Cheith
-
Posts
182 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cheith
-
-
5 hours ago, CptLoRes said:
That's the point. Mentioning 0.23 may now be considered necro, but NQ still hasn't even completed the first early version of the mission planner. And that is only the first of many steps needed to somewhat mitigate the damage 0.23 did.
For those of us who came after 0.23 we frankly are not too fussed about what was there before as it did no damage to us! Personally happy with the schematics which seems to be one of the big gripes. My only quibble with them would be that I can't make my own duplicates and have to re-purchase for a second assembler. Apart from that the schematics seem sensible. What the hell else would I be spending money on?
-
2 hours ago, blazemonger said:
Why should an MMO require consensual PVP to be a success? I think that is simply not the case. Lore and stories are created from the basic game concept. EVE lore and stories did not exist 20 years ago, only the basic concept of how New Eden evolved from the original wormhole to/from earth collapsing with many humans not able to get back. Much of the lore in EVE is created by players actually. DU only has the beginning of Lore in the arrival of the ARK ship and NQ already had to remove much of the original story to work around their server limitations.
EVE had/has extensive PvE, its own lore, back stories, etc - shit there were even books. I would argue the only reason the PvP space survived was because there were so many PvE players in safe space. While, technically, you can PvP anywhere in EVE if it gets too out of control then the PvE crowd just leave - that is why it never lasts all that long or is very targeted on the very rich.
-
2 hours ago, Lethys said:
Tell that eve online. Yeah, yeah I know. Wrong time, wrong genre, wrong game, wrong comparison. But if we're going to gerealize things then it's still valid
I loved it when I played - totally a one off though in terms of success. Nothing else like it. Plus it had lore, PvE, stories and an economist!! The biggest populations were still in safe space essentially funding the PvP.
-
9 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
That is not how this works. If this was true, Apple would have been dead by now. A vision really is just a perspective on an idea or an opportunity. A vision is not by definition fixed and can, no it should, adopt based on the experience gained while pursuing that vision. Unless you are able to fail often and fail fast, you are not going to get anywhere very quickly.
Visionary - "a person with original ideas about what the future will or could be like" - note the 'could'. I did not say vision I said visionary, not the same thing. So, it actually is how it works.
You also may notice the point that it can work, but more often it doesn't. Just because you can name a couple of successful companies doesn't mean there are not many, many more failures. Also note Apple was nearly dead many times. It was lucky - but as they say "better lucky than good".
As to the rest - what? - so they made decisions. It is what you do as a company. If you make good ones it works if not it often doesn't. And, yes, it is likely the investors are looking to see if the project can be salvaged or not. That would be perfectly normal if something is not proceeding to plan for an extended period of time.
As to the 'successful MMO' - well if you are going to throw that phrase around you'd better ditch the concept of non-consensual PvP, add in a whole bunch of PvE and move on. Where is the lore? Where are the stories? Historically that all of that is what has made a successful MMO. Something for people to grasp onto and play along with. Maybe even give common purpose. Exactly what is not talked about by the original players.
And now we even have the spectre of non-combat MMOs popping up, what next! May actually be better suited to a civilization/building/exploring MMO in some ways.
-
Well, I have to say, if you expected a 'visionary' not to stick to their vision until the bitter end then you were missing something. The visionary plows ahead for good or ill trying to fulfill that vision as that is what drives them. It is why, when it works, the visionary can produce breakthroughs against all the odds and why, when it doesn't work, they bring calamity and utter failure. Part and parcel of heading down that route.
Now we, may, have a realistic management team trying to salvage parts of the vision. I don't believe the 100% voxel universe is likely achievable with any level of deformation at the scale it is being attempted. Anything and everything they do to scale the voxel worlds back to a more sensible level probably makes sense.
I also don't believe a 100% player run system 'content' system is viable. Especially not with the current control systems and no overarching goal (see ECO for a clue on what kind of things you would need). Now, it also should be said, that with the planetary scales involved (assuming no one was fibbing with Alioth having 250K hexes) NPCs/animals could be a challenge - the sheer number of creatures needed just to populate Alioth is mind-boggling - even of you exclude oceans.
None of this means that conceptually it all can't be salvaged, but the challenges are pretty big. There are some good, interesting elements - it just needs other things simplified and more engaging game play in others.
As to listening to players - apart from in the abstract it is usually a bad idea. Too many divergent opinions from too many camps. Players suck at designing games - otherwise they would be designers - and in my experience the most messed up games are those who take player feedback in the detail rather than the aggregate. The feedback should only be there to assist (or maybe validate) the game's direction not to shape it. If the designers don't have a clear goal of where they are going it will be a train wreck.
