Hades

Even if Linux held 25% it wouldn’t make sense to tackle such until after release. There are priorities in play.

Yep, more games implement Mac than Linux. And that’s pretty telling

Haha yeah, but then you’re back to square one where you can just launch those specific weapons at a base as well, right?

Apologize to NQ, not us. Take it up with NQ, not us. My thoughts on it anyhow. Punishment and disciplinary measures conducted should remain between the party and NQ.

People have been saying the tide is turning on Linux for years. Heck, I remember when there was a big hooplah about "Linux will hit 5% in 2017". That sure didn't happen haha. I love Linux, and I would love to game on Linux... but I have no illusions. I'm pretty certain DU will release on Linux after development settles once we're released. Should they worry about it now? Nah. Honestly, getting the game working with Wine is good enough for me.

This might help you out. Seems to be a few users who have it working, core and Yama. I would contact them

The amount of times I've facepalmed while reading through this thread is... astounding. Just give it a rest, ya? If there's enough support... they'll implement it. It might be a few years, but I imagine there will be a Linux version when things quiet down. Very few users are going to be using VR, but they "plan" on implementing that as well. It just depends on whether NQ believes it's possible or not, end of story. What you think about Linux, what I think about Linux... completely irrelevant. Whether you think you're fronting the cost or not... also irrelevant. If they want to implement it, they will... if not, they won't. Just leave it up to them

What are your thoughts on improving object collision, physics and having mechanical/movable parts within constructs? Like making large custom hangar doors, elevators, lifting cranes etc. NQ-Sophon: There will be no collision physics between constructs, for gameplay reasons (no missile constructs). For hangar doors, we will introduce elements. Now, having subvoxel structures that move is a possibility, technically, but it is really low on the priority list. Maybe in an expansion at some point. Here’s one tidbit I found. I don’t think it’s the exact source you guys are thinking of though. Will continue perusing. This was from a transcript of an AMA Edit: also found this tidbit in the comments section. “Collision damage is one of the most costly feature (calculation-wise) that can be imagined in a voxel-made environment. It is (at least for the moment), not compatible with a massively multiplayer, seamless environment. There are a few games where realistic collision damage system has been implemented. By making this choice, they sacrificed the possibility to have a massively multiplayer feature running smoothly. It was a tough choice, and on our side we opted for the other solution. We know it's not the best for game immersion, and we remain open to all suggestions that could be used as a workaround.” I honestly don’t think their goal is to limit players, rather server instability is the issue.

Do you have a source for this? As that’s a very strong statement.

Oh haha, the bane vs boon was purely directed at your opinion of players being able to build their own weapons. That’s a dynamic characteristic to me, not a balancing nightmare. I completely understand NQs stance for not implementing collision damage. In fact, I think I was the one who brought it up that it probably won’t happen. I just think there are possibilities there for deeper gameplay IF it were. If “kamikaze” pilots are the blocker and not server tech, I don’t think they’d be an issue. But that’s NQs call. Something tells me it will be hard to even “kamikaze” in DU haha. But being able to launch a lump of mass at a ground base is dynamic to me. Imagine trying to ward off what seems to be an asteroid hurtling towards your base. Completely new gameplay opportunities

True, what you see as a bane I see as a boon. I don't think it fits because Star Citizen is much more of an "arcade" feeling... where ramming is even possible in space flight. We'll have to see as the game develops, but something tells me DU won't have that feeling.

That's entirely possible, collisions don't really seem like something that fit in DU anyway. One thing I do like about Star Citizen is they seem to open a lot of different dynamic gameplay opportunities. Standard combat, stealth, EMPs/electrical warfare, and ships "designed" for ramming. It takes a lot of skill but if you line up a Scythe/Glaive correctly their blades can slice through a small/medium sized ship. Kamikaze pilots attacking ships on a landing pad used to be an issue... but they seemed to alleviate that problem by making it harder to reacquire a ship. Even a 15 minute timer on insurance was enough to alleviate the issue. However, ramming and collisions during a space battle adds a whole new dynamic to the fight.

