Bitmouse
-
Posts
80 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bitmouse
-
-
5 hours ago, Lethys said:
So you're in favor of:
- splitting the community into builders who just want to build anda everyone else
- RL piracy. Those guys who take money from nq to get smth they want
- pirate servers (again splitting the community)
- pirate servers (people who play there DON'T pay nq as they should, so they're RL pirate too)
- You defend those guys because "hey, they couldn't pay for a sub so it's not that bad. At least they can play DU. But yeah, sucks for nq because they lose money"
Are you serious? Wtf is wrong with you? Sorry but I just can't understand you there. At all.
- splitting the community into builders who just want to build and a everyone else
No. I have already stated that it may attract players who wouldn't play otherwise and those that want the community experience will still play on the main server.
- RL piracy. Those guys who take money from nq to get smth they want
Piracy cannot be guaranteed to be avoided. I am saying that there are scenarios in which NQ could orient itself to benefit from piracy if it arises. (think disgruntled employ scenario and other possibilities)
- pirate servers (again splitting the community)
See previous.
- pirate servers (people who play there DON'T pay nq as they should, so they're RL pirate too)
See previous.
- You defend those guys because "hey, they couldn't pay for a sub so it's not that bad. At least they can play DU. But yeah, sucks for nq because they lose money"
It's not so much a defense as a reality. You can't control everything all the time. Knowing that in the entire world, there will always be some form of piracy, you can either acknowledge that fact and adapt to or not.
-
6 hours ago, devu said:
And the current mode is pre-alpha. I don't think you understand what you asking for here.
Simply to provide mockup of their server architecture to run on your local machine.. Is not going to happen.
This discussion has already gotten to the point where we are talking about some sort of NQ hosted created instance.
-
1 hour ago, Lethys said:
So you're in favor of:
- splitting the community into builders who just want to build anda everyone else
- RL piracy. Those guys who take money from nq to get smth they want
- pirate servers (again splitting the community)
- pirate servers (people who play there DON'T pay nq as they should, so they're RL pirate too)
- You defend those guys because "hey, they couldn't pay for a sub so it's not that bad. At least they can play DU. But yeah, sucks for nq because they lose money"
Are you serious? Wtf is wrong with you? Sorry but I just can't understand you there. At all.
I just want to be clear, that generally, some good thinkers have been in favor of piracy and have seen it's place in a legitimate economy. In this case piracy is something that they are likely going to avoid,due to the online nature of their game (sans leaks or other unforeseens). That being said, since piracy, may and in other cases has occurred, there are ways that it can be used to the benefit of the company. An example is companies who have released cracked version of their own professional enterprise software as a, "trial," for those that wouldn't/couldn't buy it knowing full well that to utilize their product in any commercially viable way, they would first have to buy it.
However, instancing this mode online solves these concerns.
-
2 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 don't have the brain power atm to address your two previous posts, but I will try to. I will just say for now that I still think it adds more to the game than it takes away, and I will explain why.
-
14 minutes ago, wizardoftrash said:
NQ talked about the possibility for a "creative mode" for building yes, but not for an offline mode. If the game functioned on any significant level offline, piracy, modding, and private servers could become an issue. Monetization could become an issue (as it would be challenging to get the "offline" class of player to pay). And again most importantly, people using creative mode would therefor not actually be logged on, they would not be participating in the same game as the rest of us.
The main reason that we have something *like* creative mode during the pre-alpha is due to the lack of a crafting system, and the need to test construct mechanics including flight on a large scale with many players (and the easiest way to do that apart from spawning a bunch of free ships, is by giving everyone all the parts).
An offline mode simply might not be possible, especially if so much of the game's mechanics are server-side.
Perhaps offline mode is the wrong terminology for me to have used, as the offline component isn't relevant. The component which is relevant is the capacity to build/revise creations and export to blueprint. This could be integrated into a system wherein the user still had to login, circumventing many of the concerns you mentioned. In fact it could be hosted on a low resource server to address all the concerns, however, would that really be necessary?
Is piracy more possible with a client hosted creative mode? If no then it would bring more content and people to the game than it would likely take.
Is piracy a bad thing for a game? Many industries build piracy into their profit models and account for it as a form of loss. Piracy wouldn't take away from the main thing that Novaquark can offer which is access to the game's main population. This is akin to World of Warcraft and the various pirate servers. What's more is that the pirate servers can't keep up technologically.
It is likely that this form of piracy accounts for a percentage of the main games population that is in the lower end of single digit percentages and many of these people are people who wouldn't or couldn't afford to play the main game.
-
12 minutes ago, Myriad said:
A creative mode would take away from the multiplayer content. There would be too many people spending time in creative mode when they should be interacting with other people.
"It is true that there may be a class that would play the game only in this limited creative mode. However, this may not be a significant portion of those who would prefer to play online and may actually bring more people/creativity to the game." quoted from previous post, after this poster posted.
-
9 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
@Bitmouse
Did you notice the game's main sell is the ability to have thousands of people on one place, at one time?
Why would NQ want people to play the game ... offline.
Also, an offline mode will only lead to their work being pirated on an offline mode and inevitably, with Johny McNugget setting up a private server - which is what they wante to avoid. At worst, Chinese MMO "Universe Two" pops up six months later and NQ loses revenue to an F2P piece of crap ripoff MMO, even if it has not the cloud-based algorithms for the netcode.
