gyurka66

I'm sorry you feel that way. Trying to make a point and defend an idea against a bunch of people you do not know can be intimidating. If you look around, there are a lot of very lively and nuanced debates going on. However, some points are less open to interpretation as they have been specifically stated by the developers. For example, the developers have explicitly stated how the payment structure (subscription) will work. Sometimes people come along and suggest that the game should be free for various reasons, and sometimes they even manage to make one or two good points (among all the other bad ones). But whatever their argument, the point is irrelevant as the developers have spoken. And although the community's opinion is important, the developers get the final say. So too have they stated that this is an online-only game, and to suggest otherwise would be like suggesting that they make the Civilization series into a first person shooter or add machine guns to For Honor. That would just make it a different game entirely. 
 
Plus, this game is made by a small company who currently have no source of revenue other than kickstarter and investors. All of their money must go to developing the game that they promised to make, not a separate singleplayer game. Perhaps they will work more on the lone wolf gameplay in the future, but for now a limited, online creative mode is all we are going to get. Personally, I think that is even perhaps too much towards singleplayer. I would be happy if they didn't include it in the game and made R&D into a resource intensive and worthwhile aspect of gameplay. 

It's like talking to unimaginative robots on these forums.
So much for the 'ideas box' forums, say anything, get an automated support ticket response.

Well, maybe it's something that should be considered as an option, that's what I'm saying in my post, a single player area offline would be useful.
 
I was under the impression a forum was for constructive opinions, ideas and discussion, I feel like you're just throwing down 'dev facts' at me for the hell of it with the underlying point of 'nope it can't happen because it just can't'.
 
I mean there is no reason it can't happen, we already know a simulated game instance can be hosted on a computer, it's not a difficult task to make it an option it's entirely up to NQ's prerogative.

So i was thinking, in many science fiction books/games/films there are always many bio-technological implants or gadgets that after one injection or augmentation are then permanent part of your body, like Infra-red camera directly to your eye so then you can see in darkness or muscle strengthening to make you jump higher etc. I thought it would be great to have at least some possibilities to do things like that in DU 

Usually in most games, you move items from an inventory to another easily, because they're not physically in the world. What I would like to see in DU, is a mix of "virtual items" and "real items". Examples:
 
-You have 1 kg of iron that you want to move into your ship cargo. You can store in in your personal inventory, move to the ship, and click-drag the iron into the cargo inventory (like in most games). 
 
-You have 10 ton of iron that you want to move into your ship cargo. Since your personal inventory is limited, you're likely going to use some kind of conveyor system
 
-You want to recharge your ship batteries. Usually would work like that: there's a physical element fixed into your ship called "battery", and a virtual item called "battery _%"; the battery element doesn't move, you would need to charge the virtual item using another element in your base, and then move it into your ship element "battery" by using your virtual inventory. 
What if instead we are able to move directly the "battery" element? Like if the nanoformer is able to detach an element from a grid, and let you replace it into another grid, mantaining all its specifics like energy amount % (battery), items stored (cargo), and so on. 
This would greatly improve the gameplay aspects, and the depth. This would create gameplay for:
-ship mantainance
-ship loading infrastructure
-physical cargo (imagine you want to sell like 100 already built batteries)
-ship design (ease to access to battery slots or other)
-combat (if a pirate is fighting vs a cargo with physical elements, he has to be careful to not break his loot)
-more
 
Why someone would want to move an already built battery instead of building a new one: building time, recharge time, etc... it just need to be more convenient, anything can be balanced. 
I'm not saying that anything has to be a physical item that exists in the gameworld, but just a few elements.

Some are destroyed, some are dropped, you lose everything on you, so the Rez nodes won't end up being used as teleporters.

Do you want to show your musical skills? Do you want a unique music for a ship, station or an entire faction? It is possible to do it without MP3 (that uses a lot of memory) by using midi creator (music studio). You can trade music and use it in various projects. The process of creation on picture (stolen from the trash game apb reloaded)
 
 

YEAH RIGHT LOL
so did you program any sweet single shard sandbox mmo's lately? As a tabletop game designer, I can say from experience that balance is incredibly hard. 
 
