Wardion2000
-
Posts
183 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wardion2000
-
-
I vote no. Inertial emulation and g-forces in a 'futuristic' space game is a bit silly to me. If you have the ability to dampen inertia or g-forces for acceleration at some of the ridiculous speeds you are supposedly simulating you can certainly dampen it for any maneuver you can think of.
-
NEED MORE RAPTOR!!!!!
-
Pro tip
Kickstarters funding info is refreshed by ajax, just leave it open and it will update without any intervention required.
Not nearly fast enough for me. The first day of this particular Kickstarter demonstrated that very well.
-
When you say traveling city this is the first thing that pops into my head.
-
I downloaded an auto refresh script extension for my browser just to keep watch. So not just you.
-
Eh, I was thinking from a game play standpoint. The idea was to ask if people thought these things would be "fun" to use.
I think that would be entirely dependent on what you mean and how the game design favors (if) any particular aspect.
First off many of your categories and explanation are somewhat.... Arbitrary and vague.
You have listed "Electromagnetic Pulses (including ion cannons)" . You stated if used against unprotected targets it would disable them but that they have the advantage of not being able to be "intercepted". So which is it can I or can I not defend myself from this attack? Is there more to it that I was to assume? If so keep in mind what you assume to be true is going to be different than what others will. For instance, Ions are simply atoms that are missing an electron (a cation) or have an extra electron (an anion). If you then say "Ion Cannon" what I envision is going to be vastly different than what you envision.
You mention a lot of 'elemental' damage types. In every game I have ever played that uses elemental damage types, I found one element more useful in more situations than the others. As an example, the game Borderlands has many elemental damage types. Fire is more effective against certain targets and less effective against others but a weapon using corrosive damage would never be LESS effective against any particular target in Borderlands. This aspect of Borderlands pushed players to either build a character who was effective against everybody but pretty standard no matter which character you played or build a character that overwhelmingly destroyed certain enemy types and had a harder time with others.
AND yes I am sure there are games that exist that balance elemental aspects out more effectively and don't run into this particular issue. Just as I am sure there are hippos that paint houses..... But I ain't seen one yet.
-
He said "good"
Seriously though, nobody can deny the advantages of a P2P. And unless I'm mistaken, pretty much every one of the above games runs off cash shop crap.
Plus everyone supporting this game already "said yes to monthly subscription".....
Coming a little late to this particular line of debate.
- As for "good" you say that as if you don't agree. That's fine. There are enough people that disagree with you to keep those games up, running, and successful.
- Making their money off "cash shop crap" is irrelevant. The debate was for any good MMO's that existed with OnePercent's particular..... Criteria.
- I too support a monthly subscription. My post was made because OnePercent made a deliberately biased and one-sided statement. As if those who's opinions supported P2P were irrelevant.
-
Don't underestimate the power of a dedicated, angry nerd. Spending years in an organization with the sole intent of bringing them down. And as your super duper awesome Project Ringworld is underway with multiple sites creating separate blocks, your most trusted ally and right hand man is telling the enemy where it all is, and the location where it will be built. But no, the enemy wont attack while it's being built in sections. They will wait in hiding for the pieces to arrive. Kill you, steal the sections, and build it themselves.
Or something like that, I don't know.
You have a good point, and I don't see why you wouldn't be able to do this. But on the scale of a Ringworld.... man, I don't know. Thats YUUUUUUUGE.
Very true. I will never underestimate the nerd rage. Still, It doesn't have the OUTRIGHT vulnerabilities that building large stations and titans did in EVE.
-
There's a tricky pick-up sequence you can go for, but it requires two people, one of them is the itnerested party. It works only on female programmers. The pick-up line at the end is " When I saw you my stack overflowed".
Step 1 : You go up to her, start to talk, then freeze, then the wingman comes along and manually rotates you away from the lady and brings you back to your table or stand in the club/bar/wherever.
