Maxim Kammerer
-
Posts
372 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Maxim Kammerer
-
-
I think nothing can be "easily implemented" into DU anymore. Only way to save the game would be starting from scratch. But NQ can't do that and nobody else will take over. Even if NQ would allow using the idea for free, most investors would avoid a concept that failed so miserable. It's a pity about the wasted potential!
-
40 minutes ago, le_souriceau said:
Overpraising is when you legibly believe goals are realistic. They knew they are not
Without any experiences in game developement it is possible that they were not able to see that the goals are not realistic. It is not even clear if they realised it in the first years of developement. At least JC lost contact to reality. In the end he was living in his own little world where everything is possible.
-
3 hours ago, BlindingBright said:
While I agree with you, every MMO beta/launch I've been apart of has suffered hard to track exploits regarding currency, and in game items...
The technology to prevent that without blockchains is there. It is standard for online banking, credit cards and even small online shops. Money duplication is pretty much non-existing. The only way to "cheat" here is to hack accounts and steal existing money (unless you are a bank that creates checkbook money, but that is another story). If MMOs have problems with exploits than not by missing technology but by bad design and programming. Block chains without proper implementation wouldn't solve this problem. And whoever can implement them properly would also be able to do it the traditional way, which is much faster and cheaper.
-
1 hour ago, Grizzly45 said:
Otherwise, it takes too much time and discourages the desire to play further.
It discourages to collect the surface ore. But you can play without it. It's more fun to ignore it or even skip calibration.
-
2 hours ago, BlindingBright said:
I still feel Blockchain items in MMO's should be the default, along with in game currency, if only to help track cheating and fraud.
Blockchains make sense for decentralised systems. But MMO's are usually hosted by a vendor with a central server or server grid constituting the single source of truth. In this case it is much better to permit and log all transactions server-side without excessive encryption.
- blundertwink and Atmosph3rik
-
2
-
9 hours ago, BlindingBright said:
Curious what NQ will do next, and if they have enough investment to keep the doors open for DU while they pivot to their new project.
I expect them to keep DU running until the new product goes live. It makes a better impression when they have something to show.
-
10 minutes ago, Zeddrick said:
PVE will save us all!
Yup. Based on experiences with NQ implementations PVE will be everywhere to ensure that everybody can enjoy it without leaving the safe zone and the first iteration will be completely unbalanced so that the NPCs are invincible and one-shot-kill everything in sight and maybe even out of sight. Than DU will have no problems anymore.
-
2 hours ago, Castanietzsche said:
Sure DU is dead if anyone asks
It will be even more dead when nobody asks anymore. (Can there be a superlative for dead? Nevermind!)
-
That means your question actually was why you get a virus message when downloading the DU patch. In that case you should add some information about your virus scanner.
-
One step after the other: First clarify if there actually is a Trojan Script in the update and if yes, than ask for the reason. With other words: What makes you sure that this is not a false positive?
-
16 hours ago, Zeddrick said:
I mean, is it going to bring 100,000 players? Will they stay long enough to buy anything?
DU would turn into a slideshow with 100,000 players. Nobody will stay or even buy something in such a game.
-
59 minutes ago, T3mp said:
this game is already dead
No matter! It was dead for years. But it is still there.
-
18 hours ago, RugesV said:
1 week cycle, 3 month cycle, 6 month cycle, 1 year cycle. Its all the same.
No, it's not. For example 1 year is around 52 weeks. 1 week and 52 weeks are not the same. Simple math.
And no, it's also not the same in terms of gameplay. For a single player it takes several days to find a good new spot. It makes a huge difference if you need to do that every week or every 3 months or every 6 months or every year.
18 hours ago, RugesV said:A casual player needs to be on during a specific period of time (when the ore fields renew).
That sounds like you are expecting all spots to renew at the same time. That would indeed be stupid design. But the change to asteroid respawn shows that NQ already learned that lesson.
18 hours ago, RugesV said:More players will be driven from the game because the endless hollow loop of scanning.
More players will join because they get a chance to actually find something valuable.
