MaximusNerdius
-
Posts
86 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MaximusNerdius
-
-
Excellent job in clearing that up, NQ! So glad to see that not only did you provide evidence to invalidate the claims being made, but you did so in a very professional manner. I am already really enjoying the level of community and interaction with community manager here.
- Pittouniata, Code24 and Cybrex
-
3
-
-
Ooh I didn't think of that: If they could license something like https://www.ivona.com/ or another text to speech software - perhaps somewhere higher on the kickstarters goals - we could use LUA to send it strings for different triggered events. I would love to use the Raveena voice for my dream capital ship.
Yes x 9000!!! Although if they include that I would want it to be set up to where we can fully customize it ourselves - a base "example" that most people think is cool would be great but definitely would love to allow full customization for something like this.
-
I don't think it will die, but it will certainly have an overhype blowout and be much more of a niche game then it's current community is expecting. Essentially if don't enjoy exploring procedural worlds for the scenery, you are not going to enjoy NMS.
This is my opinion of NMS as well. I'm sure it will be great to those who enjoy that, but that just doesn't appeal to me at all.
-
I think your second and third points can be addressed if you watch the "Gateway Shuffle" episode of Cowboy Bebop.
If you didn't have a stargate on the other side to act as your exit, you couldn't really control where it would put you when you entered it. The idea of travelling to another solar system to build a stargate would mean having one built at the starting point already to connect the two ends. That's what "exit" means in my description, that if your destination stargate is destroyed mid-journey, you're not going to end up where you expected to.
In Cowboy Bebop when the destination gate was disabled, they continued along hyperspace forever. The physics how it works are explained in the episode.
I think that would be somewhat game breaking, so I would propose that if your destination gate was disabled, that the wormhole shrinks until it collapses and you are left in a region of space far from your destination (depending on how far from the exit you were when it collapsed).
You could imagine a scenario where a wormhole exit is collapsing and you are racing through a shrinking tunnel trying to make it out before it closes.
I have seen it. I'm talking more about actual gameplay mechanics though - it's easy to come up with ideas or to draw stuff in an anime, but not so easy to implement that into a video game. That's also my point about the exit gate. Star gates will likely be in PvP space, meaning they can be attacked. A guesstimate on my part says they won't be easy to destroy... but my experiences in Eve and many other MMO's say that doesn't matter, players will find a way to do it. If you make it a requirement to have both a start and end gate... that opens up a whole can of worms (punny) that would make maintaining star gates not worth it in my eyes. Also... a lot of work would likely have to go into building one... just to end up "lost in space" because people on the exit gate decided they wanted to ruin your day.
-
-
Interesting proposals, though I think you miss some important points about FTL / Hyperspace travel.
- Your first idea about traveling through hyperspace not being instantaneous is fine, although personally I disagree with the idea I can see the justifications for it. However, requiring an "exit" gate makes it a logistic nightmare to set up a gate-to-gate system. The point of the "exit" system is to have a way to return, not a way to limit the potential of star gates.
- Combat in hyper is honestly illogical. Most sci-fi genres have imagined that you could figure out where someone went based off things like the signature left by their jump, their direction of ship, etc... but almost none have alluded to being in hyperspace at the same time as another, unless it's a purposeful "timed" jump like some have done in things like Battlestar Galactica. The "science fiction" fact is that you generally cannot join someone already in hyper, so the only potential for a combat scenario would be that you jumped with someone else.. and then tried to kill them while in hyper. That would be too rare of an occasion to justify the resources needed to provide a hyperspace combat system.
- Stuck in hyperspace? What would be the result of this? While it's an interesting story potential, I think the gameplay of it would not be quite as exciting. This is another reason I disagree with the required "exit" gate.
- Different sizes is actually not a bad idea - I have worried that the star gates idea would become a thing that only very large organizations could do... but implementing it in a way where there are various sizes gives the potential for smaller groups or possibly the rare individual even. Though one thing that does concern me.. would star gates be limited in number in a star system? I'd hate to see 1,000 star gates in one system... but then again, does it give too much advantage to a group if it's very limited? I think that aspect could certainly use some talk / decision making by the devs.
Don't let me feedback hold you back, though. The more input and ideas we provide, the more fleshed out DU can really become and the more inspiration we can provide to devs.
-
While I can appreciate the intent behind this suggestion, I don't think it is something that needs to be implemented in-game. For one thing, how is it implemented? For your bounty hunter example, that idea is very open to abuse. Let's say you post on in-game "bounty" on someone. A friend of his then kills him and gets the money, splitting it with him and likely losing nothing in the process. I see this in GTA V all the time. There isn't an easy solution to get around this sort of abuse, unfortunately.
For your alliance example - how exactly would you implement it to where the contract is broken? Is it broken only by one group attacking the other alliance member? I could easily get around that by simply not defending fellow alliance members during an attack by an outside party. Or even worse, I could hire mercenaries to do the attack for me. Further, there are lots of ways to skirt around attacks, such as providing intelligence on alliance members to outside parties, stealing from alliance assets... and these are just unsophisticated methods.. I could come up with a dozen more that would easily get around any sort of in-game contract.
