Gronkar

I.....I.....I have no clue what you mean

I completely agree. I was angry and hurt as well and certainly was not a fan of the developers, especially Sean Murray. I still don't like that they haven't apologized, the closest thing we got was "actions speak louder than words" from them. However, I am sure they did not take glee in scamming the players out of their money because they have clearly worked very hard on releasing the game they promised, despite people like us hating them, and that shows their intent was not to make off with our money. They wanted to release this or they wouldn't have. They didn't have to. 
 
I still want an apology, I'm still upset about the lies, but the fact for me at least is that all of that previous salt revolves around a game that was promised, which has now essentially been released, and it would be illogical for me to not play the game now. 
 
I'm sorry you were probably hurt just as much as I was. But that game you might have been anxiously waiting for... It's out now.

Personally I'll never go back to that game no matter what they add, I just got bored with its fundamental design.

Honestly, so long as the cosmetics don't affect gameplay at all and don't change the shape of things (like protruding objects) then they can put whatever they want in there, as far as I care. If people will buy it, cool, that's money in NQ's pocket that can be spent making the game experience better and providing more content.
 
If people want Hello Kitty, brony stuff, whatever, let them have it. Just don't force me to buy it.
 
The only thing I'm concerned with is quantity. I don't want to see updates coming out with 100 new skins and no gameplay items or new game features. NQ's time should mostly be spent on the game, and any cosmetics should be just sprinkles on top, not the main course.

Hello @ZipSnipe
 
Welcome to community.
Knowing you coming from Empyrion Galactic Survival and probably familiar with SE as a similar type of game you may have a certain expectations.
But you also know about what's wrong with SE and Empyrion. Those games do not provide one thing everyone after a while will start looking for.
 
A goal.
You can gather with few friends, build your base, ships. But after a while you ending up wandering around aimlessly. No matter how much you like building stuff, the most exiting stuff in Empyrion and SE is first 2-3 days of game play. When you building your new cool project or idea coming along.
 
I know that from experience, as I played both of those games a lot. What personally attracted me to DU was the fact they started with MMO in mind first. Sure there are sacrifices needs to be made in physics, battle system etc, but server technology behind DU is impressive. Having thousands of people on the same server is something that SE or Empyrion will never ever be able to achieve. And this is a first condition to add a sense to the game play.
 
I have seen many attempts to build bigger servers, provide some scenarios, economy systems, build worlds and there was many nice ideas, even multi-instances to overcome limitations of those games came into play. But ultimately those games cannot handle more than 50k dynamic blocks/voxels at the same time to provide a smooth game play. No matter how hard they will try those games will never be a truly multiplayer games. More co-op category kind of thing. Even single player can build massive construct that will drop sim speed to unplayable levels.
 
DU on top of promise of being proper MMO game will give you economy, politics and players itself will build a world and scenarios around themselves. As oppose to trying to convince you to 1 scenario or give you aimless game play. Only because long term game play in single server will be possible. How many wipe-outs did you survive on the other titles? As many to bring you back to the beginning, to the most interesting part of those games ;). But we all wished for a bit more. And this is why we ended up here.
 
I see you jumping to conclusions early, in fact nobody here knows how well it all perform. But if you spent some time around the dev blogs you would recognise the spirit behind NQ developers and understood the vision behind the project. With this understanding you would recognise that comparing DU to Empyrion many here could take as an insult and react a bit to harsh.
 
Think about DU as a combination of SE/Empyrion, Minecraft/ Eve Online/ Entropia Universe and you will see how much more is into it. Do not expect realistic physics simulation on grand scale, or welding blocks in stages (that I would argue about realism of it anyway  ) there will be simplification in many areas crucial to run this smoothly. But one thing for sure, the goal will be to accommodate as many players at the same world with a assumption each may have some firepower and start a epic battle at some point. I don't think anybody gives up on this part here

From the latest Dev Diary we have been shown screen units, but we haven't been shown physical how big they are or of they are scaleable yet.
 
We should get somewhat of an answer about this when the alpha drops in a month or so. Hopefully NQ will be putting an idea forum in place too to help manage requests like this too

Hey guys,
 
I hope there is no thread existing who has this idea as topic, but i couldn't find anything and as far as I know, there are only predefined screen modules.
 
I thought about having screenblocks in the game, wich you can use to create huge neon advertising for space stations or cities. You should be able to script them etc.
I think this would be pretty useful and will make cities or stations even more alive.
 
Sorry for my bad english guys, im no native-Speaker. If theres anything unclear, or do you have any advice please tell me.
 

 
Here one example how it could look like.