Step 2 : You go back and say the afformentioned line. If she's the information you got on her indicates she's a programmer, she'll probably laugh and start a covnersation. After that, it's all about your understanding of vast subjects to discuss. My suggestion : Get into rom-coms. Women of any background love rom-coms (so do men, but this is not a girl to guy kind of route).
Step 3 : Hope you have taken courses into the horizontal shuffle, cause there ain't real advices on this subject. And given you missed the innuendo one reply above, I can't see we are on the same page :|
Ah Captain, you cunning linguist you.
-
This one looks sweet. Maybe needs some work on the nose.
Heh..... Which end is the nose?
-
Being plausible doesn't mean people will be actually let to build a death star good sir
People will nuke the site before they let anyone harness the power of a sun with a ringworld made of solar panels and store the energy for an endless supply of power to their ships Yeah, as soon as any one group caught whiff of someone building a project like this, it'd be nuked within a week. So that said, go ahead. Build one!
Though, it would be cool for a community project to build a ring world, that would somehow remain "neutral" not belonging to any group when it was finished. Could be a fun community goal that NQ could put together.
While I agree that those who would want to maintain power wouldn't want someone outside of their power bloc building ANYTHING like this. How would you stop them? It's not like in EVE where everything is built as an all or nothing approach. A Ringworld or other Dyson construct could be built in sections with interlocking components. These components can then be BROUGHT to the final construction site all at once. Ah, how I love sandbox construction.
-
Welcome! Looking forward to reading any feedback you might post!
-
I don't think it is going to be nearly as easy to reverse engineer a ship as some people think. The tools they plan to give us for design could make reverse engineering a MONUMENTAL task.
Keep in mind this excerpt from the devblog.
In terms of game design, we could opt for an easy strategy here. If you have the required number of engines in the right direction (no matter where they are), and you check the list of instruments needed, it would “magically” fly. With this approach, all ships would fly the same. Trying to put more engines, or optimizing their position would be more or less useless. Hoping to have an AI helping with automatic navigation would be up to the engineers of Novaquark only. Fancy a new way to drive your ship? Impossible. How about the weapons system? How about drones? All this would be predefined and more or less rigidly identical for all players. That’s not what we have in mind for Dual Universe. While we will provide basic templates to start with, you’ll be able to engineer your construct the way you want. Engines are real (they physically push your ship where they are, with the power they have), gravity is real, weapons have to turn and target (which also requires a targeter). If you are smarter than others, you can get the job done in a better way, get an edge in battle, or in trade by launching the new Falcon X-42 superfighter and change the balance of game combat with new tactics and possibilities. It’s not only about how you can use the predefined capabilities of ships within a predefined classical game setting, but it’s also about how you can redefine these capabilities. We call it: emergent gameplay.
This tells me if the airframe (spaceframe?) is suitably complex, I might not even be able to get it off the ground even if I reverse engineer it EXACTLY. We will have to remember that ships will be more than the parts we slap together and that I can redefine how all those components work together with DPU's. This isn't easy to replicate.
I would also like to bring up how much I can customize these structures. If it matters EXACTLY where I place an engine, you would be hard pressed to replicate its positioning if said engine was placed along a surface altered by one of the voxel smoothing tools for instance. Being able to take a ship apart block by block means very little if I can't replicate those custom shaped blocks again. In fact, with the tools we currently know about the original designer might be hard pressed to replicate one of his OWN ships from scratch if designed with such care.
-
Good sounds interesting
I'm sure we'll see all sorts of fascinating builds, that's the beauty of games like this.I know. They had me at voxel smoothing tool.
-
I think someone took away your 'How to Makes Jokes' book when you weren't looking.
But if the Dual build tools can do what the Landmark build tools can do, then the term will fit. If not, then it'll be a pretty mute term. It fits Landmark perfectly, even in it's sci fi setting, because Landmark is genre agnostic, unless the builder wants to build their claim into a certain genre.
