EasternGamer
-
Posts
141 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by EasternGamer
-
-
8 hours ago, Niemand said:
you think 24 votes matter while there are thousands of players outside of this trashy fanboy forum? looks like you are very low iq.
...the majority of the forum community believes in a dark, inky-black sky.
9 hours ago, Niemand said:i dont know why find my name so funny, must be another low iq thing.
If no one knows the irony, "Niemand" is German/Dutch/Afrikaans for "Nobody" ?
"NOBODY CARES, dual universe is scifi fantasy and so is freelancer."
"nobody wants the realistic black empty space of nothing"
I considered it ironic that a person named "niemand", the word for "nobody" in another language, used the word "Nobody" in a way that can be interpreted in a way to say "EASTERNGAMER CARES," and "easterngamer wants..."
I have no idea why you have to assume intelect based on comment meant to be a joke. Your username isn't a joke, the context of your words made it ironic. Irony is funny.
Really, no offense was ever intended towards you or anyone else.
I was just correcting your statement that "nobody cares" is a completely false statement. There are people who do care—like myself, and 15 others agree with me. -
3 hours ago, Niemand said:
unrealistic? NOBODY CARES, dual universe is scifi fantasy and so is freelancer. copy the space of freelancer and you have the best and most interesting spacemap on the market.
nobody wants the realistic black empty space of nothing, its super boring.
Sorry, but "Niemand", oh the irony, it's pretty clear by both the poll and the comments, the majority of the forum community believes in a dark, inky-black sky. I would agree. Making UI is not easy, but the current space environment makes so many good-looking UI look terrible.
In generally, they need to improve lighting in the game. So many things just don't make any sense, like light bleeding through voxels, or the fact that eye adjustment is just broken.
(And don't even get me started on how stupid luminescent glass can be with lighting)
Though, I hadn't really cared about skybox, on second thought, it does look weird. I would prefer the more realistic look.
Edit: If no one knows the irony, "Niemand" is German/Dutch/Afrikaans for "Nobody" ? -
Perspective?
I'm working on a HUD-based projection system. Probably would run faster on the new screen API because it's all just lines and circles. -
1 minute ago, LouHodo said:
Not sure how I feel about this.
If you can still buy them on the market normally I would be fine with this. But making it strictly a hunt for it thing... No. As the last event proved the largest orgs will quickly dominate the market. And with safe zones being so large where would this PVE take place?
That is beyond the scope of what I can really say. PVE should take place out in the PVP zone, where it will be more like PVPVE. Maybe an asteroid is an NPC pirate's base and you have to kill them first. The "strictly a hunt" bit is a little inaccurate. Maybe they could be rewards for NPC missions? For explorers, the idea that exploring could yield money is great. Like, imagine finding an asteroid before everyone else and it has an exotic L weapon schematic, you could make a huge amount of profit without even digging. You could even sell the cords of the asteroid itself.
The balance has to come for how a discovery is made. Giving a massive advantage to large orgs should be avoided. They should have an advantage, but not one that is a landslide. -
Regarding schematics, I feel they should be something you find and can sell on the market. Maybe with the asteroids, there could be a crashed ship with a schematic or two on them? Players can then sell these schematics on the market.
^^ Just a quick suggestion.
Edit: PVE content could tie into it in the future as well as an alternative method of finding schematics. -
47 minutes ago, Bobbie said:
Kudos for this massive overhaul goes to the UI designer we hired last month, and who will be gone again next month (or much sooner, judging from his work on the recent forum overhaul...). We appreciate his contribution to making our vision of a continuous single shard universe with player driven economy a reality.
Lol, NQ has nothing to do with the forum look and feel.
"ISP Theme by ISPFocus"
"Powered by Invision Community"
Anyway, it would have been a waste of resources for NQ to make their own forum.
-
7 hours ago, Revelcro said:
Lets just say DU is getting F to F- in everything but Mining. In mining it is marked absent. Maybe a C- for ship building, neither game is great at it but for completely different reasons.
You didn't answer my question. What is A/A+? If it doesn't exist yet, adjust your scale. I also disagree with you on ship building. I don't want to assume, but it's probably because you can't make something look nice in Dual Universe.
