Bitmouse
-
Posts
80 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bitmouse
-
-
3 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
You could give another player a +1 point(max) for doing so and so.
Say max level is 500 points or something.
-
Perhaps have two branches of this
One via unlocked skills
The other via reputation points
-
1 hour ago, wizardoftrash said:
IDEA: A way to visually identify what players are proficient in key skills, and inversely, a way to show the players around you what your specializations are.
Concept: Characters could have cosmetic items, or skins for their suit/tools, that are unlocked by reaching skill benchmarks in specific areas.
Fleshing it out: Each skill category (Piloting, guns, scanning, mining, refining, engineering, etc) could have a skill icon associated with said skill. At a certain benchmark, you unlock the ability to wear that icon on your character's suit, or on an article of clothing. This would tell the players around me at least one set of skills I'm proficient in for the purposes of forming loose teams, and also inform them at what level of proficiency I am in that skill.
The Engineering skill for example might have a Wrench icon associated with it. A soon as a player becomes proficient in Basic Engineering, they get access to the Wrench Icon as an accessory for their space suit, which would place it on your character's back and on the upper left-hand side of your chest. As a player progresses to Engineering Rank 2, that wrench icon changes to have a #2 incorporated in it, or a wrench with a stripe across it or something, showing the players around you that you have Rank 2 proficiency in the engineering skill.
A character could only have 1 skill icon equipped at a time, but they could switch between them. This would be useful for ORGS because they could use it to display who a ranking member is within an org. The Cheif Engineer for example might be the only player permitted to equip "Engineering Rank 4" because an org could decide to use that insignia to show who the ranking officer is at any given tame, same for military roles.
I see this as being especially useful though with players who are meeting each other for the first time in-game, and are divvying up tasks for a play session. If I volunteered to be our crew's scanner, I'd equip my Scanning rank insignia, the miner would equip mining, engineer would equip engineering etc. That way we know by looking at each other which one of us is supposed to do what, and players that want to join would know what skillsets we might be missing, or might be able to show us that they are better at scanning than I am for example by equipping their higher rank insignia. It might make cooperating on-the-fly more efficient.
Hey WoT, I like this idea. +1
-
56 minutes ago, Oije said:
Well, I did not read the whole thread just got an idea what you are talking about.
I do not want to have a creative mode, this is totally counterproductive.
DU is on big universe, on one server and every action taken by any member of the universe should affect the whole system (butterfly effect). Testing out new blueprints must be an economical risk and it must be time consuming. Engineering can't be free because it would not help to rise an economy system. To have a vital and stable economy is an essential point for the success of DU.
Currently we have technologies that replaced previously laborious tasks. Take Word. It has replaced the need to write by hand, acquire ink and paper, and manually edit and retype/write papers. The economies adapted and profited from these changes while improving overall productivity.
I would much rather work on a document on my computer than with pad and paper.
-
1 hour ago, ATMLVE said:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but my favorite argument against creative mode is that it makes ship building harder. If you want a good ship, you have to pay for it, or work for it. It makes the entire ship economy more interesting, deeper, and profitable for those that are good at building ships. If anyone could easily design a ship to perfection, there would be no need for good ship builders, except for unimaginative replicas like x-wings or the Enterprise. Without depth, to building, the ship market becomes worthless.
This is not true. A case in point is Empyrion. There are emergent best practices when building ships. These require a knowledge set and skill to implement. What's more is there will likely be classes of ships that utilize an existing meta. Designing to this will require depth of knowledge of pvp/industry.
It will not be easy to design a ship to perfection.
This is just a tool.
-
1 hour ago, Vellnn said:
I feel like creative mode would kind of spit on the spirit of the game being single shard : /
It should be looked at less as a mode and more as a tool. How do we design, test, and iterate constructs/blueprints in a way that is simple, intuitive, complete, and risk free.
It wouldn't take away from the game anymore than wordpad takes away from blogger or final cut pro takes away from youtube.
-
1 hour ago, Lethys said:
Because of several reasons we alreday discussed here. In lenght
I believe that the ideas of making it on the same server, but distant from the main area, and deleted after use would solve all of those problems.
-
I am wondering what makes it a huge feature to develop?
-
5 hours ago, Alethion said:
But again bitmouse if they find a way around pirates....it will be because the were clever in game....not out game of securing their constructiin /base/ persinnel/resources.
