Jump to content

blundertwink

Member
  • Posts

    791
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

blundertwink's Achievements

  1. It's really hard to find them in all this history, but here's a post from 2020 talking about this issue -- although in the context of resources scarcity more than just tile scarcity. That said, it's really the same issue (scarcity of land). In the end, for a game where property is a core part of the experience, the only way to scale it (IMO) is to add land as you add players OR change the fundamental reason why some squares aren't as good as others. If the core issue is that new players have to hike way too far to get to a market, change how the market works...e.g. people have been asking for player-built markets for a long, long time now.
  2. Why people post is truly not relevant. The content of the post and the topic being discussed is what matters, not who is posting it or why. If you disagree with an opinion, articulate the reason you disagree. If you disagree with a person (or the motivations you believe they have), that's really not relevant to anything at all. Frankly, it's none of your business why anyone posts here, it's an irrelevant and trolly question by its nature because it's about a person's motivations rather than the their actual opinions...the purpose here is to talk about the game or at least to discuss some topic, not to play inquisitor and demand to know why a person has articulated an opinion (vs. actually responding to its merits).
  3. Eh, I don't have any respect for this idea that scam victims deserve what they get for being "dumb", especially in real life. It is not a matter of "paying attention". Which...speaking of paying attention, it's "good riddance", not "good riddens". I hope you don't take offense to this correction -- after all, you're the one that thinks it's okay to punish people for being "dumb". 🤷‍♂️ I don't know where you are in your life to believe that scam victims just aren't paying attention, but this attitude strikes me as naive and heartless. Ignorance is not stupidity (not knowing how to spell good riddance is not stupidity, it's ignorance) and even if it were...being stupid doesn't justify jack shit, because being intelligent isn't something you've earned in any real sense. Some people have disabilities, some haven't had an opportunity to get a quality education, and some are just trusting or ignorant. What sort of attitude is this, anyway...? For a game with few players to be like "let's celebrate dumb people quitting" is...well, good luck with that. That's the OP's point...if DU wants to retain new players, it needs to focus on easy wins like this to improve UX across the board.
  4. I could find it by applying the "MMO" tag to filter, and even then it's a bit far down the list (just above some DLCs lol). This goes to show how challenging it is to adopt the "release it now, fix it later" attitude (in general, but especially with a subscription game). If you don't do well on release, Valve will bury your game deep into pages few people see...and those that do see it will be greeted with "mixed" reviews, further tanking conversion. Valve showing it to fewer people means you don't have nearly as much opportunity to improve your stats, but you will struggle to improve your metrics without more views...so it's hard to see how DU can grow without some major marketing push outside of Steam. Especially since this promo was a great fit for DU....and not as popular as some of Steam's bigger sales, so a bit less competition.
  5. Yeah, I am almost surprised that their promo did nothing....but Steam is a competitive place. Games with much better reviews and more players are offering much better discounts than 20% off your first month. Signing up to a sub is also a commitment, and people like to trawl these sales and add stuff to their library for some future rainy day...so committing to a sub might not fit well with the psychology of Steam sales in general. And of course...Valve isn't going to promote DU very highly because its metrics are horrible. They do not screw around with giving games "a chance" if their stats are not solid, and I suspect DU's conversion rate is not great....
  6. Well, you're the one that doesn't seem to understand how a subscription monetization works, so I used the most popular subscription service as an example... Churning users permanently is a bad idea and will always be a bad idea for any product with a subscription model. It doesn't matter that DU is a different product than Netflix -- the monetization model works the same. Being "blocked" is completely irrelevant to how this model works. You're talking about specific gameplay, I'm talking about how subscriptions work at a fundamental level. That NQ didn't understand how subscriptions work is part of my point -- trying to make DU fit into a monetization model that doesn't work for the core design is a part of NQ's many problems. Changing the timing doesn't even really solve this problem, the game still can't scale indefinitely -- it's almost like making property ownership a core part of a persistent MMO is a bad idea unless they scale the property available along with the number of players. Adding planets doesn't do this because new players don't start on new planets. This topic has been discussed for so many years...this fact that the new player experience degrades over time as tiles get more claims. Years and years people talked about this, warning NQ that their design made no sense for a persistent MMO. At the end of the day, though...the core design of DU is counter-productive with a subscription model by NQ's choice and it would take more than a few small tweaks to change this. It doesn't matter that DU works differently than Netflix as a product, it matters that user churn is the number one most important thing for any sub and DU's core design is counter-productive for this model no matter how you slice it.