That’s what I’d assume. But hopefully they’ll be able to optimize that server tech and get voxel destruction and collisions in there. That’s probably wishful thinking though We won’t know for quite some time. Something tells me combat is a ways off

AFAIK, but remember... it’s always subject to change. I also doubt they’ll bounce, it’ll be a collision with no consequences.

Yeah I was pretty vague, I meant there would be no damage/destruction on collisions. It wasn’t so there wouldn’t be kamikaze designs, it was simply the servers can’t handle it. If they can, I imagine it will be implemented. We will have to see whether or not there will be voxel destruction or not. You seem to be getting voxel destruction confused with damage with locality in mind. They can still have local destruction without implementing voxel destruction. But either way, we really have no idea. I imagine NQ has a little inkling of an idea, but who knows

They are. But you also receive a skin. I also might be making this up, but I swear NQ commented on it. Basically, you receive a node with the skin applied for purchasing the pack. You might lose that node, but you can build another and apply the skin. Will look around to see if I can find it... or the lack thereof could imply I’m wrong

IIRC they are skins. And as such, they ARE lootable... but you can use the skins on the next node/unit you use. So you receive a resurrection node, but it's lootable. If you lose it, you can use the skin on another node. Can't 100% recall though.

Hmm, I thought it was a wait and see on voxel destruction. For the same reason they aren’t planning on implementing collisions. Could be mistaken though

I think NQ stated that they reserve the right to re-implement the NPC traders to help stabilize the economy at a later point if need be. I'm not sure where to even look for a source on that one, so I may just be blowing smoke I also remember a discussion on the topic a long time back, so I may be getting it confused with a player's thoughts on the issue.

They don't need to create a port, they just need to use systems and libraries that aren't locked to Windows. But to be honest, the largest overhaul would be if they aren't using OpenGL at the moment. The rest isn't "really bad". I think the most important part is "So, if we can see a strong movement of the community in favor of Linux, it will significantly increase the chance of the game being released on Linux." Seems to be a common topic that rears its head, so keep showing your support... and someday maybe

Are we going to argue chemtrails are a thing too? Open source is far more secure than closed source. It's a standard. Everyone in the security business knows it.

It's much easier to start with OS non-specifity in mind to begin with, than it is to port it over. Even if they have developed the game using OpenGL (which I can't seem to find confirmation from NQ, but who knows)... they still have to port over sound (ALSA vs DirectSound), input (xinput vs direct input).... etc. There isn't one simple button to port a game over, as others have suggested. It all depends on NQs current development environment, and whether they have been using system-specific development tools or not. As a primary Linux user, I sincerely hope NQ implements Linux at some point... and I would definitely support a "pledge" page for that goal itself. It could put a hold on your account for that amount until the crowdfunding reaches past the allotted amount by NQ. Or something of that nature. Linux is a superior OS hands down for performance and security. But what many people don't understand is that malicious users cater their attacks to Windows because that's where the marketshare is. A cyber criminal is looking to make money (for the most part), and if Linux became widely used... I guarantee there will be a larger number of "vulnerabilities" in Linux as well ;). Of course, being open-source means Linux will always be more secure than Windows.

Not really, that’s more of a counter for the defense mechanisms within the base itself. Being able to hack the ability to prevent digging, and even switch the privelages is a worthy counter. The hacking would be done within the radius of the impacted area of course. If you’re in an area where you can’t dig, you should be able to pull up a terminal and start hacking. There’s clearly communication going to your mining rig to prevent it from digging, being able to mess around with that communication is a counter. An alert being sent that suspicious activity is occurring on your RDMS network. An ingame alert, for the owners of the TCU. As for attacking while logging off, that’s what a shield is for.

See, this is something I can support. Because it’s a defensive mechanic with an effective counter: hacking.

Then that jamming would influence all digging mechanisms, not just foreign. Not sure why you’re so adverse to building up defenses. I personally want defense mechanics to be unprecedented. Creating cop outs does negatively impact that goal. Either way, it’s not that big of a gripe.