Wyndle
-
Posts
600 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wyndle
-
-
Ideally both. The reflection of moonlight onto the ambient lighting should be clearly noticed even as low as 0.6 gamma. Artificial lighting should not vanish at LOD range, nor should shadows close to the light blur to non-existant by moving away from the light.
-
45 minutes ago, Cergorach said:
I would have advised in the past I wouldn't recommend now
Hence my Brave and Portmaster combo suggestion. An ounce of prevention vs. a pound of cure.
Edit: As an added bonus, the only ads I see on sites like YouTube are the ones recorded/edited into the video by the creator.
-
We do not want to discourage community discussion; what's left of the community. Your suggestions point to there being one or more core design flaw(s) in the game that should be sorted in Alpha or pre-Alpha (early Beta at the very latest). I'm not too proud to admit that I misread and overestimated what NQ was capable of based on what I've seen other indie devs (solo and small team) achieve. That was (one of) my bad. Now that NQ is in "release" I will not give any benefit of doubt nor attribute "background" aspects based on the work of others.
-
11 minutes ago, MadSlapper said:
NQs better nature
Wow. Not sure if I should laugh hysterically or pull out an Einstein quote.
-
2 hours ago, Aaron Cain said:
So with that this forum is just waste of time to us all, why still write?
Hope springs eternal. It may be that we are unable to influence DU's progress away from almost certain failure. It may be that some of the remaining and/or former community members start their own software projects with the lessons learned from this fiasco. Even if NQ will not listen to us someone may find value in our rantings. Anyone would be hard pressed to stamp out that last ray of hope or eliminate the value I see in the writing of those who have even the most miniscule amount of care in their words.
-
Portmaster and Brave browser is an amazing combination of software and requires very little configuration if any.
Pi-hole is great for avoiding traffic from known sources and cutting out advertising bandwidth at your router gives that bandwidth back to you.
-
2 hours ago, Kezzle said:
The market says it's abundant. There's more slopping about than people can/want to use, so the prices are rock bottom. Money (for schematics, mostly) is the bottleneck.
The market is imbalanced due to a number of factors. Too much T1 and not enough of just about everything else. Clapping all but one of the faucets shut backfired catastrophically. The economy isn't dead but segments of it are starting to bloat and smell bad.
-
31 minutes ago, RugesV said:
Its one of the reasons I was so against removing T1 bot orders. It was not that I was making allot of quanta selling ore to bots. It was that the masses where able to sell to the bots to get quanta to buy stuff I put on the market. Right now I feel everyone is trying to hold onto the quanta they have which is going to hurt the economy even more, which will drive more players out of the game. And its going to take an NQ comity 6 months just to have a discussion about having a discussion to fix the economy.
I am of two minds on the ore bots, but at this point the pragmatic view has an unassailable lead. Add to my own mixed feelings a glaringly obvious contradiction is present in NQ's position. Aphelia maintains absurdly high numbers of certain elements for sale at every market other than Aegis. This is an injection of usable parts with no associated ore sink other than the now defunct bot ore buy orders. @NQ-Deckard has stated the element sell orders are needed to ensure every new player has ready access to these parts meaning they're not going to consider changing those orders. Darned if you do, darned if you don't.
-
7 minutes ago, Kezzle said:
Currently DU is neither. Ore is abundant (still, in spite of the toning down of calibration mining), but money is not. Unfortunately, money sinks are deep and voracious (and don't eat ore), even though the faucet has been turned down to a dribble, from its initial firehose state. NQ don't seem to comprehend this; they don't comprehend that people don't necssarily have the time to consistently run missions.
It's not some high level discussion about style of game; NQ don't understand what they have well enough (or if they do, they're laughing up their sleeves at us all as they ratchet up the social compliance experiment) to actually make changes that keep the game fun. There's abundant evidence of this over the last couple of years.
I have to disagree about ore abundance. It may be more accurate to describe it as: those who make stuff tend to strive to be self-sufficient which means adjusting the faucet doesn't have the results one would think to be desirable and leaving the solo and small org out in the cold. I agree wholeheartedly that the sinks are absurd. I would go one step further to specify that the sinks are one of the components doing the most damage to the steam users since us old-timers know enough about the game to be capable of adapting. For a first time player there isn't enough "game" available to them to entice them to pay a second month.
I would have said that NQ doesn't understand what they have in this project until the CEO tried to describe their metaverse product. From my perspective that just leaves a series of conflicting interests and blind adherence to the wrong focii in the original concept described (kick-starter) despite having so much greater potential. Or you could be correct in calling this a social compliance experiment. I have no direct evidence for it but far too many coincidences to dismiss it either.
-
10 hours ago, NotReally ApheIia said:
There is worry they're not agile enough, nor have the team required to make that happen though.
I'm starting to feel like I'm reading the script from a Bill & Ted movie. When I first mentioned a cash shop (at least first time since end of Beta), I was very deliberate in pointing out that the revenue that came from the shop should be re-invested into hiring more devs so the game could thrive and improve at a faster rate. That was before I witnessed successive patches under "release" and saw just how... uninspiring?... their pace and design choices are at present. Not to get into current events or politics, but I don't see NQ keeping to the status quo much longer. Sink or swim time.
-
9 minutes ago, Msoul said:
the time required for a solo player to acquire a decent ship. In which case how about scaling it like so:
- Tier 1 = 1-2 hours
- Tier 2 = 1-2 days
- Tier 3 = 1-2 weeks
- Tier 4 = 1-2 months
- Tier 5 = 6-8 months
Is that being to generous or is that too grind heavy? How would you structure it?