Honestly, the best method for making people not want to break contracts is reputation. The problem with most online video games is people are often using a name besides their own for their character and if that character gets a bad rep, they simply recreate. This is where a subscription model comes in handy, especially one where characters are either limited or very valuable so deleting / remaking characters is uncommon. If the devs wanted to take it a step further, a reputation system that works across the entire account and not just per character could help... but that also opens up a whole can of worms of abuse, false reports, etc.
In my years of online gaming, I've found the best method for avoiding contract breakers is to be very wary of who you trust... and for those you do trust, make it more valuable for them to stick with you than betray you. Of course, you can't avoid it 100%... but in 16 years I've had very few friends turn on me.
-
Definitely would like to see Vive support over Rift, though both would be even better as to bring in a larger player base!
-
Unfortunately what Traceur says is all true. Uncapped speed limits are not something really feasible. About the closest we could hope for in that regards would be something along the lines of how Elite Dangerous does it, where you transition between speed "levels" of normal, sublight and FTL travel. Something like that is more doable than actual uncapped speeds.
-
Hi!
I just stumbled over this topic and I must say that when I read that collision damage isn't planned to be a core feature from the beginning, I was like "WHAT?! How should that work?"
I know that this is a bit difficult to handle (I've seen a lot of issues in Space Engineers), but in my opinion, there are a lot of things, that simply wouldn't work right without collision damage - landing for example. If I get you right, then there would also be no need to add stopping engines to, for example a colony ship which isn't supposed to take off again, because I could just let it crash on the surface of a planet and it won't take any damage?
It would also feel very odd, if for example two capital ships collide and just stop or bounce off without taking damage - to me this would be a huge balancing issue...
The second point would be, like shadow already mentioned, weapons. To be more specific: Player made weapons. One negative thing in Space Engineers are the very few and weak weapons. If you don't want to use mods (and i think DU isn't a concept that could support mods so easily), you don't have anything that could be a capital ship weapon - except PMWs, like for example the guided missiles of whiplash141. Even if you have a lot of pre-made weapons for all kinds of ships, DU with the planned economics would be great for such engineers - there could be a custom weapons market and a real need to develop countermeasures, even better weapons and so on... Real challenge and real technological progress.
I really don't want to offend anyone, because i still think that DU is a great project, and i had a big wow-moment when i first heard of it, but to me this is an important topic (i just made an account to reply to this
)Please correct me , if I got something wrong, or if the plan has already changed. To me any, even unrealistic, collision damage mechanic would be better than none
You make some good points, but you also have to realize that some things are simply not possible (at least at this time). Think about it this way - Space Engineers can handle collisions, but try crashing a ship of 10,000+ blocks into a planet at high speed. When the impact occurs, frame rate and sim speed suffer dramatically... and that's only 1 person/ship. That's on a scale of server that is very small in comparison to what DU is proposing. Imagine trying to play on a SE server with 100 people... and 10% of them constantly crashing into planets, other ships, or anything else. The server would pretty much die or be so slow it would be entirely unplayable. Now scale that up to thousands or even tens of thousands of players... and you see why this isn't really something feasible. Granted, SE is not optimized and especially not for multiplayer, but the amount of processing power required to figure out the level of geometry and physics for even a few hundred ship collisions would be tough.
I do expect there will be some sort of collision mechanics, but just not to the detailed level that you are thinking of. Perhaps when a ship collides with something, the collision mechanics will look at the speed of collision (speed of your ship +/- speed of what you ran into) and what each object is (or is composed of), then determine whether this collision meets a certain threshold - if it does, a "destruction" type event happens, which could even be made graphically pretty without having to render your ship breaking into a million pieces; if it doesn't, the ship simply bounces off, perhaps even a minor "collision" event could happen that leaves a mark on your ship or does slight damage to it's systems...
I would certainly hope that we're not able to just fly through things, and especially not each other.. a space sim definitely needs the ships to be solid objects.
-
Definitely an excellent idea that I hope sees the light of day.
-
Dual Universe don't offers 'content' at all. It will feature (hopefully) cool tools and an environment. For me this is a normal PC game. Buy it, play it, done. I doubt many players will stick to their sub, if there will be no content flowing in after release.
But I may be wrong. As the devs spare the money for content creation like quests and story, they might go for a very low sub of one or two $/€ a month. This might work, we will see.
Where have you seen or heard that they won't be releasing new content? I am pretty certain the opposite is true, being a monthly sub game. If they don't release new content, they will lose players pretty quickly.
-
I'm super excited about this! Gonna have to freshen up my knowledge of LUA in anticipation! Perhaps at some point I can work on some guides once we see how this actually works in-game.
-
also if you are a successful trader or corp head you could always buy them with ingame currency and gift. it be an interesting dynamic in corps and other organizations to give out the game time tokens as a reward or bonus to members
It certainly would.
