Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ATMLVE

"Probably After Release"

Recommended Posts

There are always lots of questions about Dual Universe... Some of the same questions get asked a lot, but people are still always coming up with new ones. One of the most common answers to any question is... "Probably not at release." I realize there are a lot of things that can be pushed off for a time, but I am afraid that there are some features which may be initially neglected which will later become very difficult to implement.

 

For instance, I would love for hostile environments/weather to cause wear/damage over time. Extreme heat, sandstorms, toxic rain, etc. requiring different materials and skills to be able to operate in these environments would be awesome (my opinion of course) for the game, but if I asked whether this will be added the answer would be "probably not at release." But how could you implement something like that later down the road? It would be difficult. You would have to wait for new planets to be generated and then give them those effects; after all, the developers can't just say: "Update 5.67: Surprise! All of your bases on sand planets are now being torn apart by sandstorms. You need a new material we've introduced to make anything that can last there now."

 

Something like customizable elements is a great example of what can totally be added in at a later time, with little to no negative effects. But something like significant weather, or gas giants, or new materials, I feel are things that really either need to be in at the start, or it'll just be a hassle to integrate later. Some others might be:

 

- Food: Spawn into the new update of the months-old game, suddenly you are hungry with no food. A whole new economy based around food now has to be created.

 

- Farming: Farming requires land. If an org knows this from day 1, they may design their bases around providing themselves with land for crops or animals. If instead, they find out on day 100 that it's now going to be beneficial to have tons of open plains, and here they've built themselves a city with large flat one to two story buildings, now they're screwed.

 

 

Of course NovaQuark can't add in everything at the start. They can't know what update they'll want two years down the road. But, to rephrase what I've said, I don't want features which would otherwise be awesome and good for the game, to instead hurt it because they were added in at a later date after the game had already developed around their non-existence.

 

One thing I am suggesting is... You can lynch me if you want. But add in, especially for alpha and beta, add in features that seem like they would be difficult to implement later into the game in at least a buggy state, so that way players can at least somewhat adapt to their presence. Yes, I am suggesting cramming in features in a buggy state rather than having a mostly stable game. I think that, in the long run, it'll end up for the better.

 

 

Please let me know if you agree or completely disagree. I know people will disagree; I'm sure of it! Maybe you can change my mind with brilliant logic or reasoning. Please, of course, let me know, but please understand that I am very open to being disagreed with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was frightened for a moment. I have been playing mmorpgs since 2001. As I read it, the memories of Star Wars Galaxies immediately came up with the Combat Update and NGE. If you want to kill a mmorpg, take a look at SOE with this game.
 
Anything that changes the game style or turns around 180 degrees, in my opinion can not be released after release. The best examples are your survival elements. Everything that affects planetary changes can, in turn, be applied to the expansion of the universe with the new planets. Everything that expands elements or other things enriches the possibilities for new or revised projects. But Novaquark knows this.
 
One must not forget: in the end, we make only suggestions. They can be accepted or not. I may be unpopular with this opinion, but sometimes it is better not to listen to the community during development, but to wait for feedback on the PTR test.
 
I save the words to the alpha as they are self-explanatory. These are processes that are common in the business world.
 
Wikipedia: Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss. Alpha software may not contain all the features that are planned for the final version. In general, there is no software in the public domain, but publicly available alpha versions. The alpha phase usually ends with a freeze feature. At this time, the software is said to be a feature complete.

 

 

 
I think it's good that you've written it down ATMLVE. Perhaps this also brings some people back to reality. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with you in some respects, but I think the overall point you are making is a valid one. 

 

I think some aspects may be harder to implement down the road, but it may be even harder to implement them initially. Weather, for instance, is quite a challenge as it requires changes to the graphics of the game and also has to be built into the other systems. Just doing those changes can take an extraordinary amount of time, but they will also have to be balanced with the other elements of gameplay, increasing testing time and complexity. All of that time reduces time that can be spent on more important core features like constructs, mining, combat, and voxel manipulation. NQ also really wants to avoid making too many promises (NMS) which is why they often answer "Maybe later".