-
1 hour ago, blazemonger said:
well, so much for the excuse that DU does not run on a VM .. more likely it is now hardcoded to only run on GeForce Now
It is not a priority to make it work on Shadow.. As the priority is to make it run (exclusively) on Geforce Now I am guessing..
You may be right, you may be wrong, it also maybe that DU shows up an edge issue in the Shadow platform because of how it is used - maybe shadow has an iffy sound driver. Impossible to tell without being able to debug it.
Same argument as Linux really for the dev team - how many people and what revenue. Lots of people, lots of revenue then do it now - little and little then leave it until you have time and nothing more pressing to do. No fun for Shadow users, I admit, but an unsurprising result.
-
10 hours ago, Azraeil said:
Add to this that the boosters are on/off giving extremely limited thrust control and even had the pulse lengths limited in a 0.23 nerf they definitely give the #feelsbadman's right now.
You know how a rocket engine works, right? It is on or off. Massive thrust when on, not so much when off
-
8 hours ago, GraXXoR said:
Ah. Making parts of your ship out of breast implant material.
TBH, you’re very lucky it didn’t go tits up when you tried to land.rofl - nice.
-
7 hours ago, bazzybtec said:
This forum has really turned me off playing this game to be honest. I am going to cancel my subscription as the player base of this game is obviously toxic
Now that is funny - you have no decent argument so the player base is toxic. Nice.
-
1 hour ago, bazzybtec said:
getting tired of non linux users putting this argument forward that the distributions are all different and a client has to be coded for each. the distributions are not that different to make development that hard. the majority of packages are cross distribution and the ones that are not you can provide the binaries and can be compiled for each distro as needed.
the kernal for each is exactly the same. this argument only works in the hope that people either dont know any better or wont actually research to find what you say is wrong.
by splitting up ubuntu from other distributions is plain and simple to make the numbers seem even smaller than they really are.
the same could be said for DU really. there are 115,217,872 warcraft users and about 434,761 DU players so that means DU is only 0.38% the size of warcraft
and Eve online only 8523914 players and compared to that DU is only 5.1%
so i guess if we are going to use this line of thinking then DU wont ever amount to anything and we should all stop supporting it. same logic
Um write software for Linux servers each and every day. They are still NOT THE SAME. Close doesn't cut it - I have different distributions for database servers for different Linux platforms as an example. As soon as you get different distributions then you have extra testing. For a desktop system that has a small user base already it is just not worth it. Linux is an after the fact effort for already released and successful games - so when DU is released and successful it may make sense. It is also still going to come after OS/X.
Dumb logic on the last point, and you know it. It is not like Linux is shiny new. It is not like all the same mistakes were not made before. Linux suppliers just have not learned from the Unix debacle. What you really need is Google to decide to do it - gNix - and then maybe it has a chance with the right driver support, tools, GUI, no command line required, etc. Right now unless it is pre-packed tightly it is a solid super geek platform for a desktop OS.
-
19 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:
Yes, i have that example in mind.
And most of the problems of java are related to the crappy programers doing code in it.
But java is not a true binary standard.
Java vm only allows "binaries" written in java language.
The idea would be for any .obj created by compiling a code file to be able to linked into that new binary format.
Those binaries, instead of preforming kernel calls directly, would provide a place in memory for the address of those calls to be added by the OS.
Instead of assuming maloc calls kernel on address 0xNNNNN the binary would require that address to be fulfilled by the kernel on program start.
Understand that this things already exist.
There is a windows standard, very well known. And a Linux standard, and a Playstation format, etc...
We just need regulation to force them all to adopt a single standard.
Sorry - um - wrong. Java 'binaries' are compiled to the JVM. You can run any language that produces JVM binaries on it. Scala and Kotlin both come to mind. Don't get me wrong. not a big fan of the JVM, but you need to get your facts straight.
Any other 'binaries' still require either a 'different' VM sitting on top of the processor or a single unified processor architecture.
There also is not really a Linux 'standard'. There is a subset of stuff for Linux that is adopted and then the rest is up to RedHat, etc to implement. Same issue as Unix. Never learned their lesson. Also, hate to tell you this, but a single company providing something is not a 'standard'. That is a product. Standards (to be really picky) are defined by standards organizations such as ISO and are adopted by entire industries not individual companies.
As to crappy programmers - there are crappy, average and good programmers in every language under the sun. It is not the language that is the issue. Having worked in a good number of languages I can confidently tell you the language is never the issue.