I inhaled the crisp, sharp, painful air.
The room was made of glass. Lined with billions of lights.
"This is what happens when you disrespect us, Kuritho."
I heard muttering on the other side of the glass.
"It's inhumane. Nobody should ever experience this, Kefir."
"But he has defied our ways, our people, and our clan. Do it."
Suddenly, my eyes were bleeding of crimson tears.
They made a weapon that caused them to go insane.
The "Lightning McQueen MK2, Destroyer of Worlds."
 

As a noble idea it sounds, it might also lead to something else. Some people will stockpile DAC's on a low prices and resell later when expected price will go up over a time . Because of that I say no. If you consider possibility of market manipulations. We don't wont this game to be pay to win right? But to some extend that would be one of the kitchen doors to influence by having more money.

EVE had a far better system to handle this. It was an idiot-proof system. You had to actively pass at least 4 logic checks in your brain to redeem a PLEx anmake it an in-game item.
 
Also claim how "toxic" I am, NQ knows better than you guys, cause they actually played EVE and they have said they want this redeeming of DAC system which is idiot-proof.
 
Howver, if you try and resell DAC after you buy it for in-game money, you CAN'T revert it back to a non-lootable item. use it, or save it. And saving it for later imposes a risk, yas your ship may be attacked or your base raided. You can trade it in a safezone, but the supply there will be OFF THE ROOF, so you won't get good prices
 
And this is what Gallo and all of his likeminded people hate. The fact the Risk is INSANE for retrading DACs.
 
I mean, how will people RP they'are "smugglers" if they lose all their DACs every time they're outsmarted and ganked upon - which they will, that's a fact, sooner or later it will happen.
 
See, NQ knows all that. Gallo can come up with every single silly arguement, like how he "will lure people with low prices on DACs in a non-safe market and have them robbed" - which made a lot of BOO members and EVE veterans laugh by the way - but NQ knows the PLEX redemption system from EVE worked. 
 
EVE went tthe PLEX Vault way, cause they want their game to be a little more profitable by being more casual friendly before they unveil their next game.
 
Thing i,s like it or not, EVE is dead, long live DU. And JC Baillie has said, time and time again, it's about Risk and Reward.
 
You want to sell the DAC you bought for 18 USD/ Euro ? Cool, get to a market yourself, redemem the item, sell the item.
 
Oh the trade-hub was raided and your DAC was stolen before it got sold? Tough luck. You wanted to make more money than selling it in the Safezone, so you took the risk.
 
Ce la vie. 

1) PLEX in EVE, is the only item that can't follow in-game economy rules - EVE was built without PLEX in mind. When I make a LAser Canon, I have a production cost, a shipment cost and then on top, I have the possibility of losing the cargo before it reaches the market. T ha'ts called "realistic economy". PLEX disregards production costs you have to worry about. In EVE, the previous system, guaranteed theat you buy plex with real money, you go in a market, you go in a specific menu, you spawn the PLEX in your inventory and put it up for sale. Simple as that. The lootable part was there so PLEX could not be RESOLD in-game without any risk by RMT ( Regional Market Trading, google it up, you will be terrified even more). The new PLEX vault was built for those who resell PLEX in-game who don't know how the game's pirate lanes work - AKA newbros. EVE has become "easy" cause CCP is killing EVE slowlly.
2) PLEX in EVE can be used to train a secondary character simultaneously with you main. Your passive skill training is on ONE character per account. You can't train 3 characters on one account at the same time. This is why people go after PLEX (or went, now it's noob friendly as a system). Also, you assume I would not 1 free monh of game-time? Are you even serious on that one? Oh wait, I am "toxic" for proving the holes in your flawed logic?
 
3) Market Crashing is the least of your worries. RMT Scams are. And if DACs are left unlootable, they will be rampart. You clearly don't udnerstand how supply and demand works or how margin profit happens, so, no point on debating. Oh wait, you tihnk NQ will ban those eveil Scammers - LIKE ME - for scamming someone gullible? Do you think NQ will care if yo ubuy a DAC for 150% of its market price I RMT scam you? How cute.
 
4) If you played EVE (cause two days are not "I've played EVE" ) you would know your money is your actual HP - or your alliance's, look up SRP, iot's the "incentive" to enroll in a null-sec army, like a dental plan, only for ships. In DU, Quanta literally is that - Quanta is a unit of energy in physics. So, no, you shouldn't be able to steal my "HP". Not without tricking me out of it, like some space Mephistopheles. DACs on the other hand ,are exchangable items.
 
5)
you CLEARLY never played EVE. In EVE, we got a thing called - hold on your seat, we are going stratospheric on emergent gameplay here - SPACETRUCKERS.
 
When I went to buy a PLEX, I would jump in my alt in Jita, buy my PLEX, but have my Spacetrucker friend haul my PLEX back to me me when he made a trip once a week - we are talking six to ten hours, Freighters are slow ships.
 
