NQ has to do a massive advertising push at launch, and needs to advertise launch as ‘the true start’, that’s their best shot. This requires a reasonably comprehensive wipe (at the minimum the removal of all quanta and all skill points.)
All you people saying ‘what’s the point’ need to realise that that’s what new joiners want, they don’t want to feel like they’re starting on the back foot.
I get that within a week or two the rich people will be rich again.
I get that knowledge of the game is worth more than everything else so it will never be a level playing field.
I get that it’s annoying that people will loose everything they’ve worked for.
I get that people have spent a bunch of money on this already.
None of this matters, the fact is, a wipe will pull in far far more people than dual universe will loose from beta leavers. And numbers are all that matters to give the game a chance of being persistent long term.
I hope they wipe everything except static structures (with elements removed) and BPs. That way they can advertise the game as being ‘wiped except for aesthetic structures’.
-
10 hours ago, JayleBreak said:
You should introduce players to the flashlight early on. If they land on a spot at night, or use the VR station to a location at night Its hard to see.
Also, its nice to emphasise the loss of inventory on death or exiting VR, but you should qualify it by excluding Tools and Data Files (types in the drop down).
The final step of clicking on the POA Manager screen won't work if a tool is selected, which is likely the case if the last action was to fuel up your speeder. And that will be frustrating to someone who hasn't experienced it a thousand times
I thought the same thing re flashlight, but to be fair most first person games have flashlights and the activation button is always L so I hardly think people need a prompt.
-
Really enjoyed the FTUE, it hits the mark in terms of keeping the tutorial simple and only covering the basics, a good intro. Couple of points:
- At the end of the tutorial I still have my refueler selected, therefore clicking on the tutorial screen doesn't do anything. Need a prompt to tell us to put refuel tool away first.
- The 'what too do next/tutorial screen' is quite small, which is fine, but the chair in front of it makes it difficult to get close to read the text.
- The 'Lets do it' button must surely kick off a tutorial? but it doesn't do anything for me.
One thing I liked about the previous FTUE at the start of beta was that you were immediately surrounded by lots of other players, which meant it really felt like a busy single shard game. The issue with that was obviously the horrendous lag and confusing environment that it caused, so I think this new FTUE is much better in that regard. However I wonder whether there is someway to still capture that sense that this is a true single shard sandbox from the outset (there are so many games that pretend to be but really arnt, this is the biggest selling point of the game).
-
1 minute ago, blazemonger said:
What the devblog says it could be a good start and I will certainly do a run though.
I'm a bit afraid that his will be much lke the oldskool EVE FTUE, basically going "hey, welcome, here is a ship and now F off"The first impression I get is that it's not enough and it will just drive ne wplayers up a wall if they even can find it in themselves to stay that long. The tutorials are still mostly as they are form what I read and frankly, those are not great and very rough. The UX for them is also plain bad as the result of NQ not having the room to really let the players run around and figure it out.. it's mostly a "click the buttons" experience.
But we'll see tomorrow..They must tackle the range of horrible and frustrating first time experiences, such as ‘my ship has flipped over how do I turn it over again’ or needing to run ‘configure as flying construct’, there’s many of these types of things which make the start a painful experience.
-
All sounds really good, looking forward to testing it. I hope there is sufficient hand holding as the learning curve is very steep at the start.
-
I think the speed/mass changes in Athena will have an effect on this.
Voxel tanks are going to have a sizeable effect on top speeds for mid sized ships, I think it’s likely we will see some shield only designs again.
-
3 hours ago, ADCOne said:
How many extra hours of flight time did you have to do at slower speeds, when you were moving cargo - or was that ignored and not tested?
(I do mean cargo not missions)
Do shorter routes/missions. Annoyed that means less money? It’s called game balance, missions have been too lucrative and too easy.
-
It will all be back to the same situation around a month after release. The problem with the economy isn’t that people are rich, it’s due to the lack of a loss mechanic.
More Pvp or pve or element degradation or something similar needs to be put in place for the market to function properly. -
NQ-WANDERER: “If you don't want to use weapons, or make friends with/hire an escort or scout, or put in the 10 min of flying and maneuvering and watching radar to go around the pirates, or pay for the cells to warp past them, and still think you deserve the rewards of flying through pvp space without substantial risk of being a pvp target, you may need to reconsider what you expect from an area the player-base at large refers to as "pvp-space".”
One of the best comments I’ve read from NQ.
-
6 hours ago, Taelessael said:
Right... where to start...
@NQ-Wanderer : A bit more info on the nature of how the pvp rebalance / speed changes / stasis weapons / alien cores would allow players to provide feedback and or points of view on things that you may not have thought of. Sooner rather than later may subsequently make any potentially required changes of plan a bit less short-notice on the devs and less likely to outrage the player-base if you missed something big.@The anti-pvp players: I am a mission-runner, I have run well over 100 missions solo in pvp space in a ship that wont win against a purpose-built pvp ship, never lost a ship, only been shot at twice (both relatively recent, both when I was being lazy about avoiding pirates).
-You can just watch radar and fly clear of the pipe, it isn't hard, you can avoid pvp entirely about 99% of the time doing this.
-Your cargo-heavy hauler will never outrun a purpose-built interceptor regardless of speed-caps.
-You can typically fit heavier than an interceptor and rely on your combined shield/hull hp to win the fight if you match their weapons.
-Your requested "security status" attribute would be more quickly achievable by banding together to put up a watch-list/bounty-board for the people/ships that attack you.
-If you don't want to use weapons, or make friends with/hire an escort or scout, or put in the 10 min of flying and maneuvering and watching radar to go around the pirates, or pay for the cells to warp past them, and still think you deserve the rewards of flying through pvp space without substantial risk of being a pvp target, you may need to reconsider what you expect from an area the player-base at large refers to as "pvp-space".
-If you wish to discuss methods to avoid/overcome pirates in pvp space with me then DM me on discord and I will answer when I can, but don't expect a "push button to disable pvp" answer, you must expend some level or both time and resources, and everyone gets unlucky once in a while.Good to see some very sensible comments from NQ.
-
1 hour ago, VandelayIndustries said:
Your hauler will always be second class. A semi not gonna be able to handle a tank. Pvp ships are built for war. Your hauler will be slower cause its carrying more. It's always been this way in any game. You just want a "get out of pvp free" button...in the pvp zone. Not gonna happen buddy.
All of your posts are spot on, but sadly the forum is top heavy with the carebears that will only ever be happy with one thing - the equivalent of a PVP on off button.
-
5 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:
Having an artificial speed limit base on core size (or any other such mechanic) is fundamentally wrong and goes against all premises made in this game where the flight model is based around real physics based attributes like mass, drag and inertia.
To me this looks like NQ for nth time has been blindsided by the chance to make "content" at a low dev cost, and by doing so decided to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"... again.
The real problem here is that NQ has been designing elements willy-nilly without any master plan for size and weight and how this will affect game play.
Ah the moronic view that something by being closer to real physics is somehow better. Better game play makes games better. Because it’s a GAME
-
Nah, current adjusters look better
[Poll] wipe or no wipe
in General Discussions
Posted
I agree that they need to continue to release content at a decent rate post release if they want to maintain the player base. I do think there is enough content to keep people around for 6 months or so.