The game requires you to gather resources in order to build.....not build outside of the game and then "port in" your BP.....everything is done in game.
Dual Universe whilst there might be a separate section LATER if they decide its feasable without breaking the dynamics......empasis on considering ALL the implications of such a system before doing so. Whilst you may feel this is important....yes ..its important to you....but not necessarily others.
If however they decide to give you a separate section to build....you will stll be required to log in to the server...(security is important)....this means they have to devote extra people or take them away from existing things....causing issues in other areas or delays to existing things.
To be fair it is pretty pointless at this juncture. You may think its feasable and state how it is....however you do not know enough of whats happening in DU or behind the scenes to be able to judge what is feasable or not and neither do we..however they need to get the main part right before they look at other things.
So lets leave it at that and if they do come out with something....good for you. If not.....enjoy the game how it was meant to be played.
I think what I have mentioned could be a part of how the game is meant to be played. Again, I should iterate that BP's don't simply let you spawn in whatever you want. You still have to mine the resources, then use whatever in game mechanic is used to build and spawn the item (which can vary a lot, including possibilities that would be vulnerable to pirates if built in a pvp open zone). The only game dynamic this would break would be to not require players to utilize resources to test design iteration and to not require players to use the base interface and dynamics at to design. Depending on how the interface and dynamics are implemented such as the inclusion of build drones and the cost of jetpack fuels, this could be a huge ease-of-use perk for design, simply a nice addition for peace of mind/ability to focus while building, or completely unnecessary. If the in game build system allows you to easily move around your builds in 360 degrees with the capacity to hover and orient at any point and to destroy/reconstruct at no cost then I see no need for this sort of Construct Creator. However, if this isn't the case then the argument for it as an ease of use element is compelling.
-
5 hours ago, Lethys said:
Quote from https://www.dualthegame.com/
"
What is Dual Universe?
Dual Universe is a Continuous Single-Shard sandbox MMORPG taking place in a vast Sci-Fi universe, focusing on emergent gameplay with player-driven in-game economy, politics, trade and warfare. Players can freely modify the voxel-based universe by creating structures, spaceships or giant orbital stations, giving birth to empires and civilizations.
"
And we already told you (several times) that NQ plans for this. INGAME. without the need for some seperate server
Yes. And they should do it INGAME, not on some seperate server
Again, I already told you that doing it on a separate server is not necessary.
Also, the use of the term MMORPG does not preclude the use of other player-types that may play more than one game type.
-
2 minutes ago, Lethys said:
that doesn't really matter when people will only be there to create blueprints (perfectly safe! which introduces ANOTHER problem!) - this WILL split the player base as EVERYONE will use this to create blueprints without the fear of pirates
People are already going to figure out a way to create blueprints without the fear of pirates.
-
4 minutes ago, Lethys said:
So what? it's not about instancing? I don't even know what you are suggesting here when I reread all your comments
I should be clear and change my verbiage.
I am for any form of construct creator. I was offering suggestions on how it could be done using existing technology.
The main point is that you can create a construct, test it, and then save it in a file (Blueprint), which can then be spawned via some mechanism in game once the resources have been collected, most likely after a build time.
-
7 minutes ago, Lethys said:
Well yes, because again: DU doesn't aim for single players. Nor does DU aim for creative mode players. DU does aim for MMO players.
And introducing such a creative world (it rly doesn't matter that it gets deleted or smth) is just against everything DU wants to achieve
people aren't forced. People are informed that: 1) there will be safezones where you can build and do stuff unharmed and 2) everything outside will be PVP, except if PLAYERS do protect other members. So noone forces you here to build outside. Noone forces you to play DU. You get a game with certain mechanics (which are clearly promoted and which are clearly visible to anyone) - so no, you can't complain afterwards that there is no creative mode on some seperate server
edit:
and stop saying you don't want a seperate server for it when you have written that on multiple occasions
Well yes, because again: DU doesn't aim for single players. Nor does DU aim for creative mode players. DU does aim for MMO players.
And introducing such a creative world (it rly doesn't matter that it gets deleted or smth) is just against everything DU wants to achieve
I haven't seen any statement from NQ saying that it wants MMO players in lieu of creative mode players, or vice-versa. Having more players of any type will most likely increase the populace of the game/universe.
people aren't forced. People are informed that: 1) there will be safezones where you can build and do stuff unharmed and 2) everything outside will be PVP, except if PLAYERS do protect other members. So noone forces you here to build outside. Noone forces you to play DU. You get a game with certain mechanics (which are clearly promoted and which are clearly visible to anyone) - so no, you can't complain afterwards that there is no creative mode on some seperate server
I think you are confusing my intent here. I just want a tool created to help make creations. It has nothing to do with creating separate zones that are persistent.
