wizardoftrash

Hi everyone,
 
@Bleep_Bloop:
Please keep a respectful tone when debating with other members of the community.
"Are you fucking retarded" or "read the fucking post" are not an acceptable way to discuss on the forum.
If you haven't already read our forum rules, please read it there: https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/8-forum-rules/
Continuing with this kind of behavior may lead to removal of your messages, and, in the last resort, to a ban. 
We value the freedom of speech, as long as you are respectful while discussing with others.
We can understand that discussing with people not agreeing with your point of view could be irritating, but it's not a valid excuse to start employing rude/insulting words.
 
Thanks in advance for your comprehension.
 
Now to answer to your point of view: 
 
- Some members of the Novaquark team have worked for years on F2P games.
The F2P model (or the B2P model, which is nothing more than the F2P model with an initial sale of the game at the beginning) isn't the shiny and perfect model often perceived from an external eye. This model has a lot of drawbacks, and the fact of diverting artists from doing content for all the players is not a minor one: while they work on cosmetics, they don't work on the global visual improvement of the game, and this has a real impact of development speed of the game, especially when the team behind it is still relatively small.
 
- Relying only on cosmetics on the long run is like playing casino a bit with the financing of the game. You can win a lot... but you can also loose a lot (regarding the ration "cost of making cosmetics"/"income brought by the said cosmetics"). Any financial manager having a good head on his/her shoulders would tell that, in order to properly budget the investments for a MMORPG in the coming months or years, the ideal situation is to be able to predict more or less the amount of income you will get during this period. With a model relying only on cosmetics, this part is a bit unpredictable, because all the income relies only on the artists shoulders and mishaps can happen. What if a batch of cosmetics doesn't appeal to the players who usually pay for them? What happens if a few key artists leave the studio (which can happen even in the best companies)? In that case, during this period (even if it's temporary) you might have a serious drop of income that could generate difficulties, and even if in the same time the game programmers deliver amazing gameplay features, it won't help, because they can't bring any income. The subscription model is a lot more resilient in this regard: if there is a period where the artist can't provide the same amount of content as usual, the programmers can still deliver new features and the players will still have new content for their subscription. The subscription model can also enable the different teams from the studio to alternate the type of content released: game features for one release, visual/graphic content for the following one, giving more time to each team for each content release (Side note: these are possibilities that only the subscription model make possible, but that doesn't mean all things mentioned above is necessarily how the content releases will be managed for Dual Universe after release).
 
- Saying subscription is "a monetization model from another age, very few games use it nowadays, so it's a proof that doesn't work anymore" is oversimplifying the situation. If we look at the bigger picture, as in many other sectors, a lot of investors (not all, fortunately) to make quick, easy money with minimal investment/effort and pressurized publishers to find an adapted solution to this request. In this situation, the Free to Play model is the most adapted one. With this model, you can't be (or a lot less) accountable for not having high-quality services, for not listening to your community, etc. This is the perfect model for short term ROI (Return On Investment). It makes big profit in the first years. However, in the case of MMORPGs, if no significant investment is made to update the game, the profit crumbles in a matter of a few years and cosmetics alone won't prevent that. That's fine for a lot of investors and publishers and that's fine too for a lot of players that don't spend more than a few months on the same game. But all players expectations aren't the same far from it.
 
- Among gamers who have played MMORPGs for a long time, both F2P and subscription-based ones, a lot have realized that the F2P/B2P model isn't the best answer for every time of games. A growing number of these gamers would now prefer to pay a subscription fee than having the inconvenient of a F2P/B2P Model. So yes, the Subscription Model may be not very common at the moment, but this model might make his comeback in the years to come, when enough people will be fed up of having F2P/B2P MMORPGs on the western market (as F2P model is originally born - and fully accepted - from the eastern market). 
 
- Funny thing: as we speak, former developers from EverQuest I, II and Next have launched a new project: Ashes of Creation, which seems the spiritual successor of EverQuest Next. It's a subscription-based MMORPG... 
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1791529601/ashes-of-creation-new-mmorpg-by-intrepid-studios/description
Well in 48 hours, they founded their original goal of 750.000$ and are now at more 870.000$ with more than 4.500 backers. In 48 hours. Does it looks like the subscription model is dead/inappropriate? 
 