-
I love that NovaQuark laid bare why they chose this model in their blogpost. It has very well laid out details on why the decision was made and I agree with many of them. The F2P model is hard to maintain, since the devs constantly have to add to the cash shops, but balance out whether the items added are merely cosmetic or whether they can actually influence gameplay. Many F2P games fall into this trap, even unintentionally sometimes. I've even seen a few B2P games that added a cash shop end up in similar situations.
I can however appreciate that not everyone can afford a subscription, as many of my long-time online friends fall into such a category. I think it is important that NovaQuark make it possible for those who put time and effort into the game be able to use those efforts to pay for their play through in-game means. I've played Eve Online and honestly while their model allows you to do it, actually earning enough to pay for your sub in-game was very time consuming and quite frankly, boring. I've done transporting, I've played the markets but if you're not a long time veteran with heaps of cash already, it's very tough to earn your way to the point where you can make an account pay for itself and you still actually have time for "fun".
Overall my point is I hope that NovaQuark will implement a way to pay for your sub that won't be just a boring grind. I guess time will tell on that.
Also I saw it mentioned before, please implement a system where you can "gift" subscription time to other players. I'd love to help my friends play, or see Twitch / Youtubers handing out subcriptions as rewards to their fans.
-
Personally, I hate games with designated "Starting Areas." They are infested with pirates, trolls and scammers and don't really do much to exemplify the game as a whole, often turning me off to a game by cramming me into a zone with 100 12 year old's (Need I say more?)
My proposal is this: The UN Built thousands of Ark Ships, right? Rather than having a planet with 10,000 new players(NP's from now on) I think it should be built so that each player gets their own planet/Ark Ship/Safe Zone.
They also get say 9,000 "Survivors" or "Colonists" who can then be assigned different jobs in the city that the player builds in his "Safe Zone" on the planet. (IE: Build a mine, needs 650 colonists/workers to operate at max capacity. These "Colonists" could also be assigned jobs outside of the safe zone, but would be vulnerable to attack from other players.
Once the player runs out of "Colonists" he/she could then gain more by either
A) Enslaving another planets colonists who are caught working outside of the safe zone
OR
Build/Craft/Buy (ing) some form of AI/Robotic WorkerOption A would be free at the risk of retaliation from the other player or runaway slaves, while B would cost but be risk free
I plan on adding/adjusting this idea as I get comments and probably shot down by people with this stuff called "Reason" and "Logic"
-Whiskey Out
I understand your reasoning behind this, as I have 16+ years of experience playing MMO's and have certainly grown tired of dealing with problem players that bring very little to the game. Personally though, I do not feel that your suggestion would fit well within this sort of game, as part of playing an MMO is being immersed in a world with thousands of other players and personalities. It is an interesting concept to propose though, so kudos for trying to think outside the box. I don't think it really brings RTS playstyles into the game, but as some mentioned each person having their own starting planet would make many things like bringing your organization's people together much tougher.
-
Just want to point out that if you read the Dual Universe short story by A. Damasio it sounds like something like a material quality system is already planned. Specifically mentioned are special properties of the material that the original spaceship we all land in is made from, as well as a discovery later on in the story.
-
I am fairly new here, but would like to suggest that a slight change be made to these forums. It is very hard to follow a conversation taking place in a topic where quotes are used, due to the dark colors used in both the forum background, the box around the quotes and the unchanged color of the text between the quoted part and the response.
Please change the colors on one of these - either put a colored box behind the quoted text or change the text color for the quoted text, so that it is much easier to distinguish the response from the quote.
Thanks
-
Welcome to the forums of DU, unfortunately the alpha is not out yet but planned for early 2017 alongside kickstarter, and that is the only access to any alpha that we are aware of at the moment.
Not even the alpha team members have any access to the game till then, and getting into that team depends on good behaviour, forum participaton and basically if the devs decide to have you or not.
However I'd like to point out that having your first post asking for alpha participation isn't really standing you in good stead to be placed in the alpha team.
So far it's the major contributors to the forums ideas and gameplay ideas that have been noticed.
So if you really want to get alpha, participate in the forums and offer constructive feedback on subjects already posted and in general be a nice person here, even if you don't get alpha, I'm sure you can make a few friends for the game in the mean time
But yeah, welcome to the forums, I hope you enjoy your stay.
P.s. this post also applies to any new people joining the forums purely in search of a alpha of the game, sadly at this moment there is not one.
Nora,
I have to say it's refreshing to see a game community that actually rewards it's active participants in such a way. Bravo to NovaQuark for that!
-
Thanks for the link. Definitely some good info there on how they plan for things to work. I am following this game closely, as I have high hopes for it - I am skeptical due to the many failed similar games out there, but it sounds like this NovaQuark team has actually put proper planning and thought into it.
Prisoners/Slaves and Ransoms?
in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
Posted
Honestly I don't think this should be implemented as an actual game mechanic for slavery - if people wanted to roleplay this out that would be great, but forcing it onto players that aren't interested in such play styles would be very bad if you want to keep people playing. Personally I am the type that I'd just roll with it, but I have much more interest in the roleplay aspects than other players might.