-
19 minutes ago, Lethys said:
Well you asked for a creative mode "so far away you could say it's seperate". This WILL SPLIT the playerbase, if you want it or not.
People who want to build and not care about security WILL use that - so they WILL NOT interact with others.
NQ want to introduce some kind of holo-creative mode - on the SAME SERVER, TOGETHER with others, NOT seperated, NOT offline - but INGAME. That in itself introduces other problems, but as you obviously can't see the problem with your idea - I won't even start on those
I stated specifically in previous posts that those creations would immediately be deleted after the player left the session. It is just for blueprint creation.
-
1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
@Bitmouse
A creative mode won't bring more content, cause the very PURPOSE of the game's unique cloud-hosting server tech, is that the amount of players in one place IS the content.
Sure, you can have a "holographic creation" mode in-game, but you'll have to keep it IN-GAME, while online, not offline, nor in an instance. That's the problem people have with it.Yes, and I have more or less agreed and stated ways in which they could implement that that would use existing technology.
However they implement it it is going to have to be a risk free way of design constructs. The only risk being the time you put into it.
Whether they make that an in game bay you build and walk into or a button you click on the homescreen of the game is a fairly moot point. The first would be more cohesive and immersive. However, functionally it would affect the game play cycle the same.
-
1 hour ago, devu said:
Again... this game and it's technology is build around MMO. Client will not exist without server. And the biggest attraction of this title is a single shard universe. I bet this fact alone attracts far more MMO players because of that as oppose to creative builders. Because they understand implications of this style and embrace it. And DU attract this kind of audience.
Sure I understand, some would prefer creative mode, but this game is simply not for them. Go play SE, minecraft or whatever. And I doubt there will be community split here.
This game is for those who understand what, how and why.
This isn't about a separate creative mode that is contained in and of itself. As you can see from the title of this thread. This is specifically for a creative mode that allows players to build blueprints for use in the game.
I am only acknowledging other's concerns that it could be used as a standalone and troubleshooting ways to minimize that while point out the potential positives if people still choose to circumvent those specific measures.
-
2 hours ago, Lethys said:
YES, you explicitly SAID that:
So please NO, don't split the players. EVERYONE should play and build on the SAME server, in nearly the SAME area with protective measures taken by NQ to protect monuments (which they already did take: the arkzone!)
You quoted and highlighted my text, but didn't highlight the exact portion that negated your point.
2 hours ago, Lethys said:I don't see the harm. Personally this is a feature that I would wait for and imagine given the ideas put forth. Specifically the idea of creating creative areas a distance so far from the populace as to make them functionally separate from the game and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.
and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.
This point makes this a feature or a tool, and not a separate game.
-
5 hours ago, Myriad said:
This is a key point and one that didn't cross my mind.
I said in an earlier post that a creative mode would take away from multiplayer content but it would also ruin the economy.
The whole economy is based around scanning and mining resources. If you don't have to actually have the resources to make a blueprint then everyone will have blueprints and most builders will be out of a job as everyone will just spend time making blueprints before playing the game. Also with no resource requirement to start building resources would get devalued.
You of course will need to mine the resource to build the blueprint and whatever facilities or time is required to spawn said blueprint.
The value of a blueprint will be in it's design quality. Builders will have a job in design.
-
7 hours ago, wizardoftrash said:
None of what you stated there answers the primary negative impact that it would have, that is for every player spending time messing around in creative zone, that is a player who isn't actually playing the game. They aren't in the world space, they are not contributing to societies, and the only thing they are adding to the world is blueprints.
people are going to be building all the time as it is, blueprints will be everywhere, and having a way to produce blueprints in-game without any access to the material de-values blueprints as a commodity.
by far the most dangerous thing suggested here though is the idea that you would be able to test pvp with multiple players in creative mode. That would badly fracture the player popularion, as the only pvp-minded player left in the actual world then would be pirates and conquerers. All of us folks who want to fight, but who don't take any pleasure in ruining other people's creations would be playing effectively a whole other game in creative instead of bounty hunting or joining a militia.
the backbone of this game is the number of people actually playing it. If you are testing blueprints, you'll need the resources and space to do so. If you are testing military tech, it'll need field tests. That's just what an emergent gameplay environment is all about. If that's exciting to you, join a military tech development org (heck I started one, the Alchemists, and thats exactly what I plan on spending my time doing).
