Atmosph3rik

We don't know such things beforehand. We are as uninformed as you are. But feel free to take your frustration on us. We will nevertheless keep working for the community, no matter what people say about us. ?

This might be a controversial opinion, but I don't think it's a problem if the community ends up split. It's never going to be possible to reconcile the wishes of players who want to play in a dangerous universe full of risk, violence, and competition over limited resources with those of players who just want a limitless sandbox where PvP, griefing, copying, etc. are all banned. I don't believe you can have "Second Life in space" coexisting along side EVE-style skullduggery and piracy without some pretty terrible compromises on both sides.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling everyone!

You're really grasping at straws here.  None of that is true.
 
People build hangers to show off the stuff they build.  I can promise you that will still happen.
 
Everyone will still need, want, and make voxel libraries.  In fact if these creative instances were shared, then people could build even bigger, better voxel libraries, because they won't have to farm all the resources to build them.
 
And elements and honeycomb that people have to buy, just to see what they look like, but then don't have any use for afterword, are a ridiculously small part of the overall economy.
 
Would you throw a fit if NQ considered adding a way to preview what elements look like?  Or adding the actual dimensions of the elements to the description?  Because that would have the exact same detrimental effect on the economy.

Originally NQ said they were considering some kind of instanced virtual building simulation in the game.  aka creative mode.
 
Then they changed their mind and decided it went against the "vision".  Not saying they don't change their minds a lot.  But in this case they are considering changing it back.
 
Honestly they have an amazing toy here, just in the building part of the game, i don't see any good reason not to let people play with it.  If people are building stuff in a creative mode, they're still in the game.  They're still contributing creatively, and socially to the game.  And if they build stuff that people want to buy, then they're contributing to the game's economy too.
 
 The only difference between someone sitting on the sanctuary moon and building stuff, and sitting in a creative mode instance, would be access to free materials. 
 
They're still in the game.  Still paying a sub too.
 
 
 

Are you guys insane? If you think the crying is heavy now just wait to see how many tears come if you delete hundreds or even thousands of hours of resource collecting, moving dirt and creative energy put into building projects. People would lose the will to ever start again. These are the people who are not active on the forum after every patch complaining because they have been quietly producing beautiful and awe inspiring features on the land, sky and ocean.
 
A wipe will not fix anything, it will quite definitely destroy the game for anyone who plays it for creative purposes. The amount of effort that goes into finishing a creative project *read 'creative' not just a bunch of engines and airbrakes smashed together in a mess or a box with some factory units inside*, even for an M core ship, let alone a 25 L core building complex, is immense and we were led to believe that this world we are building will be persistent into the future of the DU universe. Not wiped out completely just because a few people cannot adapt and overcome a new limitation to their economic progress.

And then there are the extortion fees Steam charges you everytime 'it' sells your game. I think NQ are smarter than that. I have already seen some prime time adverts for DU on the regular interweb in good places. Far better to spend money on advertising than to give Steam a cut of your profits.

And I need a dislike button for people pushing their own agenda on completely unrelated topics  
 
But I think dislike buttons don't foster constructivity or lead to good relations - all they do is giving people a way to vent at the expense of the receiver who might not feel welcome anymore, even if there would be plenty of others who share their view. If we want to keep the general spirit of the community on the constructive side and people commenting in a way that's adding to the topic and kindness and prospering conversation instead of flame wars and trolling, a dislike button is out of the question. If someone wants to disagree, like I do with the request for a dislike button and thereby give somewhat negative feedback, they should be willing to take the effort and extra step to address it and provide a reason, as I feel I'm doing right now.
 
Someone I don't remember once said that it takes 10 positive interactions to make up for 1 negative one. Yet I feel that some frustrated or vexed people are more likely to vent by smacking a dislike button than people who are satisfied are likely to remember to like something before moving on. Speaking for myself only, but if I encounter something I strongly disagree with, it makes me slow down and try to fix it, while something I like makes me want more and carry on, getting in the flow and being more likely to forget about giving feedback. The like button enables me to give that feedback, even if I have nothing to add, which is fine in that situation. The dislike button on the other hand enables me to give feedback too, but leaves the reasoning behind it completely in the open - just saying "that's wrong" doesn't help anyone improve. "How do you like my new ice cream flavor?" - "I don't!" - "Why, what's wrong, too sweet?" - "I just don't like it." - "Too fruity? Too sour? Too soft? What shall I do?" - "Search for another job!" ... there will be some grinning but it doesn't help the producer move forward and improve.
 
