Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About vertex

  • Rank
    Novark Citizen

Profile Information

  • Location:
  • backer_title
    Ruby Founder
  • Alpha

Recent Profile Visitors

1361 profile views
  1. I beg to differ wastly. I'm aware of the possibilities, tho just because you can connect mouse and keyboard doesn't mean that the majority of console players does this in reality. They bought a console for a reason - and that's usually not to get as close to the PC experience as possible. Regarding ~"48 inputs and whatnot" on a gamepad: That's the point - it requires either a second, complete set of UI features or forces PC players to settle with bad interface inputs/fields "accessible by consoles and PC alike" - like we've seen without end in the past, where the prequels to newer titles had a more advanced and more powerful UI with resizeable windows, combined input fields with sliders, number field and up/down arrows, which only were accessible with a mouse cursor and didn't make it into the sequel, which was optimized for consoles too. But even if you can access and operate the game with a controller, you still can't type quickly in an in-game chat. What about Discord then? You mean people can talk via voice comms and don't need a keyboard? Yeah, we have this tech in several games too - and games like RDR2 nowadays even go as far as to not implement any text chat and make in-game voice comms the only way to communicate. Thing is: This doesn't work out at all since players just don't participate. I've never had such a bad multiplayer experience as I had in RDR2. People usually remain completely silent, because they are either shy or don't want to talk or don't have a headset connected. In addition, Discord doesn't help you when meeting random strangers in game. Sure I can talk to friends on the phone, via Skype, Discord or TS and don't need a keyboard for that - but then I meet another player who asks me if I can help him out with directions or whatever and I'm completely unable to answer if I don't have a keyboard right there. Again, just because you can connect decent input devices to a console doesn't mean that people will; and it doesn't change the fact that if you sell to the console market, you have to make it work for all customers - even those who don't have such input devices. Of course, again, you could follow my previous statement to make it a prerequisite - but then you defy the sole purpose of expanding into the console market, which is to reach a broader audience. It's only the hope to make a few more bucks while weighing the loss of PC players against the gain of console players and considering the additional cost of development. I've never ever seen this to turn into a win-win situation for all sides - and usually it's the PC player base who suffers most, even if many don't even realize it. Sorry for the late response btw. If you quote me, please use the embedded forum features for direct quotes, so I get notified that I've been quoted. Thanks
  2. I don't even like the sound of "but who knows" and "yet" in that DevBlog. Never have I ever seen a PC title improve for the existing player base when the developers went for console ports. It ruined UIs and UI scale, as well as input methods and customizability on all titles that I remember (like TES and FO series.. duh) and it drags the IQ requirement for games down below room temperature. Not to say that all console gamers are dumb as bricks - but a console is "easy to set up and use" for a reason. On the contrary - there surely are very bright minds on the console's gamers base too, but on the other hand those who really "can't computer" are those who only buy a console and the games need to work for them too. DU is a nerd game in a niche genre and that's what grants it a shot at becoming a lasting experience in a second digital world for us, while casual/normal gamers can join in and buy stuff from the nerds. Still this talk about console ports gives me nothing but the creeps. If there ever is a console port in the future, I think mouse and keyboard should be mandatory for DU to start and players on console should be required to type at least 100 words per hour in the chat, or be disconnected automatically A tale from SWG? I used to hang out at the markets, talking to players, helping them with their character's redesign, which required a constant communication flow to model their character to their desire. Now let console gamers enter the scene, which don't even have the option to chat? Great. I see similar situations in DU, where a customer buys a construct and talks to the creator about style choices and refinement. How's that supposed to work when players are laying on their couch holding nothing but a gamepad? If I have to wait for them to type on an on screen keyboard, I'd rather shoot myself in the face... or them. I liked the "no guns blazing" hint in the DevBlog that made it obvious you're aware of me being out here, hehe. Howeeeverrrrr, you've lead with "for the time being", so.. well.. I'm really sorry, but... had it coming
  3. I'm so afraid right now
  4. Aye o7 Thank you very much for the kind feedback. To be fair we didn't have to do that much - your design was pretty good to begin with
  5. Haha, that's a funny approach to the topic, but I'll sure take a look at it to help it become airborne You can type "/w vertex hello" in the game chat to open a direct channel to me (when I'm online) and send me your coordinates (F4 = map, then click "my location" and "copy to clipboard" - paste this using ctrl+v in chat). If I'm not on, or miss your message, send them here or via private message and I'll pay you a visit
  6. Care to get a bit more into detail on that? Not sure if I've seen your name around lately... Only at the moment tho, huh? If you become one, you'll always know one
  7. Currently this is the case, yes. It might change in the future tho. We just don't know yet, which makes it even more funny that some were losing their mind about stealing being the end of the world
