GalloInfligo

Quoted from ORGANIZATIONS:
To start with, organizations are divided into legates and members. All legates are not necessarily members, and vice-versa. The legates literally own the organization, which is divided into several shares that are distributed to the legates. Members don’t own the organization, but they have what we call “roles”. Roles are defined by a set of rights, duties and privileges that apply to members. A member can have one or several roles (and, as an legate can also be a member, there can also be roles for legates, but not always), and a role can be fulfilled by one or several members. Roles can be organized hierarchically, so that sub-roles inherit their default set of rights/duties/privileges from their parent.
 
The mechanism by which legates make decisions is voting, with a weight based on the number of shares owned by the legate. A delegation system enables certain legates to gather the voting rights of other legates. This delegation can be limited in time or not, and can be for every vote or for certain types of votes only. Note that the wording used here, “vote”, induces a notion of democracy, but this is not necessarily the case. In an organization where all legates have permanently delegated all their voting rights to one single legate, you have a de-facto dictatorship. Intermediary cases involve a parliamentary system, where a subgroup of legates concentrate the voting rights of all the others, but none of them can rule alone. All nuances are possible.

Hi everyone,
 
Just a quick reminder:
There is a forum chart (available here) that each forum member is supposed to follow when posting.
In regards to some topics that have been recently removed, here are 2 lines no one should forget:
 
IV) Following actions can result in the immediate suspension of forum privileges:
e. Posting hate speeches toward specific people."
 
Until now, as we have a mature community, the need of banning people wasn't necessary. But it might change, if this becomes necessary. We really don't like to play the police, we prefer a lot to have friendly discussions about the game with the community. But if we need to do it, we will enforce the rules.
 
@friendlytyrant03:
Saying you "hate" someone is already forbidden, even if you have good reasons.
But to hate people just because they want to play pirates in a game without knowing them, giving them intentions without talking to them, is sad and troubling. We sincerely hope this was not a serious statement. Anyway, wheither it was humour, serious, or just trolling, it's forbidden. We hope this is now crystal clear.
 
to others:
When you see a topic like this, please don't answer to it.
 
Best regards,
Nyzaltar.
 

Happiness is a belt fed weapon

Hi Metalmamoth and welcome in the Dual Universe community. So to address your concerns (or at least give you an explanation, even if it's not the one you would have expected), here are some answers:    
Please make the difference between what would seem nice in your opinion and what is really needed. No, it's not essential to make customizable prefab blocks in our game: what you're asking requires a considerable amount of development time. It's like asking to develop ingame a tool like 3D Studio Max, Maya or Blender, each of these software having a full dev team behind it. Keep in mind that we are an independant studio and while we have a bigger team than the average indie, we can't be compared to big studios like Bioware or Blizzard. We have to choose our battles, to make tough choices about what we will develop and what we won't. This + the fact that our dev team wants to keep a minimal control about the artistic direction are the main reasons why we won't have prefab customizable blocks.     
 