Perfect balance is boring (as a creator, then every decision would actually be irrelevant), and asymmetrical balance has to be weighed very carefully or else the metagame is solved too easily (as soon as a certain type of weapon blueprint is the best, then there is no longer any real choice once again). In the realm of video games where balance is no longer just a matter of dictating the rules, it gets even harder. The human part of the equation becomes a part of balance, and then you get skill threshold dependent options. Plenty of AAA studios struggle with balancing FIXED GAME ELEMENTS little lone an engine for creating customized ones.

No, but also that's why I'm building underground. Building on the surface is not mandatory. Also, NQ should not put 100000000000000000 safezons in the game, cause it would be a joke of a game afterwards. It wouldn't be a sandbox after that, it would be a playbox for babies. You wanna be nomadic or an explorer? You forfeit safety of the safezones or protection bubbles.
 
The game is about Risk and Reward on some playstyles. If NQ was to make systems without Arkships (and safezones that way) being richer in minerals of rarer quality and a value, then you should have to worry about parking your ship pel mel in the middle of nowhere. Stupidity should be punished by any means. You go up against a heavily armored guy and you brought a 9mm pistol and no extra magazines? Tough luck, stupidty is punished. Likewise, you go into "nomadic" stuff? Guess what, if you are found having parked your ship in the middle of nowhere and a person blows it up, tough luck, your risk, you fault for parking the ship in the middle of nowhere.
 
The point is for Safezones to be far and few between (since the Arkships were few to begin with). Players are the ones to build artificial safezones (Protection Bubbles). But those things are for CIVILISED and COLONONISED space. Nomads roam where there's no civilisation or society, as well as explorers.
 
Some playstyles are easy and free of risk, like living in a safezone and being a creator or RPer. Som other have risk, as you are doing said playtstyles far from safety and for that, you are rewarded accordingly. This is why I chose to :
 
1) got a safe base somwhere underground WITH other people, so I don't have to forfeit sleep - it's an MMO and it shouldn't cater to antisocial people who want to play the game solo and be on equal footing with 1000 people orgs.
 
2) embrace risk and reward and accept that my mistakes, should be penalised by the game in one way or another.
 
 
As I  said, let's not ask for the game to be a playbox for babies, complete with the admins being nanies, because Lil' 30 Year Old Timmy didn't use his hgher cognitive functions to realise the guy who told him "give me all your money and I'll double them!!!111" was a scammer.Having safezones EVERWHERE , is a step towards making the game for Lil' Timmy, who's a person who doesn't want to engage his mind to the slightest and being on equal ground with a person that does.
 
First it's the safezones being everywhere, then it's the admins banning pirates and then the game ends up with nobody playing.

A nomadic fleet wouldn't have to guard its stuff any more than someone with their stuff on a planet or station(outside a safe zone). With shields that have 48hr reinforcement timers I'd put that on a really big ship then put all my stuff in there. Something huge like an EVE carrier or super(or, god forbid, a titan).

False. Nomadic lifeform was abandoned because it prevented field farming and stopped the progress of technology.
 
But gamewise would you want to stay logged in all night to guard your stuff.

The servers shut down for the last time a few hours ago.
 
 

 

 
 
It's really sad how WB/Turbine are treating their customers after all these years. The players were promised that if something like this ever happened, that the source code would be released to the public, but that never happened and all communication with the players ceased over the last few months, going so far as to shut down the forums. Even the facebook page was removed tonight.
 
I feel really bad for many of the older players of AC1 (people in their 60s, 70s and 80s even) who don't really have anywhere else to go now. They've been playing AC1 since it released and now WB just shut the door on them and wouldn't even give them the time of day. 
 
Personally, I think going so far as to shut down the facebook page even just comes across as needlessly punitive. 

From what I've seen in the videos of the game, the voxel system seems a bit limited. I'm not sure what other cool features the devs intend for this system but might I add a few suggestions:
User created structures should be able to be textured. -They should also be able to be fine tuned into creating complex polygons. Voxel structures should also have the ability to be given functionality, such as designing your own thrusters or what not.

After watching the January Dev Diary I can't help but wonder will there be a type of weathering/aging of constructs.
 
To clarify: In snow biomes will constructs
start to have snow and ice form on them?
 
In forest and underwater biomes will plants start to grow around or on the constructs? Will they start to rust depending on the material used?
 