- Another point who is quite important and specifically tied to Dual Universe: our game will use cloud technology. To buy our own server cluster(s) at the beginning is absolutely unrealistic regarding the cost. That's why we are currently considering a partnership with a Cloud Computing Provider such as Amazon or Microsoft Azure. This means the game will have a cost per player, and going for anything else than a monetization model proportional to the number of players (hence the subscription model) is just taking significant risks in terms of financial viability (at least until we are in a position to buy our own server cluster(s)). So yes, unless we are in a case where we already own the server infrastructures, going for any other model other than the monthly subscription one while you don't know yet what size your gaming community will be (and how many gamers in it will be willing to pay for cosmetics), going F2P/B2P is not the safe road. It's the risky road. If all the points above didn't convince you, this one should.
 
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

@Bleep_Bloop has been trolling on this topic pretty hard lately.
 
This is just an example of one non-supporter who just wants DU but doesn't want to pay for it. Instead, the Devs should totally waste their time designing content that the paying players MUST have so that freebies don't have to put down a bit of money each month. Two nice coffees is the same price as the monthly fee for DU.
 
A dinner at Red Robin is the same price as the monthly fee. like get over it people lol! its a hobby, hobbies cost money.
 
Just disregard and move on

How much does a typical gamer spend on hardware and software for gaming in a year? This is the price of roughly 3 AAA game titles per year, so roughly 4 months per AAA game.
 
How many xbox one games really have 4 months worth of steady game content? There are a few sure, but 3 per year? Unlikely.
 
Sandbox game junkies often spend tons of hours all in one game. MMO players often spend tons of hours all in one game. The kinds of players that will appreciate DU are the kinds for which $156/year breaks down into a very small and reasonable $/hour ratio. For the players that have the most time to play and the least income, there is a good chance it'll break down to $0/year with the ability to trade for game time in the in-game market. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
 
EDIT for an additional point
 
-Gaming is a hobby, and hobbies can sometimes be expensive. For someone who plans to play a bit each day, or have longer binge-sessions on the weekend, this could be considered someone's primary hobby. The advantage here is that if someone decides that they no longer want to play, they can stop paying and allocate future funds towards something else.
 
Lastly this model ensures that the Developers will be able to create regular expansions, which will keep the game in a place where we want to have it as a primary hobby.

I believe the goal would be to make the custom image item expensive enough that MODs would have time to approve each image.
 
When a player uploads an image via this item, it would probably have a 24 hour delay before it could be used, and during that time a Mod would either veto the image (if it is deemed inappropriate), approve the image (turning it "on" immediately), or do nothing which would turn on the image when the timer expires. This allows the item to function correctly even if they are having high work strain or taking some time off.
 
There will already be a way to report inappropriate constructs, so I imagine the same feature could be used to report inappropriate decals (in the cases where a mod either approved an inappropriate image without understanding it, or did nothing and it was approved by default). People WILL be making inappropriate constructs as it is, but the consequences for one getting caught might be bad enough that it doesn't become a problem.
 
I would rather not see something like this implemented for another reason. Creative players will be able to use the construct building tools to create their own images and logos in-game. They already demonstrated the ability to "paint" lines onto the hull of a ship, so even if you "painted" squares you could create a pixelated logo or flag with a little planning, and copy/paste it as a blueprint into and onto your other constructs. If you are able to use a color-slider, these logos could look quite complex.
 
In addition, adding a sliced wedge-shape could allow us to make more complex images. Take my banner/user image for example: it is made entirely out of squares and triangles (because I'm hoping to be able to use that technique to slap this puppy onto my structures and ships).
 
Because we will be able to sculpt and carve voxels, we may be able to "spread" fairly thin pieces of colored hull onto a flat piece. The way you would do this is place a thin/flat hull piece, and use the reduction tool to carve the sheet into the shape you really want for that color. Then slap that thin piece onto your existing hull and repeat for each color layer. This will be quite a bit like mural painting, or painting with gel medium!

How much does a typical gamer spend on hardware and software for gaming in a year? This is the price of roughly 3 AAA game titles per year, so roughly 4 months per AAA game.
 
How many xbox one games really have 4 months worth of steady game content? There are a few sure, but 3 per year? Unlikely.
 
Sandbox game junkies often spend tons of hours all in one game. MMO players often spend tons of hours all in one game. The kinds of players that will appreciate DU are the kinds for which $156/year breaks down into a very small and reasonable $/hour ratio. For the players that have the most time to play and the least income, there is a good chance it'll break down to $0/year with the ability to trade for game time in the in-game market. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
 
EDIT for an additional point
 
-Gaming is a hobby, and hobbies can sometimes be expensive. For someone who plans to play a bit each day, or have longer binge-sessions on the weekend, this could be considered someone's primary hobby. The advantage here is that if someone decides that they no longer want to play, they can stop paying and allocate future funds towards something else.
 
Lastly this model ensures that the Developers will be able to create regular expansions, which will keep the game in a place where we want to have it as a primary hobby.

