Wyndle
-
Posts
600 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wyndle
-
-
The former then.
You are not the only person who has told NQ about problems with PvP. There are many other problems that others have told NQ about from the very beginning, yet they still ended up at this point. It is a years long running gag that NQ doesn't listen to the forums.
Thanks for trying.
-
20 hours ago, Vazqez said:
And I say that there is only one content,
PVP can take place anywhere, but on one condition.
It must be a conscious choice of both sides.That is based upon your ideal of what PvP should be, not the rules of the game you agreed to the ToS for. Your opinion is still valid, but it does not force any game maker to change anything.
Time for a less weak analogy: Walk into a war zone and yell at the guys with guns that you don't want to fight them. If you walk back out then you may want to consider buying lottery tickets too.
4 hours ago, CptLoRes said:I... have nothing to say. It has all been said so many times already, and the outcome is always the same.
I'm on the fence here. Its either a horrible break in communications or an elaborate trolling. I am invested in helping the former and kicking myself for the latter.
-
5 hours ago, Vazqez said:
And this sick ideology destroyed this game. And it was this sick approach that drove the players away.
Your philosophy has proven that it takes only a few people to ruin the game for many people/
They should change it, they have nothing to lose anyway.
The departure of 40 PVP players will not change anything.
But the arrival of 1,000 players who don't want PVP is enough.We get it, someone blew you up.
Claims that the entire game is totally wrong for "sick ideology" is selfish at best. If you do not like the game as is then leave. There's only a few million other games to pick from. There are many reasons other than PvP that caused people to leave. You made your opinion clear and several people have attempted to communicate about the situation.
Even if DU took PvP out of the game this very instant it wouldn't attract 40 new AND old players combined at this point but there would be hundreds (dozens?) of people who want PvP that would rage quit. This game is already on life support. Even the people I know who will keep playing until the servers are shut down recognize that DU is on borrowed time.
-
Just now, Vazqez said:
Maybe it's the translator's fault that you didn't understand.
PVP should be an option, not a requirement.
for example.
If I want to participate in PVP, I switch my core to PVP mode and fight anyone who has this mode activated.Many people who left were forced to fight PVP.i
If they had a choice, they wouldn't do it and stay in the game.
I understood. I agree with you that PvP should be handled different from how it is. Your and my opinions are not going to change the Dev team's approach a year after launch if the thousands of Alpha and Beta posts you never saw didn't sway them while those features where being developed. As of right now there does not appear to be any further development planned or happening.
Some people left because of bad PvP experience(s) but the vast majority left because there isn't really a game here, only the vague outline of one.
Don't worry, I won't pester you anymore after this post.Have a blessed day.
-
2 hours ago, Pleione said:
In general I agree with the Op, but the analogy is weak. Paintball fields representing an infinitesimally small percentage of places one could stumble into, and are often fenced in to prevent such stumbling. Personally, had that been the approach for PVP, I would have been fine with it.
Yes, the analogy is weak. Would you prefer I try to draw parallels to WoW PvPers vs Raiders vs Casual players? Not worth the effort IMO.
-
19 hours ago, Vazqez said:
This approach will destroy this game.
Since he wants to have access to the entire game.Since I'm putting in my real money, I don't want to be deprived of it.
The current state clearly proves that people don't want to be robbed, so they stop playing.
Only a change to the current rules can bring about a change in the number of players.
The current game model has not worked.
11 hours ago, Vazqez said:you got it wrong..It's not about more game currency
Any reference to the original assumptions of the game is a mistake. These assumptions (principles) did not prove true.
otherwise
The original rules are not good...it's the bad rules that will be the downfall of the game.
I'll give you the benefit of doubt. You're making some of the same arguments that I and many others have been making for years.
"This approach will destroy this game" - Too late.
"Since he wants to have access..." - Part of the game is PvP and was part of the plan from the start. Want access to all the game then don't complain about PvP unless you're providing specific examples and potential improvements (that will mostly be ignored by NQ in my experience).
"Since I'm putting in my real money..." - Buyer beware. That money is gone and you stepped into a restrictive ToS in the process."The current state... ...they stop playing" - Again, too late. Don't believe me? Ask any of the dozens of Alpha players that rage quit or the hundreds of Beta players that silently quit... oh, too late yet again.
"Only a change to the current rules..." - We're light years beyond rule changes alone being able to salvage things.