Personally, I would love the though of login after a month or two of playing and find vines growing up the wall of my base. Or a tree growing over the top of a wall I had near a cliff face. It would give me the feeling that the story of DU is actually looking for a home and not just a place to build my next ship.

I would like the ability to manage my market orders and other things via an app on my phone, so I would much rather have an API that allows me to do that than a limited one that only allows read access to my market orders.
 
I mean it's 2017 and you still can't manage your skill queue offline in Eve, I don't particularly understand the reasoning behind that anymore. 
 
There are plenty of things we'll need to be logged in to do, like building/prospecting/mining/etc, but do I really need to have a gaming laptop with me everywhere I go to make updates to my orders or move some skills around my training queue from time to time?

I liked the idea back in Star Wars Galaxies:
 
When a character clones, their health and action statistics are reduced by 75% for a period of 10 minutes. There are three ways of healing the cloning sickness:
 
- Waiting it out
 
- Watching or listening to an entertainer (in a cantina, hotel, tavern, theater or any player structure).
 
- Visiting the surgical droid in most major Cloning Facilities that will remove the cloning sickness for a fee. This fee amount increases with the level of your character (for a CL 90 character the fee is 5000 credits).

Greetings.
 
I am a passionate role player. I see a small problem: A server for all players. I have no way to go to an RP shard to find like-minded people. It is difficult with strangers. I can not know who does roleplay and who does not.
 
My wish:
Give me a command to color my display name.
 
Here's an example:

Type /rp on
to turn your name white(?) and signal to other role-players that you are ready for roleplay or are role-playing.
 
Type /rp off
to turn your name back to yellow(?) to signal to others that you are not role-playing.
 
Type /rp
to display your role-playing status.
 

I am well aware that it is for a minority. Alone by this color change, I know if I can appeal to role play.
 
And since we are on the subject:

Add a /me command to the local chat.
/me is the command used to describe an action that your character is doing. 
 
Here is an example that you type in the local chat: "/me sits down on the bench, and yawns." 
Output in Chat: "SirJohn85 sits down on the bench, and yawns."
 
 
Cheers!

This is exactly what it should not be.   I do not want a safe zone. Why would you restrict yourself to hubs in a universe of possibilities? Role playing can always and everywhere take place. In my opinion it would also be wrong to hide behind an entry fee. Role play is what we make of it. And everyone is invited. And if someone is trolling, then he is expelled from the building.   It is frustrating when you approach people who are clearly OOC. - "lol, why are you talking so swollen?" - "Don't you have a real life that you want to be someone else?" - "Are you such an RPG freak?"   These and similar answers came when I spoke to someone IC. Sure, you ignore it, but do I have to "try" to find the role player?   The same is true in the vastness of the universe. If I meet another player in solitude, I could see by the tag I'm getting into.   - No rp tag? You say kindly Hello and look like your counterparts reacts. If he shoots first, you shoot back.   - RP tag? You signal with the tag you want to do some role play. You say friendly hello. If he rob you in the rp, it is your bad luck, but the bigger the reward is that it happened in the rp.   This RP tag lets both sides know what they are doing. On the other hand, you do not bother OOC people with RP and vice versa. The difference is that the role player can switch when the situation requires.

Devs talked about some pets, it's some kind of drones, right? Why not to made defence or mining drones and control them? And remember, its only idea in Idea Box forum, even when it is not possible

NQ have stated that while they'd like to implement such moveable elements so that mechas can be made ingame (not that they would be effective, but they'd be fun to pilot for a bit or to form a sport around), such elements aren't even close to priority as of yet.

No word yet on changing character names in-game. I have to believe that character names are going to be static though.
 
In Eve Online your name was your badge, it meant that if you did something bad to someone, the reputation went with your name. I would argue that Dual Universe is going to be very similar, wherein your reputation goes along with your name. If that's the case I'd say that we shouldn't have the ability to change our names in-game, otherwise it would be too easy to do something nefarious without any consequences.

Technology can fix it.
 
Why do you often hear combat sounds in large space battles in sci-fi movies? Viewer enjoyment, it would be different any other way.
 
Smart technology could in theory simulate relatively fitting sounds, thus explaining all of that stuff. It would help because we're used to audio feedback and in turn it would actually be helpful with the peripherals and whatnot. Something "explodes" nearby? You'd hear it and be aware.