None of what you stated there answers the primary negative impact that it would have, that is for every player spending time messing around in creative zone, that is a player who isn't actually playing the game. They aren't in the world space, they are not contributing to societies, and the only thing they are adding to the world is blueprints.
You are assuming these are going to be the same players. There are going to be three main types of players here, in general, players that use only creative mode, players that don't, and players that use both. In terms of server usage players that don't use creative mode are negligible to this point. Players that use both and players that use only creative mode are the groups you are talking about in reference to this point. Players that only use creative mode are likely to be minimal, especially if NQ structures creative mode in such a way as to make it unsatisfying to use as a game long term. This could easily be done by wiping the instance or zone used after use. Players that use both are going to be the majority of players that use creative mode. It is unlikely that players who would want to play Dual Universe and utilize all it's features are going to be likely to just play creative. These players are already invested in playing the game for what it is.
In a sense you have a point that some players might choose not to play in the main universe mode if they don't have to and would choose just to tool around in creative mode. However, it is a bad policy in general to force people to do something they would prefer not to do. In this case preferring to play in a creative mode versus the main universe mode. That is just bad policy and not the right thing to do.
Again, I think that more likely than not that you wouldn't see that many people just playing creative. No more than you would see in the main game mode. It may be possible to just build and rebuild with the resources you have. This would satisfy the, "I just want to play creative mode itch." If you have a player/players that really would prefer to just create, they are going to move on to another game/application. Doing the work to implement a creative mode in a way that is seamless and low investment on what is currently being developed only increases the possible player base. It also ads an ease of use feature which for some may be a big selling point.
people are going to be building all the time as it is, blueprints will be everywhere, and having a way to produce blueprints in-game without any access to the material de-values blueprints as a commodity.
This is a good thing. Blueprints should be valued on the quality of the design, not an inherently meaningless processed utilized to gain the materials necessary to tool around with the design. Would a futuristic society not have the means to draft a design before building it?
by far the most dangerous thing suggested here though is the idea that you would be able to test pvp with multiple players in creative mode. That would badly fracture the player popularion, as the only pvp-minded player left in the actual world then would be pirates and conquerers. All of us folks who want to fight, but who don't take any pleasure in ruining other people's creations would be playing effectively a whole other game in creative instead of bounty hunting or joining a militia.
I disagree here. The idea about it's potential as a pvp test bed is for practice and minigames only. Dual Universe will force some level of engagement with PVP. This mode could serve as a way to practice your skills without having to ruin anyone else's day or your own.
the backbone of this game is the number of people actually playing it. If you are testing blueprints, you'll need the resources and space to do so. If you are testing military tech, it'll need field tests. That's just what an emergent gameplay environment is all about. If that's exciting to you, join a military tech development org (heck I started one, the Alchemists, and thats exactly what I plan on spending my time doing).
I think this is a very valid point. However, I want to point out that on the realism side of things, simulations and drafting are already very much a part of the design process in the RL at our current level of development. I imagine that by the time we are capable of seeding another earth like world in a distant solar system we will be able to simulate physics enough to create much more meaningful simulations for this sort of design. It simply fits with the realism of the universe. To me a much more interesting question would be, how does a military design and test it's creations in the future? I don't think a creative mode as we are talking about it allows for full in vivo testing of creations. Even if you loaded in your best buildings and defenses that is not the same as testing it against your enemies and unknown situations/tech. Even the best run military exercises are a poor substitute at best for real world testing. The whole point of a creative mode is to streamline the process in a way that is realistic and serves the community. It would allow you to return to the creative mode after your real world tests and revise. This process could be very exhausting even with a creative mode. I don't think it will take away from the design, iteration, testing process.
-
21 minutes ago, Alethion said:
I believe this topic has been debated enough.....they are not building an external port for your BPs or an offline construction program....or similar...anytime soon. If they decide to it will be later on maybe towards release or after. Whilst the idea might appeal to some....the game is about experiencing this together in a single shard universe....you get all the ups and downs of success or failure together.....key word together. The wait whilst frustrating sometimes is just a fact of life. The game has potential for lots of other little goodies for us, but that is for later. Consideration is not hard fact. The main part is the core. If the core is not solid and the server tech is lacking because the focused on as someone put it "pandering to us ?" . So let the Dev focus on the main parts, before people start to throw the things they want to see in this game, because another game had it. Not saying its not useful to grab ideas....just not at this part in the games timeline....otherwise they would have don't it already.