That friend, I would put a private contract out for in Jita - and since they are a friend of mine, I would only put collateral as the price of the PLEX on the market, which ifinite at a given point. That frienjd then, would haul my PLEX to me, and when it was brought ot me, I would put up for sale. If the friend was - for some reason - blown up, I would not lose any money on my purchase. Of course, I would also put a giant pay on my PLEX for delivering it, so the friend did make a profit for a tiney-tiny item.
 
Your unlootable PLEX :
 
a ) I can't contract my PLEX for delivery - and since in DU we don't got teleportation, means I have to go to a market and get the DAC fro ma palyer's container. in EVE, PLEX is not stored in a player's container in a market. Stations in EVE are just glorified interfaces for a tradingh hub. in DU, a DAC would be placed in a container. Which also means, if DACs can teleport, then supply and demand is thrown off balance cause there's no risk involved in hauling the DAC. But nah, I am toxic, which means you may have an allergy with the thing called "reality".
 
b ) smaller - but faster - couriers can't make money on swift PLEX Delivery (you'd know that if you played EVE, but whatever)
 
c ) markets can be bled out of money by one person with enough real life money. Find a pirate port, fly there on a cheap ship, until you get there, dump all your Pay-2-Win PLEX and bleed their market dry of money. You'd know how that works, if you played EVE on the economic scale as I do. Yes, it already happens in EVE. People flying in free ships to drain alliances' out of money that have high buy orders for PLEX. Yes, unlootable PLEX, it's now a Pay-2-Win warfare. Why? Cause as I said, CCP is killing a 15 year old game slowlly. It's a controleld demolitino what the new PLEX Vault is.
 
Now, why would I want the PLEX hauled to Null-Sec? Cause it goes for higher there as I pointed out.
 
Nobody would ever put a PLEX in EVE at a low-price sell order in null-sec so they could "lure people". That's only in your head. The moment it went up for sale, someone on my faction would go "hey, some idiot put it up for sale so cheap, cool, so long sucker" and poof, I am at a loss of money. But you would know that if you had any remote idea of how money happens.
 
Oh wait, am I toxic for puncturing your paper-thin logic ? I bet I am toxic, TRUTH BURNS LIKE ACID.
 
So, your idea of "make DAC only tradeable once", violates the realistic economy of the game - from supply and demand to hauling and courier jobs - SO MUCH, I am certain now you have zero idea how RMT happens.
 
But hey, I am toxic for proving you have zero clue on how bad your idea is. Yeah, good thing JC knows how bad your idea is, he did play EVE, he does know how RMT happens - he did gave an interview on EVE's biggest PLEX reseller after all BEFORE the PLEX Vault was even announced.
 
 
Here is what NQ said so far:
 
They said they don't have a mechanism for redeeming DACs in-game - and it's acceptable, it IS a hassle to make it fail-proof, god knows people in EVE put that redeeming system to the test.
 
It's also acceptable for DACs to be unlootable until a person CHOOSES to make them lootable in-game for the purpose of selling them like an in-game item. That's totally fine. The person that paid real money for the DAC should be 100% protected until they choose to sell it.
 
What's not fine is BUTCHERING and MAIMING the game's mentality just so some people can clai mthey are "smugglers" while in reality being carebears with a fetish for Han Solo. Reselling a DAC you bought with in-game money, should impair RISK and REWARD.
 
If you have a problem with RISK and REWARD, stay in a safezone forever. High Rewards are for High Rollers.
 
Peace.

Stealing DACs (in the context of looting in the game) is not a real life crime. I've seen a lot of people say this and it's just plain false.
 
DACs are not cash equivalent as they cannot be converted back into real life money. If they could be converted back and forth then, yes, they would be considered currency and stealing them would constitute a real life crime. The in game economy would also be subject to all sorts of international currency laws which would make everything super messy (nothing like having to report your earnings in a videogame for real life taxes ). Once the customer pays for them, they turn into virtual, 'fake' property that is not covered by any real life laws. So long as the rules laid our in the game's EULA are not broken, people can do whatever they want with them with no consequences, including stealing or "scamming" them. They can be used for dollar-to-ingame-money comparisons based on their in-game selling price but that figure would just be for comparisons sake. 
 
As to whether or not DACs should be lootable, I say yes, but not immediately.
 
They should not be lootable until a system like EVE's redemption system can be implemented. Like many people who backed the kickstarted, I would be spawning in on day one with a nice fat stack of DACs and I don't want to lose them all the second I step out of the safe zone. 
 