"Any reference to the original assumptions of the game..." - Isn't that the definition of starting with a flawed plan? If you disagree with the initial premise of the game and you disagree with the current rules of the game how can you expect forum conversations to fix either/both?
I'm sorry to be the one to break it down for you this way. There's a ton of history that your comments demonstrate you are not aware of.
-
10 hours ago, Vazqez said:
A game that imposes restrictions on players has no point in existence.
A game that forces players to perform a specific activity has no point.I'll expand on what's going on
PVP should be an option, not a requirement. You yourself write that transport missions are boring and many hours were wasted. Think of a new player who flies for several hours only to be destroyed by a pirate thief. Such a person stops playing.
Ship speed limits are another inexplicable limiter that has no basis in physics.
Faulty or missing mechanics regarding the spawning of resources in fields.
hese are the flaws that will contribute to the downfall of this game.
And the PVP community was the only one that was listened to.To rephrase your first two sentences: Obvious treadmills are not fun or interesting (even less so when the goal posts get moved).
While I concur with your observation that unwanted PvP is detrimental, it is optional; based on where you choose to go. If you stumble into an active paintball field don't be surprised if you walk out with paint on you. If you cannot stomach PvP then only fly the safe zone missions. PvP players got more attention but they were not the only ones who had complaints or suggestions addressed/adopted in the game.As for ship speed limits, there are technical and gameplay limitations working against DU that are not based on physics. If you want realistic physics you may want to try Kerbal Space Program with some of the realism mods installed.
DU started as hype (arguably, that hasn't changed). It felt really fun in Alpha, kinda fun in Beta, and barely "fun" by Launch. There are plenty of missed opportunities and derided changes beyond the flaws you mention that have dragged DU down.
For a small crowdfunded Dev team to launch an MMO is very impressive but the actual play in the game is and never was present. At the end of the day DU is a MMO building game with great flight physics, horrible combat, and tons of obvious treadmills to keep players too deep in busy work to notice that almost everything outside of building and flight is essentially a 2 or 3 star mobile clicker game.
-
On 9/7/2023 at 3:10 AM, CptLoRes said:
To my knowledge it is only AVX-512 that Intel is dropping on selected CPU's, so DU (AVX / AVX2?) should be safe in that regard.
I don't recall the pair of articles that I read but you're probably right. I do recall having the impression that DU may face compatibility issues down the road.
What is the potential of AVX commands being interfaced with a translation layer to use RT or other hardware?
-
That is also leaving out industry changes regarding which AVX command sets will be on future hardware. It wouldn't kill DU but it could introduce even more complexity.
-
On 8/30/2023 at 4:38 PM, blundertwink said:
There's just no evidence that DU's dev is ongoing in any real way; I'd be surprised if there were even a dozen people still working on DU out of those 80. Based on the last few months of no real activity, it is likely even less than that.
I've been thinking back to the recent events and dev activity in and out of the game. I could only name about half a dozen visible so I concur with your estimate of roughly a dozen max bodies working on the sleep mode version we seem to have. I've already decided that I can't justify spending more on the game now that my annual subs & DACs are dwindling to an end.
If we had 1) a roadmap, and 2) visible signs of NQ trying to save DU financially AND technically I may change my mind. Even a "free to play, micro-transaction cosmetics, and sub for premium" announcement would be a welcome improvement at this point. I recall seeing a positive response from NQ when I got vocal about not having a cosmetic shop, but no sign of it since. Even the king-daddy of MMOs, WoW, brought in a cosmetic shop while they were still growing but NQ/DU shows no outward sign of it even when it looks this dire. (edit: If the hold-up with cosmetics is durability/recycle then just give a pile of in-game cosmetic points equal to the element's purchase value upon recycle)
The fact that Web3 is/was a focus (even JC went on to other Web3 stuff) is troubling. There are plenty of obvious scams out there but the warning signs I'm seeing with DU smell just as funky and off-putting. This isn't the first time I have brought it up, yet we have only gotten vague assurances that we're not being duped or trolled.
-
7 hours ago, cerveau said:
the aliens we are fighting are not real ships
Smoke and mirrors with a random damage function perhaps?
-
5 hours ago, cerveau said:
no one actually loses their ship ?
For that to work there would need to be a list of available Aphelia ships instead of player owned. Otherwise you are asking for a major overhaul of combat systems.