18 hours ago, RugesV said:Basically the only people that will benefit from dynamic ore pools is Nomads who dont mind moving operations every 3-6 months.
Moving mining operations every 3-6 months doesn't make you a nomad. You can still have a permanent HQ. That's what HQ tiles are intended for.
18 hours ago, RugesV said:Heck even with the current ore pools, there might be to much ore coming into the game.
It is not too much ore but too few players. And blocking the good spots in safe zone is not the best strategy to attract new players. With ore deplation and renewal it would even be easy to scale the amount of ore with the number of players.
-
20 hours ago, Atmosph3rik said:
If you decide not to join the race because you don't think you have a chance at 1st place anymore, that's on you.
I do not need to join the race anymore because I already seized my chance at 1st place.
-
1 hour ago, kulkija said:
Game is available for everybody, rare ore is not. How rare can be available for all?
You have a misconception about rarity. It means that there is not much of if. It does not mean that a minority must sit on it forever.
-
20 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:
Are you saying that because it would be a 3-6 month cycle, people could just leave all of their infrastructure in place in the hopes that a territory might have a payout that is worth mining again at some point in the next few years?
No, they leave there mining infrastructure for the 3-6 month period until the ore is deplated and than move to a fresh spot for the next 3-6 months.
20 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:Unless i'm misunderstanding, this would require everyone to rescan the planets every 3-6 months to rediscover the territories with valuable ore on them.
Yes, you got it. Exploration is part of the mining business. Those, who are currently sitting on T2+ tiles might not like the idea, but it would be an improvement for evereybody else - and the game is intended for all players and not just for some lucky few, isnt' it?.
-
6 hours ago, RugesV said:
Rinse Repeat every week.
You shouldn't reply without reading. Ther OP is talking about a 3-6 month cycle.
-
JC was even more convinced on the potential of DU as MMO. So what?
-
-
8 hours ago, Atmosph3rik said:
If i knew that they were planning to fix it, or not planning to fix it, then i would move on.
You are on the safe side assuming they are not going to fix it. I guess they are aware of it but NQ has no budget for this kind of bugfixes and because the codebase is a hot steamy mess. That they implemented a second layer of collision checks tells me that they gave up finding the bugs in the original code. I'm sure this applies to obstruction (and most other known issues) as well.
-
12 hours ago, Talocan said:
With TW the safe zones would probably be massively reduced so you have no choice.
The safe and tax-free tiles on Haven and Sanctuary will always remain and that is a lot of space with the current core limit. Of course pooling all static constructs on just two moons would turn DU once more in a slide show, but that's what TW and a sufficient reduction of the safe zones would result in. That's why it is unlikely that the safe zones would be massively reduced. If TW comes at all I expect it to be like current PvP on asteroids (because it is the cheapest option) and to be implemented outside the current safe zone only.
12 hours ago, Talocan said:Right now there's no advantage to building in PvP.
Without a miracle that makes NQ learn how to create engaging game mechanics this will never change.
-
2 hours ago, Kezzle said:
Are the TW rules going to be identical to the space station PvP rules?
It's DU. Of course they would (unless NQ finds something even worse). That's why we have no TW. It would kill the game.
-
7 hours ago, Talocan said:
No, because there's no good reason to build them.
There you have it. With TW there would be no reason to build static constructs outside safe zone other than xs cores with mining units and a container.
-
3 hours ago, Kezzle said:
Got any actual facts to back it up?
Are there any space stations outside safe zone?
NQ's ideas about UGC are wrong
in General Discussions
Posted
At least without crossing red lines. Today the limitation is no longer the AI itself but the data that is used for training. It must be as varied as possible but it must not contain - lets say - problematic content. That requires manual preselection. With the amount of data required for high quality results this is very expensive - even if outsourced to low-wage countries. And with very expensive I mean very expensive. In case of large language models like ChatGTP we are talking about billions of US$. And you need additional manual postselection for reinforced learning to sort out unwanted results. This is not just an additional cost factor but it also reduces the creativity of the system. The tighter the jail the more boring and repetitive the result becomes. But the more you let the AI off the leash the higher the risk of unacceptable results.