mrfrazz

Hi Dehkur and welcome on the Dual Universe official forum.
 
Nowhere it has been said this will be hosted on a single computer.
It has been said it will be hosted on a single server.
Are you not confusing the words "server" and "computer"?
A server can be hosted on a cluster composed of many computers.
And for Dual Universe, this is definitely the case.

Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

Well, wether you like it or not, the "single shard" expression isn't born yesterday and hasn't been invented by us, as it has been used for more than a decade in the video game industry, and has been widely spread with EVE Online.
 
Edit: According to wikipedia, a "Shard" can be used to designate a database architecture OR a game server (which can be hosted on several computers).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shard
 
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.
 

I like the mythological beast and the aesthetics you got. This is gonna be good!

One might say this thread is dank. 

The pre-alpha features look already more compelling than Space Engineers for me personally. Provided there are no gamebreaking bugs, this is not even a fair comparison.

We actually have log files that can become several GB bytes large at my job. Mostly the log files for detecting out of sync between clients as those log files will get pretty much all data being processed dumped into it.
 
Though I would say log files becoming that big is a rarity, not a norm. I doubt that is the case here, probably just voxel data so the server and client don't have to constantly sync the data.

Hell no! Log files are several megabytes at most!

This makes sense, taking into account the scales at play, and lack of optimisation.
 
The most surprising figure is the high RAM and SSD storage requirement, for a procedural game, you'd expect the former, but why the latter? That is indicative to me of some form of caching used to reduce redownloading of already known up-to-date information, such as constructs that have not been modified since last login. Perhaps they might only send the changes to a construct as well, however this is less likely due to more negotiation required.
 
Pretty interesting assumptions to be gleaned just from the spec requirements!
 
And that is definitely the mobile 960 version, yes!

I think they are following an agile method. Meaning they detail it after its been developed. Support it, then fix it. Personally I think it is excellent. Perfect one thing at a time. 

Well I do hope that I get to implement bunch of stuff. Day job is programming so might not be as fun to deal with it when you get home but have bunch of things I would like to implement

Well... More Fuel = More Jobs.
Countries will fight over fuel, and why should a video game be any different?
Fuel is a driving force, the essence that all is mechanical.
The more fuel types we have, the more specialization, the more jobs, the more production, the more wars, the more cash, the more everything.
Catch my drift?

i would post this in general dicussion

Hello,
    I am a casual gamer who loves sandbox style games. I've been a hardcore Minecraft fan since the beginning also pre-alpha and I always will love the game for what it has done to this industry, and unfortunately it's starting to run dry for me. I'm also a huge fan of EVE... well the concept of EVE. I love reading up on the game and hearing stories from veterans during the BoB wars. I wanna be apart of that, except leading a fleet of my own imagination and devastation. This game promises that... it's an excitement I haven't had since I was a child.
    I want to be apart of the testing, helping this game grow. The only issue is that I just feel weird about investing my money in the game this early... but I want to. I'm really hesitant because I don't know what the player can't do. I've caught a few on the videos, like auto locking due to update frequencies, and no mining drones (really sad about that, but your reasoning was well justified... I was thinking of monopoly too), and no planet destroying superweapons, Totally fair. You mentioned fairness What rules do you have set out to maintain "fairness"? What can't I do because of technical limitations and what cant you do?
   Those questions are the only thing that is keeping me from pledging. They're the questions that kept me from No Man's Sky and I want to be able to trust this game.
Thanks,
       Frazz

Or you can find a nice chuck of space and make it really, really hard to find.

I was wondering about how if you wanted to avoid selling blueprints all together and only sold ships from your "factory". I have a feeling this would increase their price because of it's uniqueness. I know if you wanted to you could have a bunch of player build the same ship over and over again. But it would be cool if we could semi-automate the process. I doubt players a really going to get behind filling their build queues or however blueprints work.
I recently came across a futuristic TED talk where machines are farmed, not built. What if we could build 'Replicators' That allowed us to print these ships like the video at a cost of power, resources, and a little longer build queues than what the player has. Then you're coop-mates are free to use their build queues for other things and/ or can enjoy more of the game. What do you think about this idea? 
 

Ha I thought the same thing! I was like, it would be awesome for there to be a practical use for searchlights in the forest. I was imaging scenarios.
 
I'm curious about the material textures; does each material have its own texture, or can you apply a set of given textures to any material?
 
And also, 20m screen... Billboards, just like everyone wanted!

I especially like the headlights. I wanna see some police drones hunting a thief or murderer in the forest, each equipped with a headlight...

Hm... Do you mean you want to see your work explode in a good way, as in see it become more popular and useful very fast, or you want to literally watch the things that you create for other people detonate? If you're looking for work, you should make that distinction clear... 

Looking for a programmer? I've got all of your programming needs. Hopefully figuring out a specialization when i get more in-depth in the game. This game seems like I will sink lots of hours into it. Want a devoted player? You've got it. If you have the spot for me, I'll take it.

Looking for a programmer? I've got all of your programming needs. Hopefully figuring out a specialization when i get more in-depth in the game. This game seems like I will sink lots of hours into it. Want a devoted player? You've got it. If you have the spot for me, I'll take it.

The problem in Space Engineers is the way they implemented collision damage.  The moving parts keep colliding with each other and when they are damaged enough they explode.  DU will not be handling voxel to voxel collisions the same way Space Engineers does, so it should be possible to avoid that problem.
 
I am curious how moving parts could be used to automate anything.  They could definitely make a more interesting experience for players, but I do not see how they would actually contribute to anything we would be concerned about automating, like mining, crafting, building or fighting.
 
Moving parts might no increase the strain on the game that much.  If it can already handle a large number number of moving constructs, would connecting some of them be worse?  It might actually be less of  a load, because the movements of the parts relative to each other would be more predictable.
 
Without the in-depth knowledge of how the software works that the developers have, it is difficult so say what will or will not be practical.  If moving parts are practical, I really hope they are implemented some time.

Sometimes NQ mentioned that the limitation could be based on a fixed and low number of actions par minutes achieved by an automatic system, or automated elements statistics would be reduced in comparison to non-automated element....
 
So I think AI is a too strong word for what we will be able to create in DU. It might be just "simple automatic systems".
 
For example: you protect a building coupling weapons with a radar. Radar detects an enemy and trigger the weapons back. And in that case the limitation might be on the number of fires per minute or a limitation in the efficiency of the locking system. So, the same weapons would be more efficient if controlled directly by a player.

This is one of the most common concerns that come up.
 
I'm not too worried myself because the game world is so huge, and I plan to spread my assets in multiple locations so they can't all be compromised at once.