In the long run, though, they should eventually be made lootable like PLEX in EVE. I don't think any of the arguments against this have much merit to them. With the redemption system in place, people who buy them could spawn them directly into the market where they were going to sell them with zero risk. Likewise, people who wanted to buy them for the gametime could buy them and activate them on the spot with zero risk as well.  Only the people who want to haul them around would have risk, and that's fine. DACs are going to very expensive in game by their very nature (that's worthy of an entire post in and of itself), so anyone who does DAC trading between the various trade hubs is going to be making obscene amounts of money off even small percentage differences in prices. Why wouldn't we want those people to have risk? (And if super rich players were smart they could still use arbitrage to avoid the risk of transporting it.) As to the argument that having DACs be lootable will lead to them only being traded in safe zones, and, possibly, that this will cause all the trade hubs to be in safe zones. Again, why is this a bad thing? For starters, safe zones will probably end up being major trade hubs anyways, depending on market destruction mechanics. It doesn't matter whether it's a billion dollars in ore or a billion dollars of DACs, if I'm trading high value items of any sort and market security is really such a concern, I'm probably going to do it in a safe zone. Additionally, the developers have stated that there will be multiple safe zones spread throughout the galaxy that would allow for there to major safe-zone market hubs in every region (region is kind of a loose term here but you get the picture).
 
For the other arguments, that lootable DACs will result in hatred or people quitting the game, I think that is unfounded. As NQ has said, we are all adults here (or at least we should be) and we should be able to manage risk. This is not a game for children. I'm reminded of the ever present argument in EVE over the concept of suicide ganking. Many people insist that ganking is driving people away from the game because they can't handle the danger. And yet, when CCP ran the numbers, it turned out that new players who were ganked within their first week of play had a much HIGHER retention rate than those didn't! The sense of risk gave value to the experience. Now I'm not saying that everyone start ganking each other all the time, but there is a difference between reasonable protecting people from unreasonable risk and unreasonably protecting people from reasonable risk. It makes the game boring and people go play something more exciting (like getting ganked in EVE haha).
 
DACs should be unlootable until a proper redemption system can be implemented. After that, I see no reason why they shouldn't be made lootable.
 
 
 
EDIT: In response to some other points I have seen made in this thread.
 
1) When people are talking about "looting" DACs they seem to use the words "steal" and "loot" interchangeably, and I think this is causing some confusion. What people are talking about with have "lootable" DACs doesn't mean that someone can just come a long and yank them out of your pocket, or steal them from your account while you are offline. What it means is that DACs would be treated like any other good in the game. If you are carrying them in your ship and it gets destroyed, people can loot them from the wreck along with whatever else you were carrying. Whether you are for or against lootable DACs, we all need to be on the same page about the specifics of what we are arguing over. I support lootable DACs but not the ability to just "steal" them from anyone.
 
2) Some people have argued that, in order to solve the DAC Problem, other items be made more valuable so as to "distract" people from DACs. This isn't really feasible since all high value items will still follow the same laws of supply and demand that DACs will. Some will trade them, some will use them, and some will hoard them. The main difference with DACs is the fact that they are tied to a real life currency value (although that does not make them a RL currency equivalent as some have suggested). Since they are tied into a real life value, they are less vulnerable to price manipulation on a global scale. In addition, the value of DACs will naturally rise with inflation rate of the in game economy, making them a good option for long term investment.
 
3) Some people have stated that since DACs are intended to be a way for people to pay for membership by playing, or skip grinding by paying for a DAC and trading that for in game money, people should only be able to trade them once or some other limiting factor that would prevent people from actively stockpiling/trading DACs. What they don't realize is that this would create huge problems for precisely those people who want to use it for its "intended purpose". Imagine if people could only trade DACs once, so the person who bought it in game had to use it. If more people bought DACs to sell than there were people trying to buy them, the people who paid real money will have essentially wasted their money as they won't be able to sell the DACs, or they will have to sell them so cheaply that it won't be worth it. Imagine the other way around, for some reason a bunch of people try to buy DACs off the market at the same time and there just aren't enough DACs to go around. Two things will happen there: first, prices are going to skyrocket, and second, no matter how high prices go, not everyone who wants one will get one. By having a market that can resell DACs, both buyers and sellers are protected. Sellers know they can always sell their DACs when they want to, and buyers know that they can always buy one when they want to. The price will also be kept in check by the supply/demand and will remain relatively steady. Again, look at the PLEX market in EVE Online. This isn't really an argument for or against lootability, more an argument against putting a limit on how many times DACs can be traded.

Another multiboxer... ready to spew bullshit. Here's the thing. Don't play MMOs if you are anti-social. Multiboxing is an MMO's cancer. I hope Novaquark WON'T support multiboxing. 

And I mean, holy shit dude, if you can't socialise in an MMO, why the flak are you even joining an organisation/guild/alliance? Why even play MMOs i nthe first place? To harvest salt from your multiboxing pro mlg 10vs1 kills?