DevisDevine

The question is will the game mechanics allow a stock market from the existing tag system or will NQ impliment one. In Eve my corp had shares for members and would do payouts based on it. its a bit of work managing the excel files doing it yourself but not much. The bigger issue, without a game mechanic, is the trust of companies holding shares to even payout. Afterall, who would hold the largest corporations accountable if they didnt.

Can they make smaller scale voxels, sure. But remember DU is doing a lot more than Landmark. NQ is being co servative for anything that takes computing power. There are a lot of features that could be implimented, but you can only do so many. They have to set limits to have a versitile functional game.

If they stick to uniform shapes sure. But even a borg cube wont be a solid cube. And what if I were to do a net around my ship with as thin of a web as I can to catch missiles. That would be hell with smaller voxels. Added: I do think it would be nice if later on we could create decorative components, that dont have any function, on a smaller scale. So you would be given a specific volume, maybe 1m3, where you can work with much smaller voxels to make decorative elements. Then that could be placed in the world as a solid component.

The isk inflation had nothing to do when you sell to NPCs in eve, as NPCs didnt buy anything. They gave out quest which injected money, but would never buy items from you on the market. Their market, as DU intends to be, is player driven.

I like this idea. Now it seems they already intend a log system for training. The time based makes sense based on the lore, but youd think having experience from actions having an effect on your learning as well

1. I wouldn't call it a 360 in marketing. But all they have done is give new players more time to learn and get hooked into a game that has a notoriously difficult learning curve. Anyone who wishes to truely play the game would have to go P2P 2. I dont disagree that some F2P games work fine. But most dont involve any real game development. Overwatch is nothing like WOW or Eve, if you knew anything about how the servers run for them you would understand. My 9 year old computer could handle the instancing for a few Overwatch games at a time. Not to mention how horribly implemented Overwatch is. Not saying it isnt a good game, I play it often, but it is not on the level of what WOW or Eve is. 4. It has a point when the devs have fully explained their reasoning and at least 2 of these threads pop up a week. Any game running a half decade is a successful game. Most games are beyond their lifecycle if they run 5 years. But Id expect for DU just to be taking off at 5 years. I am not against B2P or F2P, both do well for certain types of games. As I said, Overwatch works well as B2P because they have very low server cost. League has been a successful F2P game, but look at how much the devs have dedicated to develop the game further. But you have to look at what the game is doing and its running cost. Anything with a high server and maintenance cost cant run for long off a B2P model.

This is an excellent question, one asked a few times but never answered sufficiently from NQ. They do not intend to respawn resources. Periodic asteroid impacts was a suggestion, but how would you choose where it hits in a populated planet. It has not been confirmed, but it is speculated that new ark ships will come into play somehow here. Also, the resources could be so extensive, that it takes an enormous amount of time to deplete them, kinda like earth. It is suspected players will be on the starting planet for a year before any real expansion begins. Of course if there are richer areas elsewhere, the better equipped groups would want to move there immediately. Leaving the extensive, but low quality ore patches for noobs. Ofcourse this doesnt really answer much, but it is a good question.

You are still confusing datapoints and what a voxel means now adays. Datapoints are static positions used to construct polygons. Voxels as being used here are discrete sized objects that can be manipulated at the players will. It is comparing a Crysis map to a minecraft map. Crysis has a huge number of datapoints for the scenery, but only a select predefined set can be manipulated. Minecraft, while having fewer datapoints, uses voxels, but can be manipulated, thus constantly has to be recalculated.

Does it have to, no. Will it likely happen this way, sure. Play as you see fit. It is likely small groups will form together and unify to control more land. It becomes benificial for multiple reasons. As this happens more you get bigger and bigger government systems. Until finally I become the supreme ruler of everything and you all bow dowm to me, youre one true god.

All Eve is doing is giving new players more time to get sucked into a game. One that is notorious for its rediculous learning curve. Any that stay long eneough to get hooked will have to switch to P2P, in turn increasing eves numbers. Eve is old, true, but not dead yet. It is regurally updated and still has a strong core of players. Their problem is, the older the game gets, the further behind new players are (something DU will evemtually have to face). They even considered a second shard so new players could start fresh without being 10 years behind in training. This wasnt favored so they went to skill injectors, which has a lot of controversy as well. Please enlighten me to which MMO like WOW or Eve blizzard has put out and has been successful as either. Seriously, because I havent heard of any. Sure there are countless MMO gakes that pop up F2P, but none are as successful or last as long as their P2P counterparts. I dont see how P2P makes a publisher greedy, when it cost to run servers and maintain the games. How is pushing out free expansions like Eve does greedy. If you ask me its the F2P (and even B2P) games that charge ypu for dlc, that in reality is just the other half the game. All while ignoring fixing glaring issues with the game or even adding any new real content. If you dont like it, dont play. Afterall it is NQs choice. Personally, being as vested as I am in it now I would try it regardless. But if they fell away from a P2P model I would begin loosing interest because I understand how it would affect them as a company. Afterall they are a company, I think its fair for them to charge you the cost of a movie each month for up to 720 hours of play a month.