Some people would hit the dislike button for bad grammar or errors in spelling, targeting a non-native language writer, while some would hit the like button for a violation of etiquette or trolling. In my opinion both is wrong, but the dislike does more bad to the non-native writer than it would do good on the troll, while a like on the writer could encourage him to overcome his reluctance to continue to write in that foreign language he's learning, boost his confidence and in time he might improve on his language skills, whereas the troll may experience positive reinforcement too, but be handled by forum staff sooner or later. A constructive member that turned away is harder to be reached out to.
 
A "disagree" button maybe, but again, if people want to disagree they should do so by writing a reply and provide a better idea or at least explain what they think is wrong with it.
 
However, I think we could do with a "please don't quote like that" button... shamelessly pushing my own agenda here after I feel I wrote enough to make up for it above ?

I think a lot of people are looking for Dual Universe to be a lot of different things, and i hope it can be all those things eventually.  But it's not all of them yet.
 
Personally what i was looking for was a building game, Minecraft with better graphics.  Right now Dual Universe is exactly that, and better then i ever could ever have imagined.
 
Look at how popular Minecraft is, it's a crazy successful game.
 
Having watched this project go from a few pieces of concept art, and a discussion forum, to what it is now.  From where i'm sitting things are looking pretty damn good.  I really hope to see the game become everything that they envisioned it to be.  And it's possible that NQ was a bit too ambitious.  But i don't see any evidence that the game isn't on track to be something amazing.  
 
As far as i can see, NQ is making the game as fast as they can, it sucks if the game sounded interesting to you, but nothing in it interests you right now.  But what was NQ supposed to do differently?  
 
Should they have built the game from start to finish in secret, without telling anyone about it, just so people wouldn't have to live with the disappointment of knowing about it, but not being able to play all of it yet?
 
They could have settled for just making Minecraft with better graphics.  Or they could have made Eve with better graphics.  Either of those would have been a hell of a lot easier.
 
But neither of those would have been half as good as what we have right now, to me at least.  /shrug
 
 

For me this is a builders-game, and so you build what you like.
Lotsa people got a diffrent  opinion about this game but it is only 3 months open to the world!
 
What was your goal when you started playing this game?
 
 

I think a lot of people are looking for Dual Universe to be a lot of different things, and i hope it can be all those things eventually.  But it's not all of them yet.
 
Personally what i was looking for was a building game, Minecraft with better graphics.  Right now Dual Universe is exactly that, and better then i ever could ever have imagined.
 
Look at how popular Minecraft is, it's a crazy successful game.
 
Having watched this project go from a few pieces of concept art, and a discussion forum, to what it is now.  From where i'm sitting things are looking pretty damn good.  I really hope to see the game become everything that they envisioned it to be.  And it's possible that NQ was a bit too ambitious.  But i don't see any evidence that the game isn't on track to be something amazing.  
 
As far as i can see, NQ is making the game as fast as they can, it sucks if the game sounded interesting to you, but nothing in it interests you right now.  But what was NQ supposed to do differently?  
 
Should they have built the game from start to finish in secret, without telling anyone about it, just so people wouldn't have to live with the disappointment of knowing about it, but not being able to play all of it yet?
 
They could have settled for just making Minecraft with better graphics.  Or they could have made Eve with better graphics.  Either of those would have been a hell of a lot easier.
 
But neither of those would have been half as good as what we have right now, to me at least.  /shrug
 
 

I think a lot of people are looking for Dual Universe to be a lot of different things, and i hope it can be all those things eventually.  But it's not all of them yet.
 
Personally what i was looking for was a building game, Minecraft with better graphics.  Right now Dual Universe is exactly that, and better then i ever could ever have imagined.
 
Look at how popular Minecraft is, it's a crazy successful game.
 
Having watched this project go from a few pieces of concept art, and a discussion forum, to what it is now.  From where i'm sitting things are looking pretty damn good.  I really hope to see the game become everything that they envisioned it to be.  And it's possible that NQ was a bit too ambitious.  But i don't see any evidence that the game isn't on track to be something amazing.  
 
As far as i can see, NQ is making the game as fast as they can, it sucks if the game sounded interesting to you, but nothing in it interests you right now.  But what was NQ supposed to do differently?  
 
Should they have built the game from start to finish in secret, without telling anyone about it, just so people wouldn't have to live with the disappointment of knowing about it, but not being able to play all of it yet?
 
They could have settled for just making Minecraft with better graphics.  Or they could have made Eve with better graphics.  Either of those would have been a hell of a lot easier.
 
But neither of those would have been half as good as what we have right now, to me at least.  /shrug
 
 

Hihihi! I'm thrilled to be here as the newest member of the Dual Universe Community team. ICYMI, you can read my introduction post here.
Tell me a little about yourself. What brought you to Dual Universe? 
Ask me anything. I'll answer what I can. 

