Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Everything posted by Murmandamus

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_and_Infinite_Games
  2. Except they won't... because it's all in their heads. Yes of course it's all semantics. Because it doesn't exist. BUT! .... you DU you, man someone has to.
  3. In other words winning and losing exist only in the eye of the beholder. Which is to say, it doesn't exist at all. "But Nanoman, you are in no position to tell me how I feel." "But Nanoman, maybe it doesn't exist for you but it definitely exists for me." "But Nanoman, that's not very practical." "But Nanoman, you could be wrong, don't be so arrogant." "But Nanoman, well that's just like your opinion man." "But Nanoman, I disagree."
  4. Aye, too much realism. (or should i say surrealism...)
  5. "Winning" is an arbitrary line in the sand. DU is a sandbox.
  6. Yes, but you were kinda suggesting that they are swimming in money and I think it's a little bit too early for that party just yet. And don't forget that they will continue to develop and add content to the game after release, rent/maintain a sizable server farm, and aim provide quality service. Those have been some of the reasons mentioned for the subscription model. So that's going to significantly extend those 2 years you mentioned, if we're going to assume that. Btw. they do owe all the backers a shitload of DACs. Basically everyone who backed will be playing for fr
  7. Well, it's not like they got those 20m euros as a christmas present. They got it from private investors, who will be wanting all of that money back and more. And that's just for NQ to break even. NQ doesn't have 20m, they owe 20m.
  8. I don't think you've actually seen proper cash grab games yet....
  9. Same here, I didn't know that. I guess that's their way of partitioning the workload into groups of players that are close together in-game, using our own hardware and bandwidth. So that could be good news for the total number of players in the game universe. But it doesn't necessarily bode well for overall performance in busy areas.
  10. Yep, who cares about promises anyway, those aren't the stars I sail by. It looks good nonetheless. It's not DU, but it has its own qualities, and it might help me wait... Maybe also a source of inspiration, who knows. I guess we'll see.
  11. Development footage playlist (same youtube channel): https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh-M5-wAw6pnnb4sXB8SQZtyEu6pOk3tI
  12. They also have moving parts and everything is scriptable. You can actually build your own custom factory/assembly line, bolt by bolt, with robotic arms and everything..
  13. Link to playlist (videos continue being added by the devs): https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh-M5-wAw6pmWgu83-8ujEIQnxl5ooz7G
  14. Would be nice to have some kind of element that facilitates docking/connecting/attaching constructs together in various ways. For one example scenario, it could allow for otherwise inert container units to be swapped out between hauler ships and warehouses and such. For another example scenario, it could allow two or more connected constructs to all use their engines and fly as a single craft. And of course another obvious scenario is to allow players to walk between ships and bases and space stations etc. without having to step out into the open.
  15. So, aside from (server-side?) automated defense systems, there is also the related hot topic of scripted weapons (not necessarily the same thing). I can see arguments from all sides, and I'm not taking sides here. I don't know what would be best. But here's an idea that occured to me for discussion, to see if maybe something comes out of it. Let's say for the moment that there could be valid uses for scripted weapons. But the main objections are gameplay balance and teamwork incentive. Now what if there were items or elements that could create sensor ghosts to confuse scripted weap
  • Create New...