 

I think it is important to remember that Alpha and Beta are probably not going to be the only opportunities for public testing. NQ will probably follow the pattern of most MMOs and have a public test server that allows for people to play with and provide feedback for upcoming features. So I think the pattern of releases will be less "Update 5.6.7: You now need food or you'll die" and more: "Hey we are going to be introducing food mechanics in about 6 months." ... "Okay we've been working on it for about a month and here is the system with have come up with *posts devblog explaining how the mechanics will work*" ... "Okay we have taken the communities comments on the topic and spent a month revising the system. Here is our prototype version of the release on the public test servers, try it out!" ... "Okay, we have taken the feedback and realized there were a few balance issues that we have now fixed, so this will now be releasing in a month." In this way, the community will have plenty of notice before any major changes come about and an opportunity to provide feedback (much like an alpha). The key is NQ listening to the community at each stage. 

 

And as to game changing elements, they may want to introduce those from time to time. In the case of weather, they may want to implement that on already colonized worlds to influence them (perhaps by incentivizing people to spread out). It is likely that they will reserve the actual hostile environments for new planets, of which there will be plenty. It will probably be a year or so after launch until people are really moving out into other star systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what you're saying and I agree with you in some aspects:

Some changes will be harder to implement later on and alpha/beta is the best moment to bring some in.

 

But they need time to even implement the most basic features like the server tech, physics, basic game mechanics like mining, processing, building, lua and so on. Even THAT is very hard work and will take forever. They just can't do everything, you got to accept that (they're no AAA studio with 5000 people).

 

Some changes like for example the weathering effect would be odd if implemented 2 years after release and suddenly all players would need to gather some extra resource - but imho that's still better than implementing a broken, unfair, unfinished, not well made and buggy mechanic from start. Because that would be abused to hell, newbros would whine about it and people would start talking about DU as an unfinished, poorly made MMO as a whole because one mechanic is broken. (Oh, they would do that!).

So in terms of PR you don't want to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. It's far better to have a well made core of the game, then layer upon layer of broken content. With a good core they will be able to attract more people to the game, which will give them more income to work with so they can make more and better content. Not to mention, having a very streamlined game at the beginning is good as it won't overwhelm new players with a massive learning curve off the bat. As more people come and more features are added the learning curve will increase, but by then the initial players will have laid the foundation of a community that will be able to get the later newcomers up to speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fond of features that add depth to the game, but I am also a great advocate for "Don't put the effin' cart before the horse".

 

 

I'l lbe honest, I am the kind of guy who was not amused when I heard "oh, no melee in the game, at least, not at launch", but then I realised I am here to build stuff and ruin the marketplace with price-fixing schemes and I was like "oh yeah, I can probably wait for swords to come in."

 

 

 

P.S. : We need more posts like thus, my suggestion, add bullet points on the most commonly requested features, if you are to expand upon the list of CONFIRMED features that won't be on release, but people call for all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the first part. But disagree with he last part. If they release a buggy broken game there wont be a game for them to fix. This is a monthly sub if its to buggy people will leave and not come back, for the most part. I would much prefer a dreaded delay then rushed features.

 

:Edit I am kinda worried that they will wait to release stuff that would be good only in the early game latter down the line too. Is that the correct two to too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are always lots of questions about Dual Universe... Some of the same questions get asked a lot, but people are still always coming up with new ones. One of the most common answers to any question is... "Probably not at release." I realize there are a lot of things that can be pushed off for a time, but I am afraid that there are some features which may be initially neglected which will later become very difficult to implement.