This reminds me of PVP in Everquest.  Where from time to time you would get disconnected from the server in the middle of a fight.  But in the heat of the moment, not realize it, and just think you were winning.  Then suddenly it dawns on you, why is the other player just running into that wall, and not fighting back, or losing any HP...??
 
It sucks when it happens when the fight was going your way.  But it happens.
 
All i see in that video is a desync.  The actual desync probably happened a few minutes earlier, and the moment that the ship vanished is when the servers caught up.
 
But to accuse someone of cheating just because the server choked, and it happened to benefit them, is a bit over the top.
 
Accusing NQ of cheating on behalf of a player, with no evidence, is just silly. 

As I think of it think right now (after emotional heat cooled down) this could have been just a huge desync (and probably it was).
But the amount of time and resources (a lot of fuel, more than 2000 ammo) wasted on this fight are much higher than average interception, and after an hour long PvP interaction it ended the way it's represented in the video.

I think this should be taken into consideration by NQ to fix, as it makes our gameplay very unpleasant.
My apologies to Hyperion (can talk only about myself though) for this kind of overreacting.

I think what they're saying is that IF we had the ability to adjust the position of, and rotate elements with more precision, then we wouldn't need the canopy glass triangles to "snap together".
 
Right now when you hold CTRL elements can be moved in larger increments.  What we really need is another modifier key, that allows you to move and rotate them in much smaller increments also.
 
Having elements snap together is nice.  But i think to most builders, that's a far less important feature then the ability to position them with precision.
 
The square glass panels we have now are already insanely frustrating to get into position.  So if it's just a matter of snapping together easily, i say let us have the triangles, we can handle a little frustration. ?
 
I'm super excited to hear more about this either way though, so please do tell us more when you can.
 
In general i would love to hear more about all the problems.  Understanding why we can't have stuff makes it SOOOO much easier to accept.  The biggest one for me would be the "voxel vector editor", why is NQ hesitant to implement it?

Dear Noveans, it's time for another DevBlog!
 
Dual Universe is a vast game. Its gameplay has layers, and we keep adding depth to them as often as possible (though not nearly as frequently as we would like to!). As developers, we love to dive into these depths. Moreover, we want to make sure everybody understands why we design features the way we do. DevBlogs are perfect to address these topics, so here we are!
 
Today, we will tackle two major features which shall be released in an upcoming patch: Construct Intellectual Property Protection and Blueprints Duplication. Without further ado, let's jump right into it.

CONSTRUCT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION
 
The objective of this feature is quite simple: allow a player to protect their creations when they distribute them in game (whether it is by selling them or trading them). We want to make sure that no unauthorized player will access the intellectual property content of a construct they did not create themselves. In particular, we want to protect:
 
The possibility to create a Blueprint of the construct The possibility to copy voxels from the construct to another construct (however, intra construct copies are still allowed) The access to Lua scripts from Control Units The access to HTML content from Screen Units  
This is how it works: each construct has a creator. A creator can be either the player or the Organization who deployed the original Core Unit. We can call this initial construct the “Master Construct”. When an Organization is the creator, any legate will be considered to be the creator.

When making a copy of a Master Construct via a Blueprint, a set of Digital Rights Management (DRM) protection flags are set automatically, both on the construct as a whole AND individually on each of the Control Units and Screen Units in the Blueprint. The newly created construct can have a new owner, different from its creator, but it remembers who was its creator. When trying to access Lua or Html content, the DRM flag of the corresponding Element (i.e. a Control Unit or a Screen Unit) will be checked to determine if the new owner is allowed to do this action. The creator is always allowed to do that. 
 
Similarly, when trying to make a Blueprint or to copy voxels, the DRM flag of the whole construct is checked. By default, since the original Blueprint sets all the flags to “not allowed”, a new owner will have no rights to do these actions.

If you deploy a new Control Unit, or a new Screen Unit on your construct that is DRM protected, they will be deployed without the DRM flag activated; therefore, you will be allowed to modify these Elements in particular. 
 
Moreover, the creator of the construct can also decide to come and remove the DRM protection of the whole construct (by right-clicking on the Core Unit), or of one particular Control Unit/Screen Unit if he wants to (warning: this action is not reversible). Make sure, however, to check if the DRM flag for voxels is global or not. If it is, and you add a beautiful sculpture to the construct, you will not be able to copy-paste it out of the construct. You should rather make your own Master Construct for this kind of action.
 
BLUEPRINT DUPLICATION

The Blueprint duplication will let players create copies of Blueprints, which in turns other players will use to generate a limited quantity of constructs.
To understand this feature better, allow us to make the distinction between Core Blueprints and regular Blueprints.
 