  8. You're welcome - no worries! On the contrary - thanks for bumping the cc0 to the top of the list. And thanks for your inquiries indeed, they help me advance as well. It's awesome to get new perspectives and inspiration this way ❤️ cc0 is merely a reaction to some people getting overly afraid of not being able to lock down everything they create. We don't even know if we will be able to lock down code and design - maybe this whole idea won't even find any application in DU. I don't speak for everyone now, but at least I don't have a desire to piss at the legs of fair trading builders. Only in the soup of those that scream "product piracy" from the top of their lungs even before they made any product or started selling. Those who claim DU will fail if we can't secure "intellectual property" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  9. Well, I didn't give static/space cores any thought until now. As in reality - homes (usually) aren't something you mass-produce and sell from stock. If someone builds something that he doesn't intend to sell in the first place, there is no DRM in effect - it's not a proprietary "product". Hence I think this got nothing to do with our business Same for dynamic cores - unique constructs are not targeted by the cc0. The creator would first have to blueprint it and offer to sell a proprietary/protected version to other players. Then these players might fly around with their new ship and they learn that it doesn't perform as well as they hoped in certain situations. They might want to change that button position on that other screen, or remove the seat that always gets in the way when there's an emergency. That's when they'd wish for the permission to modify their construct. That's where the cc0 comes in and rescues this poor fella, who loves his construct, but can't change the things that really vex him about it. If it's a unique construct, never sold, never locked down - have fun with it - none of our business /edit/ps Of course they can always ask the original creator to change stuff for them, too. If their support/service is good, there wouldn't be much incentive to call out for copycats, I guess.
  10. Thanks for the nice feedback - I too think it's fun One thing you got wrong tho: We don't aim at cheap knock-offs. I get how that feels implied - like some dude at the australian bazar selling cheap "Roolex" - but that's far from what we would do. We're more like that tuning garage, where you drive your shiny sports car in and get it back with improved stats. Nobody would call that a cheap copy - not only because copying something will be everything but cheap, but because we'll be even more expensive than the original, because we will provide full access to everything and won't do mass-production or whatever. So far it's unclear if we even got the skills or manpower needed - or if anyone likes to do anything at all. Sadly the org news got wiped, where I said that the only serious rule in cc0 is "no obligations" - so there might as well be lots of people in our org that just want to make a statement, but will never move a finger to actually copy anything. You said it: the idea is fun. That's what it's all about - the idea. Tho if someone really puts down the coin, cc0 will most probably get active on the job. Just that nobody will call this cheap - it's the opposite - it's people wealthy enough to afford not only the original, but a dedicated group of "tuners" that take the original and create a copy from it, which will take a long time and for an exact replica we'll need access to the original. We liberate proprietary design and a liberated version of an otherwise locked-down construct will be much more expensive. That was my main argument in previous discussions - a DRM infected product should sell for way less, because the buyer gets way less for the money. For all I care you could just as well ask the original designer, if he's willing to provide you an unlocked version if you pay him just as much as you'd pay us. Given that through mass-production of locked down constructs you can sell cheaper to the masses, he might even be inclined to setup a contract and get this one-time big bonus /edit/ps Oh, I've put that "no obligations" bit into the OP too. Ha, cool. /edit/ps2 Just thought about some crazy designer may ask an incredible amount of money for his proprietary crap. In that case, well, we might be cheaper, true, but it would be an even sweeter treat if we can provide a better version at lower cost
  11. The next test session starts on February 6th. See this page for the schedule: https://www.dualthegame.com/en/server-status/ Since Alpha 3 just dropped, we currently have pretty short test sessions, but expect them to get back to 96 hours once Alpha 3 got smoothed out a bit more Ps: you can read "Alpha 3 Test 06 February 2020" on the very top of dualthegame.com which links to the page above.
  12. Yeah, great grapics, but the gameplay sucks.
  13. "Why would they have to continue living when you don't see them?" - Bernd Lehahn @Context I like that username 😃 Yeah, I'm holding on to my quanta as well - even during alpha, even if I lose it all, I just like the fact being on the liquid side of things. Plus it's fun learning about some economics. Bought stuff from the market, delivered it 35km to another market, made 50k from it. Doesn't matter if it stays - for now I count it as a success
  14. I've seen "Ready Player One" yesterday. Not about to discuss that movie tho. Watched it because JC kept referencing the book over and over and I didn't want to read it, since a friend already complained about it being a bit out there overly referencing 80's pop culture all the time. Tho seeing this topic again, I feel like adding this: when I look at the vision of "The OASIS" in Ready Player One and linking it to the vision of "emergent gameplay", I think maybe players will create challenges that you can win some day. Like what prevents us from having people to put in quanta in order to enter a race event and have them win the pot in the end? 50% goes to 1st place, 30% to second place, 10% to 3rd and the remaining 10% to the organizer? The participants would have to arrive and be registered at the starting location. Race starts once the organizer announces the destination, where containers await. These could be like the vending machines that give out the speeder parts at the markets. The first to arrive would take an item from each of three containers, where the first would contain an amount of 3, second 2 and third only 1 - plus having a cooldown, so 1st and 2nd place wouldn't just take it all. This should result in 1st winner handing in 3 tokens, second 2 and third only 1. There you have it. To win in DU means winning the CC0 race or whatever other challenges we create. DU will be another world - like Second Life. We are the ones to fill it with goals. Think Last Man Standing once pvp is solid!
  • Create New...