 

For instance, I would love for hostile environments/weather to cause wear/damage over time. Extreme heat, sandstorms, toxic rain, etc. requiring different materials and skills to be able to operate in these environments would be awesome (my opinion of course) for the game, but if I asked whether this will be added the answer would be "probably not at release." But how could you implement something like that later down the road? It would be difficult. You would have to wait for new planets to be generated and then give them those effects; after all, the developers can't just say: "Update 5.67: Surprise! All of your bases on sand planets are now being torn apart by sandstorms. You need a new material we've introduced to make anything that can last there now."

 

Something like customizable elements is a great example of what can totally be added in at a later time, with little to no negative effects. But something like significant weather, or gas giants, or new materials, I feel are things that really either need to be in at the start, or it'll just be a hassle to integrate later. Some others might be:

 

- Food: Spawn into the new update of the months-old game, suddenly you are hungry with no food. A whole new economy based around food now has to be created.

 

- Farming: Farming requires land. If an org knows this from day 1, they may design their bases around providing themselves with land for crops or animals. If instead, they find out on day 100 that it's now going to be beneficial to have tons of open plains, and here they've built themselves a city with large flat one to two story buildings, now they're screwed.

 

 

Of course NovaQuark can't add in everything at the start. They can't know what update they'll want two years down the road. But, to rephrase what I've said, I don't want features which would otherwise be awesome and good for the game, to instead hurt it because they were added in at a later date after the game had already developed around their non-existence.

 

One thing I am suggesting is... You can lynch me if you want. But add in, especially for alpha and beta, add in features that seem like they would be difficult to implement later into the game in at least a buggy state, so that way players can at least somewhat adapt to their presence. Yes, I am suggesting cramming in features in a buggy state rather than having a mostly stable game. I think that, in the long run, it'll end up for the better.

 

 

Please let me know if you agree or completely disagree. I know people will disagree; I'm sure of it! Maybe you can change my mind with brilliant logic or reasoning. Please, of course, let me know, but please understand that I am very open to being disagreed with.

I hate to break it to you, but the features you just listed there (weather condition damage to structures, food/starvation, farm animals) are all off-genre features and are unlikely to EVER make it into the game.

 

This is an MMO, the features you just listed are all SURVIVAL game genre features. Not a single one of those features are a part of the core gameplay that they have proposed so far. The main features they have pushed up until this point have been about Building, Exploration, Economy, Orgs, and PvP up until this point. Not a single one of those gameplay elements ties directly into the features you mentioned in this post. A smart dev team would focus on what they already have proposed without even considering off-genre mechanics. If something is in popular demand AND can be added later, then it would be a possibility, but of the features you have listed so far, the only thing that seems like it has a snowball's chance in making it into the game is the environmental damage mechanics. Mainly this is because if added in a future patch, they can create dangerous weather zones exclusively in new sectors.

 

So my guess is that if the devs responded with "probably not at release" it is a polite way of dismissing requests/demands without losing your support and interest. They are doing a smart and polite customer service thing by keeping an open mind and not telling you flat out "no", even if that is the truth.

 

So yeah, probably not at release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you, but the features you just listed there (weather condition damage to structures, food/starvation, farm animals) are all off-genre features and are unlikely to EVER make it into the game.

 

This is an MMO, the features you just listed are all SURVIVAL game genre features. Not a single one of those features are a part of the core gameplay that they have proposed so far. The main features they have pushed up until this point have been about Building, Exploration, Economy, Orgs, and PvP up until this point. Not a single one of those gameplay elements ties directly into the features you mentioned in this post. A smart dev team would focus on what they already have proposed without even considering off-genre mechanics. If something is in popular demand AND can be added later, then it would be a possibility, but of the features you have listed so far, the only thing that seems like it has a snowball's chance in making it into the game is the environmental damage mechanics. Mainly this is because if added in a future patch, they can create dangerous weather zones exclusively in new sectors.

 

So my guess is that if the devs responded with "probably not at release" it is a polite way of dismissing requests/demands without losing your support and interest. They are doing a smart and polite customer service thing by keeping an open mind and not telling you flat out "no", even if that is the truth.