-
2 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:
Instead, we could create a binary standard.
Binaries within the standard would pay 5% less taxes.You know they already did that, right, its called Java!! Sadly (relatively speaking) it doesn't perform all that well.
-
2 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:
This issue is only solved by legislation..
If govermemts would ask for extra in taxes if a software is only available in a certain OS, then managers would instruct programers to make portable code.
And which OS would you favor? Linux is still not a great choice anyway. Should we fund Apple to promote MacOS? Or lets give Google some more market share by funding a desktop Google OS. Seriously, have you even thought about this? Linux is NOT a standard in any way and apart from developers no one else gives a zot about it. So, what is the alternative? GovOS - one per country of trading bloc?
-
7 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:
Steam supporting and pushing developers to support multiple platforms is not a bad example.
Ubuntu has a share of 0.2%.
I would say that if the work needed to put it running on Ubuntu is lower than 0.2% then its worth it.
As for testing, low budget games often say that the game "should work" on linux.
And knowing the linux share, linux users accept this.
But that is different from: "lets use visual studio proprietary libs and F you linux"
Windows has a monopoly in PC gaming.
That wont end until developers do something about it.
Most triple A engines already support linux. Its just up to the end developer to opt not to include BS visual studio crap.
0.2% - sorry, but the testing alone is not worth it. Should work and do work, as you know, are not exactly the same things. Ubuntu also isn't all of Linux and all Linux clients are not the same. I also have a feeling that the DU client might be a tiny little bit more complex than your average Steam game. Once you get into threading and the like it usually gets harder to move between the platforms as their models are different. If it is a single event queue type game not so much.
Frankly Linux is still ultra niche in the desktop world and this is a reflection of that.
Also, why would developers push Linux over Windows if it gives them what they want? As a game developer why would you care? Indeed as a developer a single platform monopoly makes your life easier. It would be one thing if we have one version of Linux but we don't even have that. So the order goes Win, Mac, and then maybe Linux.
-
2 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:
Yep, you are anti-linux
Most current game engines will support Linux.
Its the game developers that will do hard-coded stuff instead of using the engine methods and break linux compatibility.
And there are allot of reasons to support Linux.
Steam link. Several current and future game streaming technologies...
And when ppl refuse to change 0.01% of the code to support Linux, it means that they dont want to.
Not that it makes no sense.
If you open steam on Linux, you wil notice that half of the games are supported.
What utter nonsense - there are many issues with multi-platform development. One of the biggest is testing - you now have multiple platforms to test everything on. It is a significant investment and for a small team not usually practical. You also need knowledge and skills in all the platforms.
The other hard part of multi-platform is that you end up with lowest common denominator development, coding to the weakest platform. Just not an easy option.
As to Steam - like it or not it is predominantly a Windows platform - the 2020 survey had over 95% Windows, a few percent Mac and I didn't even see Linux mentioned. Bad example.
Shadow has the same issue - if it is not out of the box Windows compatible then it is essentially a separate platform that requires its own testing at a minimum. As there are 'thousands' not tens or hundreds of thousands of user then it is perfectly reasonable that it is not a priority until they get the mainstream system up and fully working. Sad for those on the platform but true. I also suspect you have not seen the last of the price rises.
-
3 hours ago, CoyoteNZ said:
But now I can’t even make a structure over 100 feet tall with dirt ? Found that out when my shipmwas just above fetch range.
Were you standing on top, jetpacking up and adding a blob? I've certainly gone above 100 feet - not tried above 100 meters though.
-
1 hour ago, CptLoRes said:
Basic cement (the glue for making for example concrete), and is made from limestone, clay and sand at high temperatures. Any other components are only added to get some specific characteristics.
Point being that the fundamental principle of cement/concrete is simple enough that it was used by the Ancient Greeks, but in this game even when we have a nano transformer it is a high tier material that is more costly then for example real modern materials like plastic and carbon fiber?
And we all know why. NQ knows that people want to build large structures/industries/etc and they are trying to time gate the process to cover up the lack of actual game play. But that does not make people stay longer, and instead there is ample evidence (0.23) that it has the exact opposite effect since building can be time consuming enough by itself without the added resource time gating breaking the camels back.
Yah don't need concrete - matte grey brick honeycomb looks almost exactly the same and is cheap and easy to do.
And of course we would have advanced concrete - plus in this game limestone is a T2 material so .... yeah.