You want to experiment on building? Do it in-game, online, like everyone else. No, you won't develope your super-weapon without people noticing, deal with it.Yes,. if you don't watch out, people will come and blow your super weapon off the sky - or even worse - people may betray you and steal your ideas, cause that's a legit thing.
Also, the current version is a test to find bugs, it's not even an MVP (minimum viable product) of a game yet, it's a tech demo.
Peace.The offline mode could be built into the main engine. I think this would solve the piracy concerns.
One of the main features is to try out ideas and cut down on the in game cost of redesign and error correction, especially in massive systems. Also, the ability to fly continuously and not use resources cuts down the need to build struts or build in space (which may be prohibitive at first).
Blueprints are already going to be a part of the game. So we have to acknowledge the fact that superweapons are most likely at times going to pop out of nowhere.
-
13 minutes ago, wizardoftrash said:
My guess is that this probably won't happen. I bet a significant part of the essential game functions are server-side, which would make this basically impossible.
EDIT: Also, it would be then *easier* for people to do their building offline, drastically cutting the number of players that would play online at all. You'd end up with a class of "player" who plays offline only just for creative mode.
NQ already stated that this is a possibility:
I am pointing out the arguments for this mode. It is true that there may be a class that would play the game only in this limited creative mode. However, this may not be a significant portion of those who would prefer to play online and may actually bring more people/creativity to the game.
-
This concept isn't for single player. It is a tool for multiplayer.
-
Just now, Bitmouse said:
I agree that the server tech is the most important thing.
I am not so much feeling impatient as I think this is a feature which should be in the game and could be implemented before release.
Giving the user something to do is the honey which brings them to test the game, it can be made to serve the development cycle.
-
3 minutes ago, Lethys said:
The most important thing to test for DU is not building. Or pvp. Or rdms. Or scanning and mining. Or production. The most important thing is the server tech.
And they should focus on that instead of fulfilling unpatient customers wishes
I agree that the server tech is the most important thing.
I am not so much feeling impatient as I think this is a feature which should be in the game and could be implemented before release.
-
I should be more clear on my overall intent. A creative mode would be a feature for the game. The capacity for designers to seamlessly build and test designs, with importable blueprints, would be an ease of use feature that would allow citizens to more quickly move into the exploration/population phase of the game.
Having played Empyrion, I found that when I moved into creative mode to building my spaceships/bases that it was an, "A-ha," moment, why wasn't I doing this before.
It is a feature that is a better tool for content creation.
-
The current game mode is a creative mode without the need for resources. NQ stated that blueprints from the alpha/beta will be useable at launch. This change would allow users to utilize the game engine without having to stress their servers. More bugs may be discovered in the engine.
Also, it would increase the useable time for building, which is the main feature currently available during pre-alpha.
-
An in game Construct Creator would give designers the capacity to efficiently build, test, and iterate designs. This could be done in a way that utilizes current technology slated for development in the game.
One method would be to use reformat-able zones. Players would spawn into these zones with a tool set similar to what is being implemented in pre-alpha. After the play session the zone is formatted.
-
On 8/3/2017 at 6:16 AM, NQ-Nyzaltar said:
Hi there,
It's true that:
- Massive Constructs "battlestar cruiser" size or "death star" will require incredible amount of resources and may not (or hardly) be possible to build alone.
- We don't plan to let players import design from 3D tools like 3DS Max, Blender or Zbrush.
However:
- It's also true that trial & errors will have a massive cost in resources if designing/prototyping a very large of spaceship must be done in the "real" in-game universe.
- It's also true that it would force all large ship designers to get huge amount of resources just for designing, not even for building. The ideal situation would be that the designer role shouldn't be tied to gather huge amounts of resources (this should be left to the production role).
In conclusion:
Yes, having a creative mode inside the game, just for designing purpose (without giving any free resources in the "real" in-game universe) is something we are considering.
However, this is a huge feature to develop, and while we would like to add it to the game, there is a high chance it won't be implemented before the official game release. If it's implemented at some point, it will be probably after, in an expansion.
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.
Would it be possible to create a mode of the game that is like, "god mode," for the purposes of creation, with the capacity to import blueprints? Or a similar external app that runs on the games engine, with the same capacity?
-
Hey guys,
I made a video to familiarize others with the way constructs deconstruct in Empyrion. Maybe this will spur some more thoughts for Dual Universe?
-
Hello,
TLDR: Ships as 1 unit, collision makes the ship of lower kinetic energy 2 units, the destroyed portion and the surviving portion, destroyed portion originates from point of impact.
Using maths to see a construct as 1 unit of kinetic energy (mass*velocity) as it collides with another ship (mass*velocity) the ship of lower kinetic energy could be divided into 2 units the surviving unit and the destroyed unit, this division could occur as a percentage (the damage cause by collision) and a shape (the rough shape of the other ship). This should yield relatively low server overhead, especially if collision damage is limited to ships above a certain size (capital ships only) thus eliminating the value (in general), of mass torpedos.
If this was simple enough as to allow sufficient server overhead collision damage could be mutual, and percentages of each ship could be destroyed using the method described above.
-
I would like to see a creative mode where players may work on joint projects out of game.
-
Adding onto a previous post I had about being able to save constructs as blueprints
I would like to see the capacity to snap blueprints onto existing constructs as subassemblies
-
I apologize if this idea has already been posted.
I would like to see the capacity to save constructs as blueprints
Construct Creator for Blueprint Design
in Idea Box
Posted
This could all be done with a separate NQ hosted instance. For real testing of constructs they would have to provide this or a simulacrum.