 

So yeah, probably not at release.

Hey now. I said you could disagree. I didn't say you could tell me I was wrong. ;)

 

Weather like rain and things like that is something that we're looking at might actually come at some point. Its a difficult problem because you have to simulate it at the scale of a planet its not like a local thing. The world is one real world so if there's a storm, we should see it from space. That makes it more complicated than just a visual effect. So we're looking into this and plants also will be generated part of the biomes. We will see whether you can actually collect those plants to make medicines. All these things are in the inner working for probably further expansions after the initial release to develop the gameplay for explorers

So good idea, interesting, one day we will look into this probably because yes, there could be effects on the players and constructs and we could also have effects on, I don’t know, solar panels and you could imagine this could effects the efficiencies and so on.

Will it be possible to create this food from NPC animals and flora and oil? This could add the option for protect of valued animals, who need grass, sun and water for living, and having ground control to protect them in your own farm (what you cannot hide in underground).

 

These are all excellent ideas and we will consider them, but not for the initial release, but more in the "survival" expansion that would come later.

NovaQuark definitely wants to implement this stuff into the game. They would have no problem saying "No, we don't want this" if that was the case, as they have done that with other suggestions.

 

From what I see, the general consensus is that yes, it will cause problems to add in certain mechanics later, but it is the most preferential option. Another thing I wanted to do with this post was simply bring to light how it's not as easy as simply adding something in later, and of course people realize this, but not all of them. Thank you everyone so far that has given their input!

 

Also, the answer of "not at release" is given just as much by members of the community as NovaQuark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you, but the features you just listed there (weather condition damage to structures, food/starvation, farm animals) are all off-genre features and are unlikely to EVER make it into the game.

 

This is an MMO, the features you just listed are all SURVIVAL game genre features. Not a single one of those features are a part of the core gameplay that they have proposed so far. The main features they have pushed up until this point have been about Building, Exploration, Economy, Orgs, and PvP up until this point. Not a single one of those gameplay elements ties directly into the features you mentioned in this post. A smart dev team would focus on what they already have proposed without even considering off-genre mechanics. If something is in popular demand AND can be added later, then it would be a possibility, but of the features you have listed so far, the only thing that seems like it has a snowball's chance in making it into the game is the environmental damage mechanics. Mainly this is because if added in a future patch, they can create dangerous weather zones exclusively in new sectors.

 

So my guess is that if the devs responded with "probably not at release" it is a polite way of dismissing requests/demands without losing your support and interest. They are doing a smart and polite customer service thing by keeping an open mind and not telling you flat out "no", even if that is the truth.

 

So yeah, probably not at release.

But they have mentioned wanting to add food/starvation and farm animals. Not sure about weather condition damage though. He was simply suggesting if they are going to add those they should do it on release. Also why are you trying to make this a stereo typical mmo? These features would work well in a game like this. There is no reason to leave them out because most other mmo games do not have them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have mentioned wanting to add food/starvation and farm animals. Not sure about weather condition damage though. He was simply suggesting if they are going to add those they should do it on release. Also why are you trying to make this a stereo typical mmo? These features would work well in a game like this. There is no reason to leave them out because most other mmo games do not have them.

Feature.Creep. that is a reason to leave them out. Feature creep kills projects.

 

There have been few successful sandbox MMO's, and nothing quite like what they have already shown us. This doesn't need minecraft features that don't fit to be something other than a typical mmo. Saying it would be better for them to cram more mechanics, textures, and features into the game prior to release because it might be harder to add it later is folley. Time and money are finite resources in a company. Any time they spend on these "maybe" features is either time they don't spend on the real features, or time they delay alpha, beta, and release.

 

They have yet to get enough funding to add construct vs construct combat. That would be a gaping hole in what this game should be like on release. Should we make this hole wider to satisfy feature creep?