  7. After a few days, I don't see any relevant bumps in Steam's metrics yet. 🤷‍♂️ There's still <200 people playing during peak, with the count continuing to trend downward. This underscores how hard it can be to get leverage on Steam when your product has a combination of bad reviews, few purchasers, and not great conversion rates. It might be somewhere in their promos, but few people are actually seeing it...and a 20% discount maybe isn't enough to compete with other games in this sale that have much better reviews. At least NQ is advertising the game somewhat honestly (the claim about making cities made me laugh) compared to trailers with fake action sequences...but we'll see how the weekend goes. It would be a bit sad if NQ's one effort to grow their Steam users yields no results at all, but so far it hasn't.
  8. I really can't agree with this idea. First, GTA5 is not merely one of the most successful games. With over 6 billion in revenue, it's among the most successful entertainment products in history, period. By comparison, every "Harry Potter" movie combined is estimated to have made ~$7.7 billion. So...it's clearly an outlier not only in video games, but in the massive world of entertainment media in general. There's a lot more examples of games struggling to sell because of bad performance than examples of games that were successful despite bad performance. Let's not give into GTA5's survivor bias. Games like Cyberpunk and NMS infamously had rocky releases because of performance struggles -- it's silly to suggest that studios simply "don't care" and only want to release an "MVP" because that's what makes money. What actually makes money is releasing a good game that works as it should across every platform, even in the world of Early Access. Let's take the example of an atypically successful game's PC multiplayer port not working well with a grain of salt...I personally do not see evidence that the industry in general only wants to push MVPs because "that's what makes money". I also can't agree that "paying isn't the issue" as if money has no relation to what it takes to build a successful game...especially in the context of an MMO. The performance of servers is absolutely proportional to NQ's budget, especially running on AWS. The quality of dev you can afford is 100% driven by budget. NQ's CTO is someone who's previous job was literally as an intern, with NQ being their only game dev role. There's a big difference between someone like that and someone that's spent 30 years making MMOs leading the tech. Further, most modern MMOs secure at least $200 million in funding -- NQ is trying to do this with 10% of the funding of a typical "theme park" MMO. It's silly to suggest that hasn't hurt DU's chances. This example of a tiny, discontinued game made by a few people is a moot point and greatly misunderstands the real struggles with optimization and performance between complex titles like DU and simple, incomplete titles made by indies...as someone that spent several years working on an indie title that was also on Steam for a period, I can't fathom the comparison between a not-finished indie game and a released MMO like DU. Even GTA5 isn't a fair comparison -- there's a world of difference in complexity between 3rd party instanced servers and a true persistent MMO. Granted GTA5's client side optimization and graphics is leagues beyond DU's...but my point is that none of this is so simple.
  9. I'm sorry, but this idea is absurdly bad for any subscription based MMO. To me, it betrays a complete misunderstanding of how subscription-based monetization works at a fundamental level. This idea that once someone's sub lapses, they ought to be completely purged from the game is immensely counter-productive. From a business perspective, it makes zero sense. This is because every subscription-based product faces high month-to-month churn, and with DU that's especially so. Every churned user then becomes a potential customer, because reengaging lapsed subscribers is a huge facet of any viable subscription service. Consider what percent of active Netflix subscribers has at one point paused or cancelled their sub. I'd wager it's a vast majority. This is just a core concept with how subscriptions work, and any sub-based product that decides to ignore this is not going to last very long. Deciding to make it so there's no reason for lapsed users to return is an objectively stupid idea for any subscription...especially one that suffers from as much churn as DU. The push and pull between DU keeping tiles and reclaiming them has been discussed for a long, long time -- the flaw is inherent in the design of this game and the solution that NQ already has makes a lot more sense than this suggestion. Hell, I'd argue timers should be even higher, because 3 months is not nearly enough time to re-engage a lapsed sub, and that's the whole point. TLDR: a game with so few subs can't be so arrogant in deleting old stuff to "make room" for new players, because there are no new players and regardless, all new players eventually become churned players (especially with DU's high churn rates), so this "strategy" is horribly counter-productive in every conceivable way.