Core Blueprints
When the creator of a construct, or any player owning the right to create a Blueprint from a construct generates a Blueprint from said construct, this is a Core Blueprint.

Its creation is free. It can be used as the simple construct-save it used to be. But more importantly, this is what you’ll use to generate Regular Blueprints.

It is stored in the player inventory and behaves as a regular information item. A Core Blueprint is never lost on death. However, a player can generate a core Blueprint only if he is the creator of a construct or if the DRM flag of the construct has been lifted.

All ancient Blueprints (as in, Blueprints from before the Blueprint Duplication patch) will be converted into Core Blueprints.
 
Regular Blueprints

By right-clicking on a Core blueprint, a player can choose to generate a regular Blueprint, or just “Blueprint” for short. A regular Blueprint, is in reality a one-run Blueprint, and is always the result of a duplication of a Core Blueprint.

It is a standard information item, and because it is a one-run Blueprint, it can only be used once and disappears on use.

Once created, regular Blueprints are delivered at once in the player’s inventory as soon as he validates the duplication. Regular Blueprints are weight-less and volume-less.
 
We hope this DevBlog gives you better visibility and understanding of what’s coming next in Dual Universe. Don’t hesitate to tell us what you would like to see next!
 
See you very soon in Dual Universe

 
Want to discuss this announcement? Click HERE. ?

 

I think what they're saying is that IF we had the ability to adjust the position of, and rotate elements with more precision, then we wouldn't need the canopy glass triangles to "snap together".
 
Right now when you hold CTRL elements can be moved in larger increments.  What we really need is another modifier key, that allows you to move and rotate them in much smaller increments also.
 
Having elements snap together is nice.  But i think to most builders, that's a far less important feature then the ability to position them with precision.
 
The square glass panels we have now are already insanely frustrating to get into position.  So if it's just a matter of snapping together easily, i say let us have the triangles, we can handle a little frustration. ?
 
I'm super excited to hear more about this either way though, so please do tell us more when you can.
 
In general i would love to hear more about all the problems.  Understanding why we can't have stuff makes it SOOOO much easier to accept.  The biggest one for me would be the "voxel vector editor", why is NQ hesitant to implement it?

When you have to leave your house every day to go to work.  Not leaving your house for two days is the coolest of plans. ?
 
 

I think what they're saying is that IF we had the ability to adjust the position of, and rotate elements with more precision, then we wouldn't need the canopy glass triangles to "snap together".
 
Right now when you hold CTRL elements can be moved in larger increments.  What we really need is another modifier key, that allows you to move and rotate them in much smaller increments also.
 
Having elements snap together is nice.  But i think to most builders, that's a far less important feature then the ability to position them with precision.
 
The square glass panels we have now are already insanely frustrating to get into position.  So if it's just a matter of snapping together easily, i say let us have the triangles, we can handle a little frustration. ?
 
I'm super excited to hear more about this either way though, so please do tell us more when you can.
 
In general i would love to hear more about all the problems.  Understanding why we can't have stuff makes it SOOOO much easier to accept.  The biggest one for me would be the "voxel vector editor", why is NQ hesitant to implement it?

This is something I'd love to help with, if I can.  

Where are you seeing the lack of engagement currently? I know the joke around the forums is that nobody posts on the forums, but that has and will continue to be different now that I'm on board.

Please elaborate, and I will bring your concerns to the rest of the community and support teams.

I should give you a disclaimer: I'm attempting to understand this as a person on my third week at NQ and a non-programmer, so "snap together" is the best verbiage I have at the moment. ?

It's definitely more complicated than that, and I'm currently attempting to get a programmer to explain it to me in a way that programming-savvy players can appreciate.

Even with the precision move keys?

Hello, not sure its necessary to create a ticket for this...
 
I successfully canceled my subscription by clicking the link given in the email from Xsolla: "If at anytime you would like to cancel just follow this link unsubscribe."
 
Anyway its really a borderline commercial practice, to "force" people with an automatic renewal of there membership. You absolutely don't have any mean to refuse it before the payment.
 
About this, it could be a good idea to create a ticket...
 

That is a lot of tinfoil hat right there. It is more likely that demand for space cores spiked because of the safezone confirmation (before that it wasn't even clear whether Alioth is staying safe) and the insane megaprojects some people plan on doing with over 100 cores for a single spacestation (I know of at least 5 of those from the top of my head, there are likely a lot more).

So people bought those up, as well as some "investors" who try to make bank with it and profit off the situation. Everything else is supply and demand.
 
But this is just another theory, just with a bit less "out there" 1+1..