Warden
-
Posts
823 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Warden
-
-
Science is not just an abstract idea on paper or restricted to virtual (game) activities. We also collect and assess information. Results are often provided to the public. Here is an old archived poll about "DayZ playstyes".
Date: 08th November 2014
206 total votes
1. Neutral - Depends114 votes (55%)2. Rather Hero player39 votes (19%)3. KOS, no or very little exceptions31 votes (15%)4. Rather Bandit player
22 votes (11%)
So assuming that roundabout 200 players can be projected on a larger community or "speak for it", it turns out the "general pure KOS mentality complaints" weren't as justified and personal experience confirms this (hero type). This means the social interaction component is bigger than one could think.
Is this relevant for Dual Universe you could ask? It surely is as the game idea can be similar: Meeting strangers or unknown factions that are potentially dangerous and that could potentially cost you your gear or success ... or add to it by collaboration or cooperation.
There are two other polls / studies running. One organization study is currently on hold, another is taking a look at RP preferences. Both are Star Citizen related. More DU specific content of this type is upcoming.
On that note, should you be interested in this type of work, Science is hiring.
-
What's the prob with having players in such a spot in theory (dunno how it works in EvE)?
Especially the POV of the consumer rather than the devs would be interesting and together they create stuff together.
Then again you could also argue such official council is a PR tool indirectly, but I like the idea.
-
Bickdutt. That is all.
In all seriousness, I think that over time we can test various mechanics in beta and pick the best, or perhaps consider that players can decide or manage those special areas. Or certain parts of those areas.
-
Greetings and welcome. With the steady influx, things seem positive so far.
And RP(ers) is (are) always good.
-
I'd personally rather have a party in a club or bar than a restaurant.
-
Yes, but compared to a gunshop with working guns, a gunshop with fake guns is not so good either
A restaurant without food would be less authentic is what I mean.
-
This game is NOT survival.
From their facebook page:
"We are considering to implement survival gameplay. In the case we would develop this aspect, we haven't decided possible features yet. Some ideas we are currently looking into are harsh environmental conditions, like atmosphere toxicity, gravity, temperature. The goal is to have survival gameplay when you explore a wild, unknown planet, not colonized yet. But once proper gear or element is crafted and population start to grow on the said planet, all the survival aspect would slowly fade as the environment start to be controlled."
I realize you mostly refer to food / water consumption but I'm mainly replying to the statement "This won't be a survival game" with my point here being "It could contain survival gameplay elements if the devs feel like it"
And I wouldn't mind at least "natural" survival mechanics where an area may be too toxic, hot, cold, etc without the right gear. That sounds reasonable to me, food and water aside completely. Adds some tactical element too if you want to put some storage, house or base in some not so nice region.
-
I can ironically only really see player restaurants etc work if, next to good customizable interior design and gadgets like local music (jukebox etc) food is required.If I didn't have to eat I wouldn't go there and unless you were a roleplayer that simulates food consumption on paper, building one would be rather useless or a simple filler for some location.
In turn the most immersive experience I can imagine is actually using an ingame restaurant to eat and to perhaps discuss business deals at the same time; like in reality.
But time will tell. I'm generally for survival mechanics including hazards a such as extreme cold, heat, toxic areas, radiation, etc.
-
Hey, I'd say food count also counts towards survival (and economy). The higher the better!
But I didn't mean to change topic or anything.
This is actually an interesting thought. I mean as you produce ammo I wonder how it may work. This is both sandbox and an MMO. Do we see people dig up whole planets for precious materials? Or can we see some middle-ground solution where we perhaps have resource clusters that perhaps allow some harvester to be placed near or on them so they produce a longer lasting steady input of materials?
I can see factories pop up all over mineral rich worlds for war production alone ... or alternatively if there is no harvesting via machines (would be pretty outdated tho in that age) many holes and cages dug by people. In turn, certain ammo factories or hubs could become potential targets in conflicts.
-
I still wonder why people want all of this (which is fine) like ammo count, limited or 'weighted' fuel for spaceships in turn and a lot more ...
... but still refuse to have basic food mechancis in the game where you perhaps have to eat once a day for like a few seconds or perhaps a bit more often per every few hours of gameplay
I'm in favor of this by the way for both characters and vehicles - ideally there will be melee alternatives later on.
-
You could also consider joining an existing one. Unless you for some reason want to be in charge and defining one from the ground up.
That's perfectly fine but I like to mention that alternative from time to time, as trying to not just start but run (and grow) an organization can be a tough thing unless you have a few friends willing to support you at one point. It can also cost money depending on how far you want to go (websites, etc).
The more professional or solid you want to appear, the more effort and monetary input you have to calculate. But that's another topic.
I hope the future of the game will shine bright on us. Time will tell.