Combat in Dual Universe is very placeholder at the moment for me. As for the combat, it's a far more realistic depiction of what space combat could be in reality. It's not the most action-packed, but when you're encouraged to keep distance and high speeds, people will do so. And, considering people can push 12G's in acceleration, close quarter combat makes even less sense because you're talk 117.6 m.s^-1 velocity change every second. Considering in games like Space Engineers the max speed is less than that... -
40 minutes ago, Aleksandr said:
jumping?
"or in any other way moving a construct that does not belong to you"
-
2 hours ago, Revelcro said:
SB Grading would be Mining B-, Ship building C-, Infantry combat B+, Ship Combat A++ can not be improved upon until capital ships are made more viable.
What would an A/A+ be in Mining, Ship Building and Infantry combat? Why is ship building a C-? Sounds like it's not the game for me since I consider DU's ship building A+ at least, and that's practically 99% of what I do in the game at the moment.
-
26 minutes ago, SirJohn85 said:
It's not my job to convince people. But for those who don't see a flamethrower, rocket launcher or C4 Explosives aka Avatar vs Avatar as "much different", then I'll set the record straight for a moment.
Yeah, I was right. It isn't much different fundamentally. Much like any space game. You shoot, you mine, you build. It looks cool, sure, but it's just an expanded version of DU with a more defined damage model, physics and mining. I'm not saying it's better or worse, I'm saying it's not the answer to everything. Much like Dual Universe wasn't the answer to everything if you had only played Space Engineers.
-
As for the Empire, we're building our station out in space. Most of the people who offered to help build are building it. On the PVP side, we're building our fleet back up. We're almost ready for official PVP ops again.
I don't think Starbase is much different. You build, you shoot, you mine. I haven't played any of it, but, seeing the videos, it's not the answer to everything.
-
8 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
I doubt he's there to sell anything and as the CEO of the primary investor for Novaquark's 22M funding rounds so far he is well aware of what goes on inside NQ..
These are VC investor's , not PE ones..
What does "PE" mean here? Lol, I'm familiar with that term.
-
23 minutes ago, Sawafa said:
From the rules:
Parenting Ships - Dragged to PVP Space: This is a hot topic and one we wish to be very clear on. Intentionally parenting any construct without permission of the owner is not intended for game play.
Why does NQ speak about specific issue - parenting -, and not general intentional moving/transferring the other player's construction to the pvp zone without braking the game physics lows?
I don't think anything more needs to be said when Deckard clearly says "transporting of third party ships out of safe zones for the purposes of pvp and claiming them is not allowed."
This is someone from NQ stating on/off the record that what was done is essentially not okay. It doesn't matter the method of transport, be it gravity, the ship's original velocity.
If you say it's too broad and not official enough, no one can help you there.
Also, you're defending this, why? Is it because your source of income is this and you're afraid now that the technicalities of the rules may no longer hold true? I would urge you to just stop.
However, I'm 100% with you that NQ should handle the motion of an object server-side once no one's on it, until it just gets really far away. It's not computationally excessive. You don't need to render an entire construct, just a point in space with x,y,z coordinates and a velocity vector. Hell, even slow down the simulation time, it wouldn't matter until you actually saw the construct anyway. Things like orbiting ships can be a thing. I'd estimate they could even locally run it on maybe ten modern desktops, if they had to. They're just points in space that need to be simulated. And, to reduce load, just simulate ships which move more than one block a second. That should eliminate static ships.
Edit: The only downside might be dev time, depending on how messy or complicated they made simulated motion be. -
29 minutes ago, Sawafa said:
> Parenting is both between constructs and between a construct and a player
I want to hear this from official NQ representative, not from any other player.
But that's how it works. You don't need someone from NQ to say that. And you have like a 0.01% chance they will say anything on that.
-
11 hours ago, Sawafa said:
9) Finally, could you please clarify what is "Parenting Ships" from your article here: https://support.dualthegame.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016890940-Clarification-Regarding-Bug-Exploits-and-Griefing
By parenting, is it considered parenting between constructs only OR between construct and player (Can player be parented to construct?) is also considered parenting? Is construct transferring to PvP zone with one of the methods described above considered "Parenting" and is also forbidden? Is it, finally, exploit or not?