I first heard of this over 4 years ago, and it wasnt until 1-2 years they released how they do it. From what I understand this system cannot be used by a voxel sandbox game. For games like GTA or COD it could work great. As was mentioned, they take millions of data point scans, which could represent a voxel, but they dont necessarily do this. These points are then archived and sorted in a specific manner that allows them to select 1 out of a group that then corresponds to a pixel on screen. This soeting process takes time, think of it as their compiling. So instead of rendering billions of points, then doing an average to display on screen, they choose 1 point to correspond to each pixel on the screen and render it. The problem is, with a constantly changing dataset, as people mine amd build, it is not gaurenteed you can keep the file holding all the points in a specific order when its being modified. Furthermore this only addresses rendering. Voxel games arent cpu hungry because of what they render. Think of MC and starmade and the low quality textures they have. The difficult task for these are to constantly calculate and update the positions of each voxel so that your computer knows what to render. You would still need to calculate those points, then feed them into this program to sort before rendering. It strips the benifit gained.

This was discussed, as people wanted the option of corporate or alliance currencies to compete. But you would have to have a syst to allow their creation. Which I wouldnt be against completly. In lack of that, as stated, players would trade in resources, or utilize a game material or objec thats hard to obtain as a trade medium. From my experience this makes trading less desirable and useful in a whole.

I can see it now, after 6 months of work someone puts out a blueprint for an ancient Mahogony tree or century old cypress that you can buy, slice up, and use in furnature. All the big buainess would want it over the cheap pine patterns found on the market. But seriously, smaller than 25cm would be nice, but it destracts from the overall game right now. Components, mesh objects, that act as chairs and tables can replace this for now. Besides, having it a component can make it functional, as in using a chair to actually sit. I can see a game in 5-10 years after release where we're dealing with 1cm voxels and interaction components. So you can imbed something in a chair you create, allowing you to sit. But tracking smaller sized cubes means more components for interactions, meaning more calculations and heavier server loads. Now techniques like block groupings to form 1 larger block, or even creating a hallow body mesh of the object could reduce this. But it not only takes development time but also how will you handle component destruction if it is now 1 entity. So I agree we should ask for it as a future goal, but I dont expect it soon.

the block destruction does remove a respurce. But i agree its not credit removal. It just keeps the deman for raw goods going. I stated a transaction fee because something will maintain the database for whatever credit system we use. I'd assume thats the Ark based on lore. Think of them as the bank. Now I agree whoever sets up the market should control taxes, which wouldnt be the same. So the Corp that runs an area can create taxes for anyone operating in their area. Essentially they are the government, any anyone who sets up a shop can dictate prices like a store would. But these last 2 wouldnt be any form of sink, just exchange. By having the Ark operate as the bank with 'fees' it would create a true curremcy sink. These fees could be flat rates or percentages. This could be slowly adjusted over time to control inflation if desired and poasibly manipulated by skills as in eve. But this alone doesnt address insertion into the market, which you were looking to do as well. Sorry, I am on my phone and not very focused when writing this.

while destruction isnt a curremcy sink, it still removes value. And since currency is just there to represent value it works similar. But i understand where, even with an increasing population, it could lead to currency inflation similar to what we have in the US. I guess eve mitigates this my small transaction fees. And this could make sense in DU. It would be assumed that it is the Ark that handles these transactions. It could impose a small fee for transactions.

I agree a 1 time npc removal isnt the way to go. The credit thing has been a big unanswered issue to me. I've often wondered if a system like yours would work in a game. Do you know if its ever been tested? With new players always comming in, i think there needs to be a continuious source. Otherwise you end up in a situation like you stated, most of the currency in the hands of a few with no way to ever surpass their wealth. The common sources are NPC quest and killing NPCs for a 'bounty'. I do hope NQ has some sort of NPC enemy for this to give the combat guys to directly earn money. But to have this then cut it out can cause drastic issues in the market. Now the sink source is obvious, destruction. Blow something up and its value is removed from the market. Now to get away from a structured NPC system, youre way on paper seems to work, but it would need considerable thought and testing. To me, in a resource based economy, you expect the value to come from the ground, therefor I like the idea. But gold has to be rare, but not too rare. Possibly something thats not just in scarce pockets, but in really low quantities throughout the planets. Say you mined 1 million tons of iron and refine it, maybe you get eneough to make bar of gold as well. Something to that effect.

I definatly work with odd symetry more, but having the option for both would be best.

I dont have the link, but read the dev blog on ressurection nodes.

I'm not sure if it going to be a stretch goal, but it is planned for future development.

There is such a thing. The Alpha Outfit, offered in I think Gold and higher

the teritory and piracy thing could be something to note... if it hadnt been addressed already. I can tell you now how much territory the largest orginazation will control, 0%. or the limit as X approaches it. Remember the universe is infinite. Someone have that teritory, move on. Furthermore as JC stated, with there being no choke points it will be harder to control large territories. you can enter amd exit a given space from anywhere around a 3D sphere. As for piracy, sure it will likely happen on trade routes, so what. Deal with it yourself thats the point of emergent game play. I dont see where someone can control the market, or why it woulf matter. Everything is player made, meaning it comes from what you and others harvest. If no one controls all the teritory you can just mine yourself and make it, or make your own market elsewhere

That was my question. It has been stated for months thats what the skill system will be

Also it could lead to balancing issues. But I hope they have a large variety of components and even nanoformer upgrades.

I was under the impression the planet was scaled down for presentation purposes. I agree it should have something too it. I havent played much SE since planets but it seemed they had a good feel to it. climbing in altitude was a challenge. (well for me playing 30 min on the new system)

Thats what I had in mind. But some people prefer to skip that, so why not let them. They probably wouldnt pay attention anyway to whatever mindless task they are told to do. But give incentive so they want to do it. And it would also let someone start with basic skills related to their playstyle.