-
Let's all industrialists team up to build a capitalistic nightmarre land where fumes pollute the sky and water is crispy green. >_>
Be careful what you wish for
(Let's actually try to do this if we can - a pollution mechanic sounds funny if I think about it)
Hello Cybo, by the way.
-
I'm personally for a survival mechanic that's not useless and not a chore either.
If people want fuel for ships they should be able to live with food for bodies, too. You can design a consumption rate that is minor so you only have to eat once a day (not ingame) or in other words once every 24 hours your char is online so to speak, meaning that it could extend as far as 3 days if you play 8 hours per day. If you play less, it extends further. Perhaps that would almost be too useless again but I'm just saying you don't have to eat every real hour.
Some consider it a chore, I consider it a logistical aspect you have to consider as you move about just like fuel (if there will be a fuel mechanic). In addition it can allow a new economy - anything evolving around food and delivery. Your far away outposts better be stocked not just with ammo or the like but with a bit of food, too. In turn you have gameplay that evolves around growing food in some classic (fields) or sci-fi (labs, tubes) way of course. That can be fun for some, and if you don't have to eat that often but still once in a while, I think that would be middle grounds for all.
I'm not sure what the current dev stance is on this, I think someone threw a quote around where they were against this. I personally think it should be considered now or later anyway to see how it will fit into a potentially complex and immersive gameplay experience.
-
We posted at the same time, saw it too late.
But I do wonder out of curiosity: What if you just had to eat a bit once a day? An actual day, for example.
-
Later on in a certain blocky sandbox game, we exclusively built underwater organization bases. Mostly research labs. Too bad crappy imageshack swallowed all pictures or else I would've shown a design draft.
It's fun. And with actual, more in-depth water physics, it'll be even more fun.
-
It doesn't really hurt to have a basic survival element in the game by having to eat / drink. Heck, combine this if you want. Just use food items that both satisfy hunger and thirst. And you can set it that you don't have to eat every 5 minutes.
It would touch on the whole logistical aspect a bit. Perhaps make it so that you have to eat once an hour or every 2 hours?
Some consider it a nuisance, I see potential in this simple mechanic that adds a whole economy and somewhat forces you to bring a bit of food if you go out and explore. Perhaps make it different. Instead of having food items that give buffs, make it so that you have some kind of hunger bar or system. You're fine until it hits some minus value. Then you could have minor debuffs at best but you don't die.
E: Right.
-
You make some good points. I suppose this would make sense. I've been pondering about this myself. Having some NPCs as security would be useful. No one wants to spend their day on patrol duty.
Trust me, I'd say most players don't even have the guts or time for a task as simple and yet as vital as patrol duty. Or at least the average roleplayer. People often look for the action but these (at times menial) tasks have to be covered too.
In Half-Life 2 roleplay, when I still went to school (or it was on a weekend, so it wouldn't matter) I once did roundabout 8 full hours of checkpoint duty. In fact I wasn't even on patrol where you move around a bit and see new things.
I set up an automated checkpoint (with controls to regulate doors and cameras) in an abandoned subway station or the entrance to it to be precise. No trains ever came. The idea was to simply check or rather block citizens wandering down there as access routes lead to the sewers that were forbidden. Sounds boring as hell to some?
Depends. I actually deterred quite a lot of people there who would've ventured down there otherwise and the cameras helped me cover a somewhat bigger area. Of course we could've simply blocked off the area.
But the point is: There it wasn't even necessary due to automation or just blocking the area. In more resource based sandbox games, patrol or overwatch may be vital for your survival or to prevent excessive damage to property. While I received "RP training" to handle formations patrols and more menial tasks, I honestly can think of better activities at time and I'd say the average player doesn't want to stand on a watchtower most of the time they play, if they even have enough time to play during the week.
So honestly, anything that helps us as players "outsource" those tasks on a fair level (through turrets, cameras, NPCs, etc) is a good thing. Again, doesn't have to be "overpowered" but reasonable. Shouldn't be underpowered either though if they do decide to add those things.
-
Thanks, well, that kinda answers the topic.
I look forward to this site.
-
Less of a gameplay, more of a forum idea.
We currently have both player and organization introductions in one category.
I suggest that we (well, mods / admins that is) create a new category for player organizations, alliances, etc. This may be more useful sooner or later in my book and may eventually make finding them easier. It also looks a bit better.
Of course the sooner this would be considered and implemented, the less work you have later on as you move threads over.
If we assume people are for this idea, how could one execute it as we have threads in the category already?
Perhaps users are allowed to move their own threads between categories. If that's not yet possible (I didn't try so far) or not intended then mods could move threads upon request. There aren't that many organizations yet so that should also not be too much of a hassle.
- nietoperek and CyberCrunch
-
2
-
I personally would not mind being able to have NPCs as additional manpower for security or combat purposes. I most notably think of security.