Well, EVE has a pretty solid economy, with every trick in the book being emulated, like bubble schemes.
 
 
Yes, Emergent Wolf of Wall Streeting the game is an option.

I think this topic went way off track since Java and Javascript aren't really related other than by name. This StackExchange article lays it out pretty clearly:
 
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/245062/whats-the-difference-between-javascript-and-java
 
tl;dr - "Java and Javascript are similar like Car and Carpet are similar."
 
 
 
That aside, exporting bindings from C++ to LUA is much easier than exporting from C++ to Javascript, lookup any binding library on Github and the differences are pretty clear.
 
I would also argue it's probably much easier to integrate LUA into the game engine than trying to import a javascript engine (something like Google's v8 engine). 
 
Considering all of the posts that have been on the forum calling for an easier way to write code, expecting people to learn Javascript isn't going to be an easier sell by any stretch of the imagination over LUA either. 
 
 
 
I think you're going to need much more reasoning than this to try to get a javascript API built into the game.
 
I'll tear down some of the major differences between the two languages (Javascript and LUA) here:
Lua has native support for coroutines. Lua doesn't convert between types for any comparison operators. In JS, only === and !== don't type juggle. Lua has an exponentiation operator (^); JS doesn't. JS uses different operators, including the ternary conditional operator (?: vs and/or), and, as of 5.3, bitwise operators (&, |, etc. vs. metamethods ). JS has increment/decrement, type operators (typeof and instanceof), additional assignment operators and additional comparison operators. In JS, the equals and not equals operators are of lower precedence than less than et al. In Lua, all comparison operators are the same precedence. Lua supports tail calls. Lua supports assignment to a list of variables. While it isn't yet standard in Javascript, Mozilla's JS engine (and Opera's, to an extent) has supported a similar feature since JS 1.7 (available as part of Firefox 2) under the name "destructuring assignment". Destructuring in JS is more general, as it can be used in contexts other than assignment, such as function definitions & calls and loop initializers. Destructuring assignment has been a proposed addition to ECMAScript (the language standard behind Javascript) for awhile. In Lua, you can overload operators. In Lua, you can manipulate environments with getfenv & setfenv. In JS, all functions are variadic. In Lua, functions must be explicitly declared as variadic. Foreach in JS loops over object properties. Foreach in Lua (which use the keyword for) loops over iterators and is more general. JS has global and function scope. Lua has global and block scope. Control structures (e.g. if, for, while) introduce new blocks. Due to differences in scoping rules, a closure's referencing of an outer variable (called "upvalues" in Lua parlance) may be handled differently in Lua and in Javascript. This is most commonly experienced with closures in for loops, and catches some people by surprise. In Javascript, the body of a for loop doesn't introduce a new scope, so any functions declared in the loop body all reference the same outer variables. In Lua, each iteration of the for loop creates new local variables for each loop variable. local i='foo' for i=1,10 do   -- "i" here is not the local "i" declared above   ... end print(i) -- prints 'foo'   The above code is equivalent to:   local i='foo' do   local _i=1   while _i<10 do     local i=_i     ...     _i=_i+1   end end print(i)   As a consequence, functions defined in separate iterations have different upvalues for each referenced loop variable. See also Nicolas Bola's answers to Implementation of closures in Lua? and "What are the correct semantics of a closure over a loop variable?", and "The Semantics of the Generic for". Integer literals in JS can be in octal. JS has explicit Unicode support. In Lua, ~ is used in place of !. (as in, if foo ~= 20 then ... end) (technically syntax, but it's easily overlooked and causes subtle bugs). In Lua, the not/or/and keywords are used in place of !/||/&& (also syntax but also easily forgotten). In Lua, any type of value (except nil and NaN) can be used to index a table; in JavaScript, object indexes are converted to strings.  
Depending on the tool used, the LUA interpreter or the LUA JIT Compiler, the performance over javascript can easily be 3x-100x faster according to some test results I've seen as well. I've not run any of those tests myself so I can't independently confirm them, but in a game like DU I imagine that performance needs to be squeezed out of every corner possible. 

Your post reminded me of this.

LUA works due to the game engine's heavy use of C++ code. Look up Unigine 2.


They code an MMO, not a mobile game :V .