I am the guy who plans on making ships that look like Dragons and Giant Space Kraken and probably plan on building yamamushi a flying space cathedral for his church. I am definitely building that claim.
-
Well said Wardion2000. You might be right...well and if this is the case I admit defeat.
No, don't do that. I don't think your viewpoint lacks merit. Merely IF it is an actual issue. Giving voice to a possible concern is fine. I just balk at the idea that something WILL happen unless it is changed or that it is alright to broad stroke an entire group of people and say we don't want change so we can hold some kind of advantage over others.
I was under the impression that Novaquark was creating a single shard sandbox where hundreds of thousands of people can build cool stuff, explore, create worlds, governments and factions... and to possibly make some money on the side with a healthy fan base existing of people who adore many aspects of game play. I must have missed the Dev Blog about how the game is designed to solely cater to people who code and that the other aspects of game play take second stage to coders and that Novaquark is ok with a 20 year plan to recoup the investment cost of making Dual Universe due to their infinitesimal player base of coders.
I am sorry for misunderstanding that Novaquark was trying to appeal to as large as player base as possible. The...the only I can't figure out is why they would need all this server tech designed to hold thousands of players in a small space. I don't understand why they felt the burning desire to change game engines to a game engine that handled a larger player load. I don't understand why some of us were invited into alpha to test the building tools as the prolific builders we are.
I am confused...all of a sudden so many things are not adding up.
I too am under this impression. However, I don't believe this game will fail over an entirely IMAGINED set of circumstances. Complex coding and building is a STATED design goal. (Link here) Novaquarks goals are VERY ambitious. Perhaps too ambitious, but they are clearly stated. And Novaquark seems to think they can attract a large enough player base with these game aspects. I agree.
You keep equating that having the complex aspect of coding will somehow ruin the success of the game by driving away the player base or that it makes everything else secondary. I believe that that in-game coding is a selling point and will ATTRACT more players not drive them away. I also believe that people will focus on whatever aspect of play they enjoy most. If that is coding then yes, everything else will be secondary. If it isn't, then coding will be secondary.
- Anaximander, PhunkeyMonkey and Tanuki
-
3
-
Good for you, what you consider yourself doesn't mean anything to me. Generally people who are 'voxelmancers', and good at it don't need to announce it. Their work speaks for itself. Unless you've played Landmark, not sure you know what voxelmancy is.
I was making a joke. I liked that it makes me sound like a SPACE WIZARD and so dubbed myself with it. I'm not using it as a statement of what I think my talent is. I WAS making the statement that I will continue using the term despite that it doesn't sound sci-fi. Cool?
-
I suggest you go back and re-read my posts. Your assumptions here have already been explained in detail above outside of the fact that you are brining up points that are irrelevant to this discussion as you are arguing semantics and not the fundamental issue, which is do we allow the smallest portion of the player base the most power, which is exactly what some of the people in this very thread are proposing...no conspiracy necessary.
I made no assumptions. It's why I use words like "trying, seems, and may". I am disagreeing with your assertion that the issue is a fundamental one at all. I believe it to be a semantic one, therefore what I wrote IS relevant to this discussion. So allow me to rephrase in this case.
MAYBE this game isn't for people who can't code. This game will include coding, and if you know anything about LUA you would understand that you can't simplify this anymore than has already been stated by the devs and still consider it coding. Even if it's a graphical editor you will still need to know how LUA works.
The ability and talent to perform any complex skill like scripting in DU will not necessarily equate to power. The "ramifications" you write of are "nothing but the product of an inference predicated on previously accumulated intelligence and experience." Just like everyone else's view here. The truth is far more simple. You don't know if it will be a problem. So stop making it out like it is.
As for this previous little gem.
Now lets assume that designers, people like myself, get to import mesh objects of spaceships or buildings or entire cities that they built in a 3D program like Maya, Cinema 4D, 3DS max etc. We get to make all of our stuff off line, out of the game and import it easily, but not just that, we also get better fidelity objects, shapes that can not be created using voxels. We simply will have the best ships, or cities in the game. These designs will be desired and will fetch a large price on the free market.