 
Does it have to be Massively Multiplayer?   Short answer:   Yes.   Long answer:   If you like playing on small private servers to play with small communities carefully selected, that's perfectly fine and you have already many games aiming to achieve this goal: Space Engineers, Starmade, etc. On the other hand, there are NO massively multiplayer Builder games as we intend to do. That's one of the big reason why there has been a lot of investment developping the tech necessary to make it happen. We are perfectly aware that it won't be everybody's cup of tea, but we aren't trying to satisfy every player either.   There is no game offering such experience at the moment and we're intending to provide such service. If massively multiplayer games don't appeal to you, then maybe it's not a game for you. From what you are saying, other building games have performance issues with huge voxel constructions, and we can understand that's a problem. However, if you prefer their way of doing things (private servers, small communities), it would be more relevant to ask them directly to address the problem in their game than attempting to modify the vision of a game (like Dual Universe) that has entirely other goals.   If you see our game like a "Space Engineers" clone, then you have missed most of our goals with the project: building spaceships and cities is just the corner stone of a bigger edifice. We want to combine Building gameplay with a player-driven economy, constested territories and politics. These last three gameplay aspects won't thrive unless we reach a critical mass regarding the number of players. That's the big reason to go for a massively multiplayer online structure.     
  Dual Universe is not a game meant for children. So unfortunately, this scenario is not relevant. There's currently a high chance that our game will be rated PEGI 18 when it will be officially released. Not because of offensive content included originally in the game (there won't be any), but because of the very nature of sandbox games (especially when it comes to massively multiplayer games): giving player freedom is something that is expected in a Massively Multiplayer Sandbox game, but it comes with some duties. This is not something you can ask from someone who isn't legally responsible because of his age. You can see Dual Universe as a Minecraft-like game made for mature, adult players. We want to build a community with players responsible for their actions and ready to handle the consequences of their actions ingame: do not trust blindly someone you've just met one minute ago, do not transport valuable goods in an unprotected spaceship, etc.    
You would be perfectly right if we wanted to develop a "theme park" MMO like World of Warcraft, Guild Wars 2, Star Wars the Old Republic, etc. In this kind of games, the developers mission is to bring huge amount of content regularly. To sell expansions in this scenario would be totally relevant. But in a Sandbox context, where players make their own content? Sure the dev team plans to add regularly additional gameplay mechanics, to offer aways more gameplay possibilities to the players, but would it be enough to convince the most part of players to buy an expansion ? nothing is less sure than that. And that's probably why CCP preferred to keep a subscription model instead of selling expansions (despite the fact they did make expansions, they didn't sell them and kept the monthly subscription formula). This would be a very very risky bet.    
With all due respect, there might be a third possibility: Without having all the cards in hand to judge objectively, you're making a (probably involuntary) biased assessment, and the way you calculate the costs are incredibly far from the reality (with the costs being in fact much higher than what you are thinking). Unless you have already managed and directed the budget for a Massively Multiplayer Online game, you're not qualified to make such bold statement as above. Continuing to affirm such things would be just arrogance.   It has become increasingly common in the recent years to see many players jump to the conclusion that devs are immediately greedy and/or evil masterminds as soon as the price of a game isn't the price they deem reasonable without having made rigorous market studies on the topic and/or being fully aware of how much cost a game, and especially a MMORPG (costs skyrocket when you're aiming for Massively Multiplayer Online Game, available 24h/24 7d/7  with all the logistics behind. Moreover, the costs for an offline single player - or a player hosted server - game is nothing comparable to the costs of a MMO game.   Another point that makes your reasonnement starting on a wrong basis: currently, Dual Universe isn't planned to require a payment equal to a full game price from day one. So to reach the price of a Buy to play Model, you will have to play and pay at least 4 months (+ the free trial period) if we refer to standard monthly fees, before reaching the same cost. After all this time in game, if you don't want to pay anymore, you will still have the alternative to buy monthly subscription tokens from other players with your ingame money (or even before: if a player is active enough, it might be possible to buy the first monthly subscription token right after the free trial period expires). This is exactly how the PLEX system from EvE Online works. So in all honesty, we have a hard time to see how this formula can be seen as greedy or evil. It's a balance between giving people with low budget but with lots of free time to join the game and the investment in the game (be it in time played or money) as a deterrent to adopt a bad behavior.    
If you have read our devblog post here, we do tell that the B2P model (Buy once, Play forever) is a strong deterrent to player negative behavior, nearly as much as the Pay to Play model. Our main concerns with the "Buy to Play" model are elsewhere:  - This is an immediate paywall that would discourage many players with low budget. - This makes our alternative to play for free impossible. For more info, read the first part of the DevBlog ("Being able to play the game without spending money"), and especially the "Pay to Play" part explaining the benefits of the PLEX system used by EvE Online (and copied by other MMOs like Wildstar and World of Warcraft). - This is not a solid and sustainable model unless we invest a huge amount of our budget in developping a cash shop. Because MMORPGs with a Buy to Play model always have a huge (some players would say oversized) cash shop. The server and the team behind a MMORPG aren't just financed by the sales of the game. On the long term, the main revenue to finance all this is generated by the cash shop. As we are aware that relying too much and/or becoming dependant from a cash shop revenue can generate many problems, that one more reason to be careful about this model.    That being said, an official thread will be made soon to answer and adress all the concerns about the Pay to Play monetization model. There are already too many threads about this topic, and it's about time that all the related discussions are gathered in the same place.   Best regards, Nyzaltar.