  10. In case anyone missed it, NQ is announcing a Steam-related event along with a discount for new players: There's only ~100 people playing via Steam right now and it hasn't broken 200 concurrent players in a while (down from 400-500 just a few months ago) -- so I appreciate that NQ is at least trying to attract more players on the largest PC gaming market. I think it is also wise to promote it with this specific event. If players join DU expecting PvP or PvE (even if that one new mission drops), they'll be very sad. At least this time NQ is marketing something that's actually up their alley: building bases. I personally think they'll have slightly more success marketing it like this compared to doing make-believe trailers that set a very wrong expectation about the game and its "combat". Granted, I'm not sure 20% off one month's sub is going to be interpreted as a great deal...and I'm not optimistic about retention considering the state of the game and NQ's development velocity. Do you think DU will see a bump in it's Steam stats because of this promo? Further...will they actually retain new users?
  11. So the poster is not only a secret NQ agent, apparently NQ employees aren't "real humans"....? Is that the sort of claim a "real human" would make? Unlikely. Please prove your humanity before you accuse others of being some sort of nonhuman spies, else I can only assume you are the non-human spy. 🤷‍♂️
  12. Huh...? I don't know why anyone would suggest that a subscription based model is actually working for NQ. Mathematics says that subs only work at-scale, and even then they only work for a limited period of time. Consider a company like Netflix. They have more subs than any MMO will (>230 million) and they recognize that churn is inevitable. The only way to combat churn is via constant content. Why do you think WoW has 300 expansions...? Why Netflix is willing to spend so much on new content? They know that every month, 10-20% of users will cancel their plan -- the only way to grow is to add enough content to re-engaged lapsed users or attract new ones. The rate of updates for DU is not nearly, nearly fast or deep enough to combat churn -- especially for an MMO, which players can easily invest more time into than any other entertainment sub product. We see this spelled out in the game's stats. Average pops today are ~20% of what they were at launch just 4 months ago...and that number was never high enough to be scalable, anyway. I don't think NQ is "on to something"...I don't see any evidence that their monetization "strategy" is sustainable.
  13. Which is also one of the reasons cited for FF14's infamous mulligan. They had a pervasive attitude of "we will fix it after launch", and this is a horrible idea for a subscription-based MMO...or any product in general, really. Let's be realistic about that: NQ picked an obscure engine that isn't typically used for gaming because they insisted that they must have a 64-bit coordinate system (which is not true at all) and were willing to sacrifice anything to get that. Unigen2 was picked because of laziness and ignorance -- the founder and early prototyper hadn't worked a day in game dev, he had no clue how critical it is to pick a robust engine...so he picked one that would get closer to their apparent goals right away without any real study or experience. I agree that DU's performance flaws start at the engine level...but for a studio that has taken 8 years just to realize they needed at least 1 PvE mission...they won't be re-platforming, lol (never mind writing their own engine, as is typical for most MMOs)
  14. It's beyond stupid to ask players to read and obey rules that can easily be integrated into the game itself...but this is something that's been said many, many times. Game rules are meant to be integrated into the game, and if NQ doesn't want to do that basic thing, at least they can have a lighter hand in enforcement. Hope you have fun in whatever game you find, @Cergorach! I'm sure there's plenty of other studios that would work much harder for your sub money.
  15. Not really -- I articulated why it's bad design, why it's utterly unfeasible for NQ, and how there's an infinite number of far easier mechanics that would be much wiser choices for NQ. I don't "need" to do anything, and showering NQ with "more positive messages" won't help anything. As for subs and funding...that ship has already sailed, and it has jack to do with anything anyone is saying around here. No one cares. If criticism on this forum that so few people view is making the difference between success and failure, that only underscores how poorly the game has scaled. Criticism helps the game more than glowing positive platitudes. This idea that "if only people were more positive about the game, they'd have oh so much funding to hire devs" is just not grounded in any shred of reality. This idea that they might merely be "one dev away" from fixing things makes me think you haven't had much experience working on large technical projects. That's just not how it works. One dev can't retool 8+ years of legacy code or fix the fundamental scaling challenges that come with a single-shard implementation. To say it again: criticism is not the same as toxicity. Toxicity is doing what you are doing: making claims about personal motivations that you know nothing about. When you spend your time talking about a person whose opinions you don't like instead of discussing their opinions on their merit, that's being toxic. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but when I have something critical to say, I try to explain why I have the opinion I have. Trying to assert that every opinion I've posted is just "hate" and "bashing" is what toxicity is -- it's conjuring up motivations about someone you don't know and implying those motivations are "wrong" because you don't have the patience or civility to allow for the possibility that people might simply have different opinions. For what it's worth: I've explained why food isn't a good design choice, how there's an infinite number of better and more simple design choices, and how implausible the laundry list of random features you've compiled is considering NQ's 8-year history of development velocity. That isn't merely regurgitating "food is annoying", but whatever. You do you.
×
×
  • Create New...