Being able to get a few per player or perhaps per organization sounds nice. Why? Smaller groups could rely on moderate protection or at least as deterrent to "offline invaders". Doesn't mean you can park an army in your base as you log off, but a few strategically placed NPCs or those you can further tweak and edit (patrol routes, basic things to do when hostiles are detected, etc) sound like a good addition. Of course you can tie some cost down to usage and more.
Before anyone comes with the player argument: I'd say unless you were rather large and had players all over the world that had enough time, no one could easily afford to man some base 24/7. In addition if creatures or other NPCs become a potential problem and not just players, then that may make additional sense to have some NPC help. Example: Not just random players could attack your base but depending on where it is located, indigenous wildlife may attack it or NPC bandits and whatnot. If that was random and could happen any time, then having some kind of defense system in place as you're gone may be nice.
It would also make it harder for random raiders to just go on a pillaging tour when no one is there. Obviously, one would have to limit this a bit but balancing is possible.
It is questionable at what level we see this however, or if. Chances are this may be a rather late addition - or one after release.
-
With the scope they seem to aim for here, they may as well add physics to the game. Is it more work including fine-tuning? Yup.
Is not having it somewhat a bummer? Yup. Honestly, the floating minecraft blocks are outdated and we should not see that in a game like this.
Obviously, I mean on the planet or somewhere where gravity is. In space things would "float".
-
If you can dig around, then any artificial (or converted natural, like a cave that becomes a base) underground area made into some player camp or base shouldn't be a problem.
We did this heavily in Minecraft. Apart from like 1 exception, we mostly had underground bases there. Our bases were later most often in the ocean right in the water and / or beneath the ocean and the surface.
It would be somewhat interesting to have physics mechanics on blocks or pieces of land ("round blocks" so to speak) like in that certain zombie sandbox survival game.
There things like caves or tunnels could collapse if there is too much pressure from above. Well, just like in reality, so you have to add support beams or a proper design so nothing collapses. And you don't want to be buried in your own underground cave or tunnel system. Or base / city for that matter.
-
The cause of Starforge's failure was never "lack" of money. They abandoned it for another project (Reign of Kings) and they just didn't care about it. Bad programming decisions like voxel placement being entirely client side (Log off and all blocks you built would disappear. Comical for sure if building in Co-op but an EPIC fail in a construction game.) To game breaking bugs they never bothered fixing. Lack of customer support, lack of feedback from Devs. Starforge is a classic example of Abandonware and should be excommunicated from Steam and everyone's thoughts. Lack of money was never the cause of its problems.... It was the EFFECT.
In the back of my head I have bits of memory floating around of the old community manager Juno (that was kinda kicked out after taking a pro-community stance) saying that financial aspects also had to do with it somehow. Of course there was general mismanagement and perhaps lack of interest. But these guys got offices or one anyway (remember the first pics that were almost like "straight out of mom's basement" where the two were sitting in front of PCs with socks?) and hired more people. Even some ex-bioware guy. Then they cut down eventually again.
I can't imagine money wasn't a topic at one point I suppose, but it may as well been a sacrifice for RoK.
-
The problem here is, that most people, especially teenagers these days, have been raised up in the age of youtube and torrents. Well, guess what, you got to pay for things you like in life. I totally support Novaquark on a subscription model and I believe they should not budge on the subject, cause I personally, as well as many others, are tired of playing F2P games where they eventually head over down the Pay-2-Win route.
AMEN
P2P aka subscription fees guarantee a stable income and allow the devs to plan more easily opposed to perhaps random dynamic income from shops or whatever while serving as a minor anti-toxic barrier (those purely out to cause chaos on a general level have it easy if access is free).
As for those saving money due to getting software or stuff elsewhere for free: You save a notable amount of money if you get something like that on occasion, so chances are you can afford one subscription fee for an MMO.
Again, I know some really have to watch the money they spend but I could afford an MMO when I still went to school with pocket money. If you have a PC, internet and can get new games on occasion, then you surely have the few bucks per month to spend on a game like this I'd assume.
E: If we leave a trial aside for a moment I also realize that free to play may encourage more players to check out the game - but if it's really good even a fee won't keep those who're interested away.
In short: I don't want to save money short-term only to possibly have the game crash. I'd rather invest a bit into it and be able to play it longer so to speak. But that's just me. Others will prefer other models. I personally hope they settle for something that keeps them afloat, and I assume subscription fees may be the most stable income.
- SledgeHammer and Kiklix
-
2
47th Legion [MilSim, PvP, PvE] [RECRUITING OPEN]
in Org Updates & Announcements
Posted
I really missed stuff in Empyrion, it seems...
I should take a look at that game again it seems. Been ages since I played it and I only messed around in singleplayer a bit. But from the reports here I suppose you definitely recommend it.