How much does a typical gamer spend on hardware and software for gaming in a year? This is the price of roughly 3 AAA game titles per year, so roughly 4 months per AAA game.
 
How many xbox one games really have 4 months worth of steady game content? There are a few sure, but 3 per year? Unlikely.
 
Sandbox game junkies often spend tons of hours all in one game. MMO players often spend tons of hours all in one game. The kinds of players that will appreciate DU are the kinds for which $156/year breaks down into a very small and reasonable $/hour ratio. For the players that have the most time to play and the least income, there is a good chance it'll break down to $0/year with the ability to trade for game time in the in-game market. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
 
EDIT for an additional point
 
-Gaming is a hobby, and hobbies can sometimes be expensive. For someone who plans to play a bit each day, or have longer binge-sessions on the weekend, this could be considered someone's primary hobby. The advantage here is that if someone decides that they no longer want to play, they can stop paying and allocate future funds towards something else.
 
Lastly this model ensures that the Developers will be able to create regular expansions, which will keep the game in a place where we want to have it as a primary hobby.

ITS TIME TO DU-DU-DU-DUAL?\
 
You've activated my Trap Ship!

How much does a typical gamer spend on hardware and software for gaming in a year? This is the price of roughly 3 AAA game titles per year, so roughly 4 months per AAA game.
 
How many xbox one games really have 4 months worth of steady game content? There are a few sure, but 3 per year? Unlikely.
 
Sandbox game junkies often spend tons of hours all in one game. MMO players often spend tons of hours all in one game. The kinds of players that will appreciate DU are the kinds for which $156/year breaks down into a very small and reasonable $/hour ratio. For the players that have the most time to play and the least income, there is a good chance it'll break down to $0/year with the ability to trade for game time in the in-game market. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
 
EDIT for an additional point
 
-Gaming is a hobby, and hobbies can sometimes be expensive. For someone who plans to play a bit each day, or have longer binge-sessions on the weekend, this could be considered someone's primary hobby. The advantage here is that if someone decides that they no longer want to play, they can stop paying and allocate future funds towards something else.
 
Lastly this model ensures that the Developers will be able to create regular expansions, which will keep the game in a place where we want to have it as a primary hobby.

Another thing to consider though is that they have a PR voice to protect and maintain. Saying "XYZ is not currently in our design plan" is often a polite way of saying it will never happen. As a content creator it is their goal not to create false hopes, but also not to alienate their player-base.

Why 156/year? They said the monthly subscription will probably be around 10/13 (euros or dollars i don't remember) depending on how many months you buy in the same package. So you're likely going to pay something around 120$, that is like 2 "AAA" games (and you get for free 1-2 expansion/year, that you'd pay anyway otherwise). If you prefer you can buy 2 "AAA" games that will provide 20 hours of gameplay each if you're lucky, to me 120$ for a year of gameplay seems better
 
If the game is really going to be as good as they said, the price is not a problem.

Sand, all up in my junk – Part 2
“RONALD”
The world started to come back into focus around Stier, but the infirmary’s Interface was blaring an unfamiliar name at him.
“MCNALDO?”
Then it clicked. As far as the Arkship was concerned, that was his name. Before the ships left earth, occupants had to sign themselves into the new database after security checks. The UMF’s official records were on a much older system so the administrators were not able to import it automatically. During the sign-in process, some of the colonists changed their name and Stier wanted to see how far he could push it so he entered a phony one as a joke. He wasn’t able to change it of course, so he was teased mercilessly during the simulations.
 
The infirmary’s interface was designed to look a bit like a smiley face. There is so much voice communication from the AI that having a face to go with the voice was supposed to be comforting. Waking from cryosleep or in the resurrection node was a traumatic affair, but this grim mask of death of an interface made it all worse during the simulations. In the flesh it was much more pleasant now that its entire surface is plastered in Greetz Puppy stickers.
 
EDIT: Sticker now in user signature as reference.
 
*Greetz Puppy was a pop-culture brand originating from the late 21st century. The brand went mega-corp prior to the establishment of the Emporium. As the UMF encountered funding issues with the construction of the ARK Ships, Greetz Puppy was one of the mega-corps that provided the rest of the funds needed for launch. These stickers or “cosmetics” were provided to the colonists as part of a marketing campaign.
 
“WELCOME BACK TO THE ARK SHIP, YOU DIED!” stated the collage of stickers. A brief look around revealed that most of the medical bay was peppered in the things. Death wasn't nearly as painful as he thought it would be, turned out it was a lot like going AFK. A quick check revealed that Stier… Ronald actually, still had his starting balance of U2’s and all of his DAC’s. As predicted thieves only managed to steal some sand, and some now very sandy protein matter. Ronald topped up his personal energy and protein stores and headed down to the landing site.
 