-
13 hours ago, Cainon said:
I started a week ago fresh and cannot do Surface Resource Harvesting as there is not resources left. Makes it hard
The current meta is land ownership, taxes, and tending to auto-miners. When you fully tend your miner it digs up huge ore chunks up to surface mine. If you do the FTUE it takes you through the process and gives you some gear. If you want to find natural surface ore you have to get off of Haven and head toward a moon.
-
On 6/20/2023 at 10:19 PM, Seawing said:
Core PvE feedback:
Clicking on widgets for almost all combat actions is fun-destroyingly painful!
Keybinds for the following actions would go a really reaaaalllly long way to a combat experience that has flow:
1. Identify selected target
2. Engage selected target
3. Reload All
4. Vent
5. Cycle Shield Resistance Presets
If I could click a target's icon around me with the reticle, and from there out interact with it solely by keybind it would at least put us on par with tab target MMOs
There is potential for fun here, but the current method solidly, solidly blocks it. This one point must be addressed in order for the combat to retain appeal and players.
Other PvE feedback:
Enemy killcount to complete the Very Easy mission feels high for the time alotted. Reducing the # of kills required by about 30% would feel better, or an extra 5 minutes on completion
Being killed by running out of time feels harsh, an automatic portal out would be better. Players already expend fuel/ammo and sustain damage, simply leaving the mission without payout is punishment enough imo.
Enemies should not spawn and fire on the player the very instant they enter their construct seat. Perhaps the intention was to feel like you were being ambushed? However if so this is not communicated to the player. A 30 second countdown to the arrival of the first wave would be good.
Ressurrection node selection logic needs to be looked at, as currently a rez node on a carrier at the mission entry point has not been where I've been sent on death. Rather all the way back to Alioth?
To expand upon Seawing's observations; it is vital that we be able to bind active gameplay functions. The controller and joystick support, while long overdue yet appreciated, still falls short of what this game needs to be playable due to click-only widgets. Fixing that one aspect will enable a more immersive experience as well as taking a massive step toward becoming PCVR compatible (ex. Virtual Desktop emulating supported controllers).
A potential solution for the Res node issue would be to display a list of available nodes upon death instead of instantly spawning.
IMO, the rest is a matter of balance. The way PvE functions at present gives a massive advantage for cannons and discourages moving at all. The lore may explain why they pop in so close but it sounds like a larger variety of enemy builds (i.e. optimal distance preference) would resolve this balance issue with the least amount of dev work required in theory. It would also help immersion greatly to have a unique enemy type show up at end of time and force you to warp out instead of dying.
On 6/21/2023 at 3:54 PM, Seawing said:I'm not under illusions about DU's situation. It's simply feedback, narrowly focused on a major impediment to the fun of the new system they just spent significant resources on building.
In the spirit of feedback: Thanks to LLM AIs I have a bit of hope for the skeleton crew at NQ. I've been watching the forums since I acted like a diva and stormed out. There hasn't been a ton of communication but it has been exactly what was needed and in a timely manner. Perhaps we can get a vague roadmap of what NQ hopes they can eek out next, even if there isn't a timeline or hard expectations?
/smh
Yeah, I'm back... for now.
-
23 minutes ago, Kezzle said:
Word.
It's not feature-complete and many of the features that are "done" aren't; they're tentative frameworks for placeholders.
It is not an exaggeration to say that the game had more features, fun, and stability in the first half of Beta than any point from launch or beyond (so far).
-
Patch notes appear to be unavailable at this time.
-
4 hours ago, Cergorach said:
No offense, but how much old sci-fi just completely ignored science as it was known then? And the line between sci-fi and fantasy has always been very blurred, even 'hard' sci-fi often ignored a lot of science in favor of story. And that's not a big issue imho. It all depends on suspension of disbelief and the consumers willingness to do that. But some things require a lot more suspension then others, the NQnian physics require a rewiring of reality... 😉
I honestly don't care much about the NQnian physics, as long as they stay internally consistent, but as NQ is running an eternal Alpha game, they keep changing stuff around, often quite drastically. And even then, due to it's buggy state, it's internal logic is not applied consistently... Is this a floor? Nope, not today? Must be something to do with the alignments of the moons and the butterflies being in heat....
There is a huge distinction between fudging the science for the sake of art (B movie breaking of science was typically a plot device for cheap popcorn flicks and/or lazy writers) and calling attention to the science for something but being inconsistent everywhere else that would apply.
4 hours ago, kulkija said:SCIFI / Science fiction is not about Science or physics as we know it. Trying to follow Science or physics creates simulator, not a game.
