MaximusNerdius

I'm in favor of the subscription model myself, but I definitely wouldn't mind a decrease from the normal $15. If it was more along the lines of $5 or even $10, I think you would see less complaints about it. While that may sound like it shouldn't be such a big deal, it honestly can be for those who struggle to have a steady income or have a very tight budget. I definitely do not want to see this game as F2P though, as most F2P game communities are a lot more... caustic.

I'm in favor of the subscription model myself, but I definitely wouldn't mind a decrease from the normal $15. If it was more along the lines of $5 or even $10, I think you would see less complaints about it. While that may sound like it shouldn't be such a big deal, it honestly can be for those who struggle to have a steady income or have a very tight budget. I definitely do not want to see this game as F2P though, as most F2P game communities are a lot more... caustic.

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

BlueDrake42's follow-up video on NQ's response video:
 

 
Nicely played NQ! Very nicely played.

Minecraft disagrees. Crafting / building games are absolutely popular and one of the largest genres in recent years.

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

For those who haven't seen it yet, CaptainShack got to sit down with Jean-Christophe Baillie for an interview about Dual Universe.
 
https://youtu.be/m1WMwIDWFKI

Wow, that didn't take long for the conspiracies and haters to jump on DU. Should make a drinking game out of how many times this guy says the word "truth", lol.

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.

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.

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.

Well, it's a noble goal to warn fellow gamers of a possible scam.
But be sure to check the honesty of your source before following him blindly in his diffamation and misinformation speech.
There are some points that don't add up in the scam theory:
If we tried to scam and deceived people, would we opt for a monetization model where we plan to make a free trial before starting a monthly sub? Obviously, it would be suicidal to give access to the game, even temporarily for free if we wanted to scam people. 
 
On the other hand:
- Bluedrake42 seems to present only information that could back his side of the story.
- He hasn't even tried to contact us to check his assumptions.
- When we asked some explanations on his Youtube channel, he didn't validate our comment on purpose (he has validated other comments, more recent, since then) for some reason known only from himself. Transparency seems to bother him.
- The tweet pinned on his twitter account is self explanatory:
 

 
In short, he's proud to say that he doesn't care if he's right or wrong, if he's loved or hated. All he cares is visibility.
 
 
In the end, the bad guys are not always those who appear to be in the first place.
Not all indie developers are scammers, not all youtubers have good intentions.
Do not follow blindly what others say.
If you have a doubt, ask the involved persons before accusing them.
Indie developers generally answer to the questions.
In other words, make an opinion by yourself, do not just follow an opinion made by someone who has visibility.
 
Best regards,
Nyzaltar.

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.

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.

*chuckles* Just noticed the signature there, Tracuer. Well done.
 
To add to the list...
Satellite Dishes
Antennas
Drills (several sizes)
Ore Detector
Helicopter Blades
Aircraft-like Wings

My wish list:
 
Rails (Otherwise known as the piston without limits)
Handles (Something that allows you to grab onto a struct and move it around or be moved by it)
Tethers (When the thing your grabbing onto is trying to fly away)
Sensors (Environmental variables accessible in LUA)
Rotors (Spinning wheels of doom are fun for everyone)
Welders (Or some way to automate the construction of blueprints)
Space whales (Or some way to poke fun at Hello Games)

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.

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.

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.

If you mean an uncapped speed in terms of distance using some sort of FTL jump/warp/hyper drive, or any other medium of travel where you aren't likely to meet anyone on the way or make any turns, then yes, it could be uncapped, or capped only by energy usage and other game mechanics. But If we are talking about traveling within normal space, where things on the way need to load on the screen, where you can change the direction and completely ruin any server side prediction on what's likely to need loading, and where you could very well have the unfortunate incident of your spaceship deciding to cuddle with someone else's, then unfortunately - even if they don't hard code a cap themselves - it will have the very hard cap of hardware limits. In that scenario not having some sort of hard cap would also have gameplay balance ramifications for an MMO, such as natural speed limits changing depending on your internet provider.

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