 

Now once the game is actually out and collecting revenue, then the situation changes a bit. They will have to decide how to use that new revinue, and what to develop. If we assume we have Construct vs Construct at that point, wouldn't it be better for them to work on stargates? new worlds and materials? new equipment and ship building options?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feature.Creep. that is a reason to leave them out. Feature creep kills projects.

 

There have been few successful sandbox MMO's, and nothing quite like what they have already shown us. This doesn't need minecraft features that don't fit to be something other than a typical mmo. Saying it would be better for them to cram more mechanics, textures, and features into the game prior to release because it might be harder to add it later is folley. Time and money are finite resources in a company. Any time they spend on these "maybe" features is either time they don't spend on the real features, or time they delay alpha, beta, and release.

 

They have yet to get enough funding to add construct vs construct combat. That would be a gaping hole in what this game should be like on release. Should we make this hole wider to satisfy feature creep?

 

Now once the game is actually out and collecting revenue, then the situation changes a bit. They will have to decide how to use that new revinue, and what to develop. If we assume we have Construct vs Construct at that point, wouldn't it be better for them to work on stargates? new worlds and materials? new equipment and ship building options?

I would prefer they delay then release an incomplete game.

 

 

Edit: "If we assume we have Construct vs Construct at that point, wouldn't it be better for them to work on stargates? new worlds and materials? new equipment and ship building options?" Well yes, once the game is released but this thread is about before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. The game looks good for the moment but it could be better in my meaning.

About weather they said, it is cool but these are effects they can add after release.

 

I prefer they said, ok the game will not be launched at the end of 2018 but later, the time we implement ALL we want to be the bet game.

I prefear a game completely done at launch then adding dlc after release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm not concerned. I don't mind big updates to the game as long as they are valuable editions, I can adapt to those changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm not concerned. I don't mind big updates to the game as long as they are valuable editions, I can adapt to those changes.

Yes but can the community as a whole? After all this isn't Minecraft we're talking about here. It's a game with one single world, which is going to keep that one single world for the entirety of its existence. And the purpose of the game is the development of this world by the players, the development of an economy and infrastructure. Large game-changing updates can't just be tossed around willy nilly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. The game looks good for the moment but it could be better in my meaning.

About weather they said, it is cool but these are effects they can add after release.

 

I prefer they said, ok the game will not be launched at the end of 2018 but later, the time we implement ALL we want to be the bet game.

I prefear a game completely done at launch then adding dlc after release.

 

There will be DLC regardless of the game's status at launch, but it will be free DLC so you don't have to pay for it (other than your monthly sub). This game is designed to last for a very long time, maybe even forever (probably not but we can dream :P ), so if the don't do DLC it is going to get rather boring.

 

Yes but can the community as a whole? After all this isn't Minecraft we're talking about here. It's a game with one single world, which is going to keep that one single world for the entirety of its existence. And the purpose of the game is the development of this world by the players, the development of an economy and infrastructure. Large game-changing updates can't just be tossed around willy nilly.

 

The community will have to, for two reasons. The first reason is that as the game grows and more content is added, it is going to change. You can't just add new types of engines forever, or new biomes, because that eventually gets repetitive. They will need to update mechanics both to keep the game fresh and appealing and to handle the needs of the community. For example, as more building parts are added it may be necessary to update how the inventory system works, or a new set of weapons may change combat so that will need to be reworked, and so on. The second reason why there will be big changes is because this game is about building civilization, and civilization is not static. Humans did not just pop into existence on earth with all of our current technology; we went through many phases and big changes as new methods and technology were discovered. As the years pass after the game launches, we will go through similar big changes. There are already several planned. The community will have to adapt when the first interplanetary ships are built, and it will have to adapt when the first stargates are built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately you have to accept an online MMO game like this is a living thing, we can hope that it will get better and add features that we want but one thing for certain is that the game 2 years after release will be very different from the game on release day.