Source: Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction
To answer the question:
I feel DU game designers have got it all terrible wrong.
There isn't enough consistency in what little lore there is to call it Science. At best DU could be considered a post apocalyptical simulation with science-sounding elements.
4 hours ago, CptLoRes said:Yes the lore makes no sense. We are humanities last hope sent to rebuild a dying civilization. But on arrival we are just giving some basic tools to survive and let lose to run around like a flock of hens. And when NQ introduced tax they pretty much gave up completely on following the lore. The last thing you do when trying to rebuild a civilization, is to tax everyone to death.
And.. who built the markets that where waiting for us when we arrived?
And so we are now in a situation where the alternative community Lore where Aphelia is an corrupted/evil AI overlord pretending to be good, makes for a MUCH more interesting and sensible explanation.
For a 'humanity's new start' with 'no rules,' there sure are a lot of central planning rules followed by chaotic reprisal for trying to distance from or overcome the repressive system.
-
2 hours ago, ZeroPainZeroGain said:
We have been prepping for a new planet since launch and are prepping for the next planets.
Our team was 10-12 Players with 18 Scanners each and scanned majority of the planet in around 12 hours.
In beta we had ~100k scans and had mapped most of ION (every single hex)
The ore distribution from single megas in a hex to blobs of ore for mining units changed scanning forever.
You no long need to scan every hex.
There is no cheating, there is just super organised players working together for a common goal.
We opened our doors in Beta and had over 120 players mining for us.
Those doors remain open and you are all more than welcome to come and join then fun of scanning, calibrating and hex management.
1 hour ago, CptLoRes said:So to sum it up. Broken game design, is broken..
Just now, Kezzle said:Thanks for speaking up, @ZeroPainZeroGain. Eye-opening organisation, that. Disturbing in some ways that it's possible for such a small number of players to fully map a world in half a day, but then, if you look at DU's tech base from another angle, it's entirely appropriate for a survey to take so short a time...
It's consequential, too.
Thank you for making this known to everyone. In eight lines you proved me wrong and showed just how flawed the design is without name calling or hurt feelings. Bravo.
-
1 hour ago, AlbusD said:
which org was it and who? im making a list of all these types of people.
Does this risk creating an espionage scoreboard?
-
I have given this question way more time than it is worth. In my mind it boils down to the lore being overly generic to the point it barely qualifies as a garnish on a side of mash potatoes instead of the steak of a good RPG. Dying world, random company name sends cryostasis colony ship(s), FTUE, grind, grind, grind.
There is such a small amount of lore that once you watch the cinematic you've covered all the lore. Generic end of world, generic you are here now and.... go.
-
8 minutes ago, JayleBreak said:
I admit that I don't know much about this stuff, but can anyone enlighten me why voxel layers matter given that when converted to a mesh only the surface (triangles) are downloaded to the client (which renders them)?
By increasing the distance between the two surfaces that gives more time to process collision with the second surface layer. My guess, anyway.
-
7 minutes ago, blundertwink said:
Hell, Unigen doesn't even talk about games as a main use case on their homepage...gaming is an afterthought stuffed into their "Community SDK" section, which is either free or $150/month.
At one point in the past the Unigen website featured DU/NQ. After my copium from the launch hype wore off I went to the Unigen site and couldn't find any meaningful mention or assets from DU/NQ. I don't know the story but that didn't help my confidence in NQ to be pulled from the engine's site.
-
9 minutes ago, Bazzy_505 said:
quality of NQ coding aside, processors "slightly" below mininum specs are so old they're not even supported by current windows platform DU runs on ...
So Windows 10 will no longer run on a 7th generation core i3? What is this sorcery?
-
4 minutes ago, blundertwink said:
"Just fill the holes where players aren't around" sounds like a simple enough idea, but really...the implementation would be massively difficult.
If tile is owned assume digging is intended. If tile is not owned/abandoned AND distance under 1000m terrain data not requested by client(s) for 60 days, revert to seed.
Not perfect, but not hard to work on edge cases from that point.
8 minutes ago, blundertwink said:if they tried, it'd probably create a huge mess.
The fact that I keep seeing patch notes that are very similar to off-hand and under thought suggestions I made leads me to agree. Do we have to hold NQ's hand and lead them in minor quick fixes? At least give credit for suggestions that led to a related patch.
Bit of a problem with element mass
in General Discussions
Posted
Correct. They are using weight to punish players for using objects that are resource intense for rendering as CptLoRes stated.