As to the lack of game play - it is a sandbox, remember - you could argue about the lack of extra mechanics to play with such as farming, also the assembly stuff is a bit basic in many ways, damn I would more complain about the terrain this procedurally generated crap is pretty bad and unrealistic, or the lack of animals/birds etc anywhere. Lots of real things to moan about.
-
Interestingly enough cement is not as simple as you think it is ....
"calcium, silicon, aluminum, iron and other ingredients. Common materials used to manufacture cement include limestone, shells, and chalk or marl combined with shale, clay, slate, blast furnace slag, silica sand, and iron ore." from the Portland Cement Assoc.
... be careful of what you wish for, you might get realism!!!
-
For 20 whatevers ($ for me) it is worth a pop.
Building and flying your own stuff. Building your own base, city, whatever. Some mildly complex industry/selling of products. Mining (too much, but that is likely to change soonish).
Its not bad, not great. Hopefully will get better - there is promise there.
There are also a bunch of bitter vets lurking on these forums who seem to have lost feature 'X' that they loved, or its not the right shade of pink, or whatever and now seem to want everything to fall apart. Take a bunch of the comments you see with a pinch of salt (including this one).
-
8 hours ago, GraXXoR said:
If they implemented rockets properly you could still get into space with rockets alone. The fact is that making the L rocket T4 when an XL space engine is T2 is just wrong.
especially since rockets are essentially only on or off and you can’t modulate their output power.
(Though, technically, you can by pulsing them on and off rapidly with a Lua script, but that feels more like an exploit than intentional)
I understand - I was more thinking of going to the moons, etc. While I am sure that is possible with rockets it would be a lot harder would it not? You kind of need the space engines to do anything more than just reach orbit do you not? Or at least do it manageably.
I accept I may be totally wrong on this, but that was my concern.
-
4 hours ago, GraXXoR said:
I think we don’t need disposable rockets.
Current liquid ones just need to be tier 2 since they have basically existed since WW2.
the rocket skills are also insanely “priced”. Isn’t it something like 3,000,000 XP to train rocket handling up to L5?
At least rocket fuel is a realistic weight, unlike the liquid metal our atmo fuel and space fuel is apparently made of on which bricks would literally float.
I believe it should be more like this:
wings brakes and hover engines atmo engines. and atmo adjusters T1
atmo fuel T1.
Rockets, retro rockets, rocket adjusters T2
Rocket fuel T2
space engines T3 space brakes, universal adjusters T3space fuel T3
warp drive T4
warp fuel T4
anti grav T5
anti grav fuel T5
I think my only quibble with that is T3 for space engines if only because space is such a big part of the game for many (not me yet because I am lazy, but others).
-
So, I don't think the ship has sailed for DU. One of the huge issues is the amount of Voxel stuff going on because people are constantly digging. That is a lot of updates for, in reality, very little purpose. No one else has succeed at this level of voxel deformation in an MMO either - in fact no one has succeeded with less on a planetary scale.
The mining units may solve many of the issues with server DB performance just by reducing the activity - but we shall see. I would certainly suggest they cap the digging possible also to further reduce the possible damage and just the overall number of Voxels. Going down a couple of hundred meters should be more than enough before we hit an artificial 'bedrock' (yes I used a Minecraft term
)
We should also decouple the PVE argument from this. I think the world needs at least some 'life' even if we don't have PvE. Currently there isn't even enough 'E' in the game with no creatures or birds just wandering around on the planets that would support it. Personally I don't believe in the 'player made experience' BS that is touted. I have not seen a working example and at best I have seen player enhanced experiences with the game supporting the core elements with some PvE basics.
Just my x cents worth.
-
39 minutes ago, FrigoPorco said:
Empyrion: Galactic Survival (on Steam) is a game that every dev here should be playing and studying....they did all these things correctly...PvE, PvP, building, mining, auto miners....
Except it ain't an MMO (or at least it wasn't when I played it) and frankly has all sorts of other issues. Multiplayer on dedicated servers if you wish, but not an MMO.
The building is also tragic compared to DU, It does, though, have missions and other such things.
- DrFrigoPorco and Shaman
-
2
-
Totally variable for me - sometimes I get a few in a row sometimes hardly any.
So after 4 months...the game got really boring!
in General Discussions
Posted
Or it would suggest I came after 0.23 - just saying.
I guess the point was that, at some point, one needs to move on whatever that looks like for you. New players don't care about 0.23 and why should they. Like it or not the future of the game is not about the players that have left it is about the players to come. If the game is not interesting to the significantly larger community out there that have not tried the game then none of this matters.