If we could only. I'm still flying the same XS core with about half of the parts in it original to day 1. The ship has only improved due to on-place talent boosts. I was investing all of my effort into avoiding spending and helping build a functional factory. Then the nerf hammer started hitting and I've been crushed repeatedly.
-
5 hours ago, CptLoRes said:
When it comes to NQ I think Hanlon's razor is a better explanation for most things that happens.
"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Regardless of which is more accurate, we all lose. Including DU.
At what point is it reasonable to walk away from a growing pile of mistakes?
-
1 hour ago, Jinxed said:
since NQ have closed the Ideas thread it’s clear they have no intention of starting to listen to us going forward.
Hearing the tone and the words used when it was announced on a stream that a cash shop is in the works I'd say they're paying attention to the forums. I've still got the majority of my pre-paid year for them to win me back and that's the most generosity (or money) they'll get out of me without tangible, objective improvements.
-
If there had been something in place at launch to incentivize Aegis use as the main market it may have split up some of the load that is now firmly in place around M6. Now that M6 has become the defacto market for the entire game again post-launch it would take drastic measures to change that. The kinds of drastic measures that would ruffle feathers, drive off established players, and further hurt the game overall.
Now, if we want to talk about incentivizing NEW players to prioritize using Aegis we'd first have to stop the exodus churn, then find ways to grow the player base, and then treat DU like an actual MMO instead of an online sim of hope crushing.
-
Any EU members who are familiar with consumer law?
-
33 minutes ago, Cergorach said:
The KNOWN ISSUES section seems a bit light, with only one item. Are these actually all the issues you're currently aware of or is this an oversight?
At a minimum the localization issue is missing unless I missed that fix in prior patch notes. I think it is safe to say that the internal list of known issues is either much longer or periodically purged.
-
"So even if everything we are using as a model is considered distopic we must press forward to ensure it happens and our hand is on the wheel." (Paraphrasing)
-
Ha ha ha ha ha. 😂
The answer is probably hidden in a right click menu.
-
No offense intended to OP but just two weeks ago this forum was almost as active as it ever was during 0.23+. Since then the majority of posts are people who enjoy the building and flight physics begging the devs to stop killing the game and proposing solutions. The type of posts since 1.1 morphed into betting on how much longer the meager momentum will keep the train rolling or if there will be a fiery derail event to spectate. IMO, this game died with JC's departure and has been coasting downhill since.
-
1 hour ago, Msoul said:
If you find it annoying then either update your account email preferences, block it, or consider mentioning it to one of the CMs so they can investigate.
This questionnaire in particular is tied to unsubbing. To be fair, it's optional but extremely poor optics.
The pets have no value for me at this time (or at any prior time).
-
3 hours ago, Msoul said:
That is very fair. Apart from the third party kickstarter page, most of the remaining information pages were archived after several years, likely to avoid confusing newcomers with unobtainable reward packs offering "alpha access". Since there seems to be questions regarding what rewards to expect I will write up a more detailed overview on everything soon and post it here on the forums.
Why are we still getting Beta questionnaires months after "Release" if confusion is a concern?
-
2 hours ago, Verliezer said:
For scavangers this is a nice reward as well.
I beg to differ. I came across a wreck and attempted to recycle it. It is at least 3 times faster up-front to trash broken parts with Alt-click in build mode and trying to find all the spots in a factory to sort the parts into use is a nightmare. If there were a market for parts there might be a silver lining here, but for the same reason I don't want to pick up the parts there's not much call to buy/sell/trade the parts either. You would have to design your factory around constant import of parts for this to be of ANY value. The implementation of recycling was the final nail in the coffin for my copium as well as my (misplaced) confidence that NQ can even keep the game functionally playable for another year even if funding were not a factor. Add in all the features still in the vision that will clearly drive off the players who do anything other than PvP... Let's just say I'm only still here because of what little community is left [self-redacted to avoid immediate ban].
-
On 10/9/2022 at 7:50 AM, Archaegeo said:
Given a conversation with NQ this weekend and expected rule clarifications next week (not sure which way, just clarified rules) I plan to continue playing for the moment. This might end up being like when you plan to quit a job, you are offered some so you stay, and you end up quitting 6 months later, but we will see. I honestly do want DU to work out, I didnt put 2 years of coding into it because I want it to fail. When you have a game with GM enforced rules, they must be clear and they must be enforced, especially in PvE areas where all other players have no recourse. If we had territory warfare and could have dealt with this on our own, it would be a totally separate situation. Anyway, ArchHUD will be maintained and continue to be improved for now (as much as I was ever able to improve it).
This was Archaegeo's last post and Arch HUD was archived over 20 days ago. If the HUD is broken then it's time to say goodbye to it as it is probably dead for good.
-
Pay to play and free to play fix
in General Discussions
Posted
I don't know the code needed for this off hand but I bet transparent screens can fill this request already. It would be nice if a color picker with transparency slider were a part of the package here.
If NQ is short of art staff I bet there's a few dozen builders in-game who would be willing to do the leg work on designing models for stuff like this in exchange for some in-game benefit and attribution. Attribution is easy, just include builder(s) in the details of the item as well as an in-game title. In-game benefit may be a longer discussion because it should not be something that would imbalance the economy or PvP even if a given object becomes insanely popular.