Based on your last statement, you seem to not know how the game works. Parenting is both between constructs and between a construct and a player. Have you noticed how you also move along with the ship when the ship begins to move, and when you go too far out, you no longer move with the ship? That's because you're parented to the construct. Just like how a construct is parented to another construct. The world parenting probably comes from the fact that any object attached to another is described as a "child" and "parent" object, respectively.
On your other points, common sense says that, if it is in the safe zone to begin with, it should be considered untouchable. If you do anything to make it no longer safe, or steal it, then it's exploiting a mechanic unfairly. If that mechanic is bugged, or working as intended, using it to get a ship outside the safe zone or crash, without the permissions to fly it, is a no-no.
But if it is in PVP space to begin with, you can do whatever you want. -
8 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:
In that case I would strongly suggest you use the autoconf system (%GAMEFOLDER%\Game\data\lua\autoconf) and store the script as a .conf file there next time.
Look at the default scripts in ..\lua\default for examples on the syntax. The advantages are.. many..
The game crashes the moment I try export the lua. But that's fine. I can copy and paste the code however I like. I just chose not to use outside editors because I never need to use them.
I'm like this meme
Replace Math with "An editor"
:P -
36 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:
Yeah, that's a big nope.. Nobody with the skill set to make a one of a kind "Augmented Reality GUI" whatever would make that script using the built in LUA editor only, never ever having versions of the script exist outside the game and/or in multiple cores. Making a complex script using the built in LUA editor in DU, is like painting a house with a toothbrush. Technically possible, but wrong tool for the job.
Well, I guess I painted a house with a toothbrush.
While not the same as Elias' script, I made my own and just published the incomplete version in the lua chat. I didn't use any outside editors at all.
-
11 minutes ago, XKentX said:
Can someone confirm that this script is actually a community one ?
Is it open source one that will be available for free like dimencia hud ?
It would have been open source apparently if he had time to finish it.
-
If it was in safe zone to start with, then he should get his construct back. He's not going to pay the 300 million.
Edit: no one should be banned, however, since no real exploit seemed to be involved. -
Well, I think those "special characters" would be removed once it was completel.
-
4 hours ago, realMod said:
this is what I was interested in when I first heard of DU:
I'd say it improved pretty dramatically both visually and performance-wise compared to that pre-alpha video.
The beta trailer did what every game trailer, in my opinion, will always do: glamorize everything.
I take all trailers with a grain of salt. Especially the action-packed stuff. Anything that looks "movie-like" is probably just fiction. No one's going around and walking about a small-sized factory with 10 other people. It's just unnecessary usage of time.
Also, considering the scale of the game, even if you have 20,000 players connected at once, it wouldn't be like you would see people on every single planet and every single market you might go to. I suspect for that to happen, you'd need more like 100,000. Well, that's just my two cents.12 hours ago, realMod said:For me the most important thing to keep in mind is:
This is a multiplayer game at heart.
Solo player will not have that much fun, imho.
Finally, someone seems to get it. xD
Yes, it's a multiplayer game. -
1 minute ago, Fembot68 said:
notice "bright or shining" in your def LMAO
?????????????????????????
My dude... You're confused. I showed the definition of "Luminous"
This is the definition of Luminescent. It isn't very specific, but it's not meant to be bright... xD Look up the wikipage and you'll see plenty of examples where it doesn't look very bright.
-
My second thing I wanted to point out was that some/a lot the textures seem to have been reduced to like 128x128 textures...
Those are meant to be "wood", but the texture looks like it's been scaled up massively. Might just be me though. (Max Settings btw) -
11 minutes ago, kulkija said:
This is SCIFI - Space game, not a realism simulator.
It isn't a realism simulator. But that doesn't change the fact that it probably was never intended to give off large amounts of light. That's what lights are for.
QuoteLuminescence is spontaneous emission of light by a substance not resulting from heat; or "cold light".
33 minutes ago, Fembot68 said:That's the (approximate) definition of a luminous... Not sure where you got that definition from.
40 minutes ago, Fembot68 said:so if they don't emit light then they need to change the name
right now they glow so Glowing Voxel ?
No... actually the current name makes sense.
Why I think the nebula should be removed
in General Discussions
Posted
I'm not sure why everyone is so agro about this topic.
What do you mean by this?
You mean like a third "option" where you can enter your own, or did you mean like a option to change your vote?