The problem with you logic here is, Servers do cost money to run, so if you don't want to pay a monthly fee to play a game, I suggest you stick to the ones that don't have this set-up.  MMO's on the other hand HAVE this set up, and you can expect to pay a monthly fee to keep their server going.  All of these BS arguments about not wanting to pay can be boiled down to that simple idea.  I am glad they plan to charge monthly, and will have no problem paying them.

This has been brought up 4 times now including this post.
 
Food, Sleep, Logout location etc.
 
Logging out
 
Preferred logout mechanics? I suggest we use this one as it is the oldest.

Nope.

The problem with you logic here is, Servers do cost money to run, so if you don't want to pay a monthly fee to play a game, I suggest you stick to the ones that don't have this set-up.  MMO's on the other hand HAVE this set up, and you can expect to pay a monthly fee to keep their server going.  All of these BS arguments about not wanting to pay can be boiled down to that simple idea.  I am glad they plan to charge monthly, and will have no problem paying them.

Would you prefer us to explain reason to a guy who hasn't read any DevBlog and wants DUAL to become a Space Engineers clone with all its crashing glory instead? He hasn't even seen the ideas the devs have on customising a cockpit on the inside to make it more personal. He probably thinks the game is FPS combat as well. Care to explain that part to him?
 
Or would you like to explain why EVE and WoW got a P2P model with WoW even mimicking the PLEX system for their game from EVE?
 
Could you at least expain to him why Private Servers won't even exist for the game, since the tech they got for it is patented and owned by the NQ's CEO and Lead Dev of the game, JC Baillie?
 
 
The original post I made, was a reference to all those things he didn't bother to read or research for that matter.

You really should read a bit about a game before you start to post in its forums. All of these topics have been discussed at great length before or covered by dev blogs.
 
 

Did you even read the DevBlogs?

Yay! We have another new member.  Deepnature has joined the Outfit.  Welcome, welcome!  We're excited to have you aboard

Good to have you Xorkil!

*popcorn* Don't mind me good sir, I'm here for the fireworks.

I thought you might prefer to compare space ships instead of Water Ships...
 

I thought you might prefer to compare space ships instead of Water Ships...
 

Language is Language, you learn one, you can learn more.... there are not many differences between these newer languages, its not like they are asking everyone to code it in Assembly!

First thing's first :
 
I was once like you, typing in 24 font, then I took a barrage of hateful comments, PMs and pleas to stop it.
 
Second. Setting up turrets around the planet would be quite difficult if wireless energy transmission is impossible. Perhaps on Space Statios acting as Watchtowers, with a huge enough supply of power to keep a large cannon going.

Sure. It would be the same missile launch system used on board ships, or a B.F.C (Big .... "Funky" Cannon). that can only be placed on planets because there's no ship that can support its power needs and/or massive size. It's not something out of the realm of possibility, just not something that would be herpa-derp commonplace. It would take a lot of resources to build the B.F.C. but it would be something large Empires would use to defend against enemy forces.

Language is Language, you learn one, you can learn more.... there are not many differences between these newer languages, its not like they are asking everyone to code it in Assembly!

first thing I thought of was from the movie Payback....and that fits for pirates.

first thing I thought of was from the movie Payback....and that fits for pirates.

The Outfit sounds more like a retail competitor to Hot Topic, than an actual pirate group. Are you guys hiring pale folk with a lot of piercings as well? Cause I don't know if that's a copyright infringement, and if it is, yarrrr away   :V


Pirate dissing aside, good work on the site. Real neat.
 

"The enemy commander walks into his bridge, sits on his comfy chair and presses the power button on the ship's engines. As he looks up he sees the emblem of the enemy faction's marine corps on the bulkhead above.
 
 
At the same time, 1 km away, on an asteroid, a marine stands there, enjoying the fireworks."
 
 
Short and sweet story indeed

Hey, Tagging is a Marine tradition, I hope they allow it to be in the game.    nothing like painting your emblem on someone elses ship, just to let them know you were there.