Would you honestly be happy with this? Knowing that nothing you make will ever compete with the competition unless you go earn a degree in 3D modelling? Would you be happy that the game 'favors' designers over anyone else?
If that was a major function of the game? Like the game was designed to cater to those people? If I were one of them? Yes, yes I would be happy with this. -
Empyrion like production chain? It works fine but I miss welding part... Production chain will be limited to nano-assembling cannon placed on players wrist, powered with players body energy (heat, maybe something else). Basically this cannon will be able to dig out raw materials and place anything if costs meet amount materials. Pure and simple... I kind of hate this idea. I'd rather to see complex production chain. I'm not sure if there gonna be any production block for bases/ships and that is also sad.
It's a little (read a lot) more complex than this. What skills you have trained will determine what components you will be able to make in 3D printers and assembler devices which you will also have to construct as well. The nano-fabricator on your wrist is the most BASIC tool which you can never lose and is the foundation for building all other construction devices.
-
I will build Giant Space Kraken..... No seriously!
RAAAAWWWRRR!!!!
-
Howdy. Looking forward to reading your posts.
-
War. Unmitigated, unrelenting, war. Unless the whole planet is Arkified and we can't do anything like that. Then, it will be...
Mining, unmitigated, unrelenting, mining.
If people are intelligent then groups will form where most people increase various, different crafting skills, thus being able to create spaceships much faster.
Afterwards they'd be the first to reach the neighboring planet, having a vast amount of resources for themselves.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Then they will hurry to create an stationary interplanetary weapon and turn the original planet into hell, forever denying the other players the chance to leave it.
Prison worlds, I like the way you're thinking good sir. I like it indeed.
heheheheheheheHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
I like the direction this thread is going already.
Personally, I predict game crashes. Unmitigated, unrelenting game crashes.
-
Actually number crunching would be the complete opposite. Supply and demand ensures coders in this regard would be the ones making large profits. The only way your statement holds true is if the majority of the player base are coders and the minority are builders.
If Dual Universe is found to be appealing to a wide audience, the people who code will be in short supply. The coders know this, and this is why the coders are fighting to make sure that "coding is as hard as possible in game". They are trying to unbalance the game in their favor. The understand the laws of supply and demand. If 10% of the population can code and the other 90% are builders, guess who is going to needs whos help. It's not going to be coders needing builders help, it will be builders needing coders help. Which means in an free market, the coders will be able to charge A LOT MORE for their money than a builder will.
The thing is, building will take longer than coding wiil especially when you consider people can write lua ousdie of the game and simply copy paste it into game, where as builders will need to be in game.
So, what this does is it makes the coders the richest of the rich with their high demand skills which means they will have to harvest less if at all as plenty of people will be willing to lay down free spaceships at their feet in exchange for some of their coding.
This heavily weighs the economy in favor of people who can code, this is in fact game breaking and once the community overall understands the ramifications in giving a small group of people this much power, people will quit the game. I have seen it over and over and over again in every game that lacks reasonable balance.
It seems to me that you, like so many of the coders in this thread are heavily biased towards coders being able to have this luxury....but lets not be hypocritical in thought.
Lets turn the tables 180 degrees.
Lets now assume that the lua scripting in Dual will be handled inside of an easy to use interface (much like voxels are) and this is all the coders get. They have limitations put on them by Dual (much like voxel builders do).
Now lets assume that designers, people like myself, get to import mesh objects of spaceships or buildings or entire cities that they built in a 3D program like Maya, Cinema 4D, 3DS max etc. We get to make all of our stuff off line, out of the game and import it easily, but not just that, we also get better fidelity objects, shapes that can not be created using voxels. We simply will have the best ships, or cities in the game. These designs will be desired and will fetch a large price on the free market.