Town wasn’t what he was hoping it would be by now. There were only a couple of polished-looking permanent structures and the earth was littered with pits and scattered shapes matter-formed out of dirt and stone. The MODs (Maturity Office Directors) have been quick to remove the obviously phallic shapes, but the more abstract ones loom around the landing site like a lower-school Stonehenge. The most active Alphas have either already left the safe-zone or are still AFK (away from konsciousness) from the Beta. Shortwave chat data is mostly omegas trying to figure out how to use their Nanoformer, or Betas trying to rob each other.
 
Ronald had an idea that it would end up like this. Transitioning from the Alpha simulations to the Beta revealed a critical design flaw of the Nanoformer. The Nanoformer taps directly into the nervous system for its input, which allows the user to collect, deposit, and form matter with only a little practice. That asset is also its flaw, since much like many of the body’s organic systems, it behaves erratically when that neural connection is violently severed. When you die your bowels tend to… evacuate, and so does your Nanoformer. U2’s and DAC’s were never matter to begin with, and were tied to DNA to prevent violent theft from becoming a problem, but this flaw in the Nanoformer made it possible. Beta was a bloodbath compared to Alpha, and the real deal is turning out to be quite a bit like simulation. Welcome to the Wild West.
Previous update here https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10052-sand-all-up-in-my-junk-part-1/#entry32895

The unicorn helmates from the HALO series are an example of a serious design choice that had silly/meme consequences as an example. That sort of thing happens to anyone who takes healthy design risks, but I agree its likely to be a non-problem.

This all boils down to Game Design as an art, and not just as an economic product. As an art form, it is largely up to the intent of the artist as to what they want their art to look like (in most mediums). The fact that the dev's don't want to intentionally design "silly" content is entirely legitimate. They sold us on a game with a fairly serious aesthetic, it isn't as if they had pepe space suits in any of the trailers, so this kind of decision shouldn't come to us as a surprise.
 
Nothing stops a player from using the voxel tool and brightly colored alloys to create a hello kitty ship, or murals and whatnot. The devs just don't want to burn their own time and resources creating something that they don't like/want (and we can't blame them).

Why do we think we get to decide what items there are? We don't.
 
So let's not worry about it.

Actually I'd say position is the more important than the raw resources offered in an area.
 
Time spent playing the game is a key resource in games like DU. The locations where players have spent the most productive time will end up being the most valuable. By productive time, I mean building shops and infrastructure, mining and refining resources, etc. The only productive time in a region that doesn't improve its value is exporting finished or raw goods in a trade that doesn't return goods.
 
If there is a large concentration of shops in a given territory, it no longer matters if that territory still has any ore. A territory that has already been partially mined is often MORE valuable than one that hasn't (since the ore deposits and dig sites are visible, the time scanning and prospecting has already been spent). And this is indeed first and foremost a multiplayer experience, regions that get more player traffic will be more sought after.

and I'm hoping not losing money on death will stick, because there is already enough risk in those types of transactions. Luring players to unsafe space for financial transactions will already get enough player energy and attention if the cargo itself is lootable, without currency dropping lol.

There are a few ways you can go about this.
 
For ship docking for example, you could have a priority system that automatically shuts down flight controls for every connected ship or fragment that isn't the mothership of the fleet (for a larger ship and smaller docked ships). In Starmade that is by default how docking works, and in Space Engineers a docked ship can use thrusters to violently un-dock (does not recommend).
 
In the case OP is describing here, the detachable components don't actually appear to be fully functional ships. OP is talking about un-powered connected containers that can be disconnected to reduce the ship's mass (to improve thrust). As long as the containers don't have thrust or any component system, there is no battle for control: only the ship has any claim to control there, so there should be no conflict between the docked parts and the main ship.
 
It'll all come down to a few mechanics as to whether or not it'll be possible. Depending on how they set up landing a ship onto another ship, you might be able to create container "ships" that land onto your barge (if landing gears are magnetic and can lock). The troulbe is without any controls on the container "ships", you can't actually tell them to un-dock from the barge.
 
On the flip side if you can use landing gears on the barge to connect to a container ship or ships, you might be able to tow them. This could be a problem too, as ships that have landed might lose their flight functions, so "landing" onto a cargo unit to tow it might shut down the barge and prevent takeoff.
 
Best case scenario would be the ability to destroy/delete/disconnect ship components mid-flight, even if the only way to restore the disconnected parts would be to "repair/restore" the ship (basically to replace the detached components). A break-away block (like the rotors and connectors in Space Engineers, or docking components in Starmade) that you can control from the barge that would allow you to purge everything connected to it would be the way to go. You could even probably set up a script to automatically disconnect the cargo bay if your shields drop for example.
 