I think people are confusing the intent of this suggestion. This isn't about together or apart. A creative mode supports the together part of the game in that it is a tool for creations to be used in game. It is just photoshop and the game is Instagram, except in this case they are more or less the same program with minor modifications.
-
On 9/25/2017 at 5:29 PM, ThatGuy225 said:
What I really want in any game is Mechs. This might be a stretch to do since the it either needs to function flawlessly or it needs to use some sort of pre-made animation (which would be difficult to fit on so many different designs) but if i could have one thing, it would be giant robots. more like a Gundam style as well as any other style people like such as mechwarrior, or the Big O, whatever Giant Robot floats your boat. of course it would all be up to the player. maybe they could have some sort of skeleton that you could build off of and that skeleton would have the pre-made animations and you would just be putting on the armor and weapons. might be a bit too much, but it will always be a small dream of mine.
For now I can just play pretend by building a ship in the shape of a Gundam even though the arms/legs don't move. if they added some sort of rotors like on Space Engineers or some sort of moving parts mechanic then that would be more than enough for me.
If we were given parts that could work towards this, it could be easy. However, getting these parts to interact with the terrain in desirable ways could be hard/easy.
I imagine the limit is on the physics simulation on the server.
I could see 4 legged mechs and some sort of bikes/atvs/cars working though.
-
Players would have to sub to play creative, so it is revenue to NQ.
I don't see the harm. Personally this is a feature that I would wait for and imagine given the ideas put forth. Specifically the idea of creating creative areas a distance so far from the populace as to make them functionally separate from the game and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.
I think the potential success of this can be found in the success of minecraft builds. I don't think the idea of a creative mode can be minimized.
Losing your build to pirates/other players is going to be inevitable. A creative mode gives all players the capacity to streamline the rebuild/redesign process should they choose to do it.
In fact, the mode that I mentioned earlier in this post would allow groups to practice pvp with their new constructs should they choose to use it.
If NQ created a form of simulation that was more feature rich, minigames could even be emergent that are less likely without a simulated mode.
I think in general this sort of feature, which is more of a tool for use of the game, can be designed in such a way as to enhance not hinder the game and could lead to other possibilities that could enhance the culture of DU.
-
7 hours ago, wizardoftrash said:
Yeah piracy is generally something you want to avoid.
But lets think nice and hard about what you are asking for here. Either creating yet another parallel server, hosting private instances for each player who is experimenting with creative mode, or building a whole accessory program that allows a player to run a creative mode single player client offline... so that the people what are already playing the game and building stuff can build blueprints of things they can't afford to build in-game.
I just don't see how that could possibly be worth the money or man-hours it would take to make it work. It would add so little to the game, it would actually reduce the active player count and run counter the game's purpose, and it decreases the actual construct count in-game to boot (because if you are building something in creative, that same construct isn't being built in the actual game, and there is no guarantee it ever will).
Just wait till Saturday hits and try-out what they already have. then re-visit if you think something like that would really actually add to the game.
I still think the benefits outweigh the positives here.
They could run it on the same server. A zone/s so far away from the played part of the game that it is functionally separate, wiped daily. Individual zones should be doable from what they describe of their tech.
People building things they never could afford to in the game at worst sparks their creativity and allows them to test what is possible. That most likely, overall, will translate into more creations by more people than less, since it matters what the population does and not the individual, in this case.
-
4 hours ago, Lethys said:
This is a game, no program to work with.
And DU isn't, shouldn't and hopefully will NEVER EVER be instanced. They want to avoid that crap and make something new - not go back to that dark age of the old times
Just to be clear this isn't about instancing the game. It is about creating an in game app that allows you to effectively create and test constructs. It can be built so that using it as a separate instance in the long term isn't viable.
Cosmetic items for skill specializations
in Idea Box
Posted
Well you either know the other person has gone around to get 500 people who are paying a subscription for a game to say that they are good at ______ or they had 500 people who are paying a subscription voluntarily say that they are good at _______.
I think you are going to run into the later more often.