Would you honestly be happy with this? Knowing that nothing you make will ever compete with the competition unless you go earn a degree in 3D modelling? Would you be happy that the game 'favors' designers over anyone else?
Though there may be coders who DO want to unbalance the game in their favor. I think we are a far cry from labeling the entire bunch (myself included) in the same stroke. There's no conspiracy here.
As for a coders ability to just copy paste. It's not that easy. If I write a code I will then have to test it to see if it works. Will it work the way I intended? Will it work to my satisfaction? Will the design of the ship alter how I must write the code? Will it work at all? None of the answers will come out of a vacuum. Real life avionics software designers will tell you the same thing. They create the program FOR the airframe. Not the other way around. Making a graphical interface for scripting will change NONE of this. You cannot make it any simpler than 'do you understand coding or don't you?' Anything else is no longer coding. If you are advocating against the entire process I think you are missing the point of THIS game.
THIS game is trying to appeal to the coders and builders. THIS game seems to be catering to the people that like to create and is giving us the tools to do so. So I say this to you Kiklix with absolutely no malice, you may have to go elsewhere for your gaming needs. THIS game might not be the one you're looking for.
Secondly, the hypothetical where one might have 90% builders seems far fetched to me. Having the tools for voxel crafting doesn't necessarily mean most people will be good builders. Being able to stack shapes together makes you no more a builder than being able to right words makes you a coder. I don't see builders outnumbering coders at all or more correctly I don't see coders being in higher demand.
Now think about this. How many people are actually GOOD at making anything in games like Minecraft, Space Engineers, Kerbal, Starmade, Empyrion, From The Depths, and Besiege? Whether it's making a space ship with complex internal workings or turning Minecraft into a working CELL PHONE. These people exist. They are a small percentage of the actual player base. Yet all these games are still successful. The majority of those playing these games have none of the skills I am writing about. Yet they still play and make these games successes. Why? Because it's a sandbox. Where one can create at their leisure and finding out what they can do is more important than how they do it.
-
I don't really care what other peoples opinions are, its the developers that need to read this thread and get the message that there going to loose potentially millions of customers over a 10 year period with this garbage business model.
I am heavily involved in the gaming industry and game development , and I know that this type of business model is a scam. Imagine if Minecraft had done this, they never would have sold 33 million copies but they would probably have made just as much of a few people in the short time the game would have been around, but because Minecraft used a MUCH BETTER business model it made Notch a fortune and the game TO THIS DAY is still getting updates and development. WAKE UP.
To those who like to insult people over there view and get personal, you have just shown your true colours that you are immature.
If you want a quality game you need a better business model than one that blatantly rips you off every month.
Thousands of potential customers GONE, from this poor decision.
Like I said, if the game is good enough the funds will come in anyway as more buy it, this is a PROVEN business model that actually works in BOTH developer and CUSTOMER favour, wake up there ripping you off, yes the game looks great but no game is worth hundreds and hundreds of dollars over a couple of year period you just have to have failed maths at school to believe it so.
I don't want to insult you or belittle you Piddle. Not really my thing. I will endeavor not to.
However, you say "you don't care what other people's opinions are". Okay, that's fine. I don't know what you're doing posting on a COMMUNITY forum then. But that's fine.
Your opinion matches many others that have been posted here. This too is fine.
Your opinion is not gospel, though. Just because you say it doesn't make it true. It might BE, it might NOT. This is in spite of whatever "involvement" you have in the gaming industry, not excluding it.
A subscription model for games CAN work if people believe it is worth paying for. The developers of DU believe they are making a game that can fulfill the criteria. If you believe there is evidence otherwise and wish to bring up an opinion here to be perused by others. That too is fine.
But unless you are the bloody Kwisatz Haderach and have visions of the Golden Path the devs should take for a successful game future it is only YOUR opinion. Please keep it as such instead of stating it as if it were fact.
Traveling cities?
in Builder Forum
Posted
Fuel, lift, and weight aren't as much of an issue if your shipyard is in space.