 

They can do lots of things to mitigate the shock of new features coming in, telling players before hand, running a test server with new features a few months in advance and slowly ramping up the impact of things like food or weather damage.

 

The only things that I think could be absolutely game breaking is if they want to change the terrain generation algorithm for planets to add something like new ore types or features like caves, these need to be set in stone (excuse the pun) from day one. Yes maybe they can update it when they add new planets and systems in but Alioth cannot change after the release. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think trying to add all of those features initially would be a bad idea.  Even implementing them poorly could add a considerable amount of time to development.  Also, bugs do not necessarily limit their effect to the routines that contain them.  Rushing in some additional features might cause some core systems in the game to fail.

 

While we should respect the developers' decisions to delay features, I think that should not discourage us from suggesting the things we would like to see in the game someday.  I have found that if I do not have time to implement something now, having even a vague idea of what I might change later makes it easier when I do.  On the other hand, changing something that is implemented the wrong way can be much more difficult than adding something that is not in the software at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certain that NQ is looking at all of those things (prioritize, maybe at least stub out the foundational stuff that would be important hooks later on to work on.)

 

I'm really glad they're saying "no for release" in many cases, because that means they  are resistant to scope creep which has affected many (especially crowdfunded space) games :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certain that NQ is looking at all of those things (prioritize, maybe at least stub out the foundational stuff that would be important hooks later on to work on.)

 

I'm really glad they're saying "no for release" in many cases, because that means they  are resistant to scope creep which has affected many (especially crowdfunded space) games :)

I'm on the same train mate. Foundations for many things I'd take over insane hype and unreasonable feature creep. Like, they won't have swords - whic is a bummer for me at least cause I like melee - but if they were to have a rudimentary "pistol-whip" animation or elbow strike in the game, It'd do for when - if ever - the melee weapons come in the game.

 

Same goes for hunting animals and survival mechanisms, like agricutlure. If they have SOME sort of "fuel for the player's avatar", eithher carbonated water or w/e, I'd be fine with it, until farming and the such are added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2017 at 11:15 AM, Atriumgp said:

I totally agree. The game looks good for the moment but it could be better in my meaning.

About weather they said, it is cool but these are effects they can add after release.

 

I prefer they said, ok the game will not be launched at the end of 2018 but later, the time we implement ALL we want to be the bet game.

I prefear a game completely done at launch then adding dlc after release.

game wont have dlc just free updates /exspansions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make a valid point. Even though the suggestions you made are totally within the realms of possibility. 

 

In my opinion ideas are great and I have made a few myself but we should always remember that the game concept is huge and on a scale that has not been done before.

 

We must take that into account.

 

It's important that we remain realistic in our expectations of a game this ambitious. Imagine minecraft, space engineers and EVE online having a baby.

 

People thought NMS was ambitious but think about it. If NMS sky was going to be multiplayer, where was all the data for voxel edits for billions of procedurally generated planets going to be stored? (I knew the game was full of dirt the second I heard it was going to be multiplayer.)

 

With that in mind be sure to align those expectations realistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2017 at 8:35 AM, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

 "oh, no melee in the game, at least, not at launch", 

 

Good example of how a well meant comment basically misrepresents facts.

No one ever said there will not be melee at launch, it's not there a the start of the first Alpha sure, but launch is quite a log way away..

 

This may be a good point in time to once again put emphasis on the fact we are starting this journey on an unfinished (pre)alpha build of this game where a lot can and will change and even more can and will break, crash, do unexpected things and make you lose work and things.. There will be wipes and more wipes.. 

 

We're not getting ready for the game, we are getting ready to start testing, fixing and expanding what will eventually be a full on rocking and rolling game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

 

We're not getting ready for the game, we are getting ready to start testing, fixing and expanding what will eventually be a full on rocking and rolling game.

Exactly! For those who love testing new games, this is what we live for! Bring on the game so we can see what can be broken to make it stronger!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...