If there is no such block at launch, a clunky but possible solution would be to set up an explosive charge in-between the cargo unit and the barge that would destroy the hull connecting the two, but not damage key systems, thus relieving you of all of the mass of the cargo when detonated. We don't know yet if damaged hull actually disappears, nor do we know if you can "cut" portions of a ship off as a result of damage. The devs mentioned damage to constructs warping/damaging voxels, however we don't know if that can actually cause systems to break off of a ship (of if the whole ship would "explode" before that type of damage would occur). So that might not be possible at all.
 
We can expect AT SOME POINT in the future for there to be some kind of connector block that would make this possible, but if the above two solutions aren't present at launch, you might just have to go down with your ship.

Nope! I've already pledged, and we already have plans for our return, mainly we are getting ready to buy our first house *_*

Nope! I've already pledged, and we already have plans for our return, mainly we are getting ready to buy our first house *_*

If DU wants to encourage players to specialize (as they have mentioned using advanced skills would require players to focus on those skills), wouldn't the branches of the tree be more separate and less circular? This is less about what us as players might like and more about what type of behavior the dev's want to get out of the players here. I would imagine a circular skill tree would cause players to be less specialized, so would't that rule out a circular configuration?
 
For example, for a player to specialize in Mining, a linear tree would reward players that want to mine Tier 3 minerals for actually just going down the mining tree. This accomplishes their goal quite nicely, as the game mechanics reward specialization behavior.
 
On a circular tree however, a player might be able to get Tier 3 mineral mining by going the Scanning route until late in the tree and shifting over (there being some overlap between scanning and mining), or by going the weapons route and switching over (there being some overlap between weapons and mining lasers). Even if this method is less efficient, that would be very attractive to a player since yay now we can do more things, but this system rewards generalization over specialization.

Thrilled to see the features that they showed off, I like the look of the new models so far!
 
I'm really not surprised at all about the delay, they are being very straightforward about it rather than just stringing us along with SOON^tm. I'm not expecting a super polished game in alpha, but it does seem like what we will see in September is less of an alpha and more like a greenlight release.
 
The fact that they are trying to get a significant amount of actual gameplay in the alpha rather than just creating a sandbox for building and flying ships is actually huge, bigger than I expected. What I expected the alpha to look like was "here are some building tools and material skins, have fun!" but it sounds like we get to taste some of the player progression and harvesting/processing materials as well. SWEET ACTION.
 
Likely to up to Ruby soon

Also too it isn't as if orgs have any real power in the game based on how many players have joined, there is no faction currency or anything. A fake org might technically be breaking the rules, but the orgs won't have any real resources until they are allocated to the org in-game by actual members and administrators. In Alpha the only real tangible thing an org will be able to collect is Blueprints (info we have for now is that the blueprints will not be wiped in-between alpha, beta, and the release). Beta might have enough content that org resources might matter, but no one will be able to buy and trade DAC's during that stage. It won't be until release that orgs matter much at all, and even then the same issue I outlined above kicks in (orgs have no assets until they are allocated to the org by the legates and actual org members).
 
Right now they are just lists of names with no authority.

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.

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.

This will all depend on whether or not certain infrastructure features will be station-only. In games like Space Engineers or Starmade, a player can live entirely out of a ship because you can build almost everything for any play style into a ship.
 
There are some serious limitations though, for example in Starmade, you only benefit from build protections for pvp purposes in your home sector, at your home base, and any ship docked to it also gets that protection. You can't actually protect an undocked ship, so for a nomadic lifestyle you would HAVE to set up a tiny station to dock your ship to, and claim whatever sector you are in to get home base protection.
 
Space engineers makes it possible to have a mothership style base with role-specific ships that can be unlocked for certain activities. I had toyed around for a while with a ship design like that, a large "jump ship" station with almost no propulsion, but with medium-sized miners and fighters attached. The mother ship could handle all of the actual industry tasks such as refining and assembling without a station.
 
For this to really work for Dual Universe, there needs to be a way to protect a ship from pvp while AFK, or you'll need to be dropping your ship off in safe zones while afk, and from what we've seen so far from the devs, it seems like getting into space PERIOD will take a while. I think having a nomad lifestyle will actually be easier late-game than it will be early game, as time goes on there will be more infrastructure in space that will allow for shelter, and there may even be an update in the future for space territory unit safe zones that can shield nomads. For now though, it seems like most of the early game play will be terrestrial and permanent structure focused.