Jump to content
Bitmouse

Construct Creator for Blueprint Design

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lethys said:

So you're in favor of:

- splitting the community into builders who just want to build anda everyone else

- RL piracy. Those guys who take money from nq to get smth they want

- pirate servers (again splitting the community)

- pirate servers (people who play there DON'T pay nq as they should, so they're RL pirate too)

- You defend those guys because "hey, they couldn't pay for a sub so it's not that bad. At least they can play DU. But yeah, sucks for nq because they lose money"

 

Are you serious? Wtf is wrong with you? Sorry but I just can't understand you there. At all. 

I just want to be clear, that generally, some good thinkers have been in favor of piracy and have seen it's place in a legitimate economy. In this case piracy is something that they are likely going to avoid,due to the online nature of their game (sans leaks or other unforeseens). That being said, since piracy, may and in other cases has occurred, there are ways that it can be used to the benefit of the company. An example is companies who have released cracked version of their own professional enterprise software as a, "trial," for those that wouldn't/couldn't buy it knowing full well that to utilize their product in any commercially viable way, they would first have to buy it.

 

However, instancing this mode online solves these concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a game, no program to work with.

 

And DU isn't, shouldn't and hopefully will NEVER EVER be instanced. They want to avoid that crap and make something new - not go back to that dark age of the old times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, devu said:

And the current mode is pre-alpha. I don't think you understand what you asking for here.

Simply to provide mockup of their server architecture to run on your local machine.. Is not going to happen.

This discussion has already gotten to the point where we are talking about some sort of NQ hosted created instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lethys said:

So you're in favor of:

- splitting the community into builders who just want to build anda everyone else

- RL piracy. Those guys who take money from nq to get smth they want

- pirate servers (again splitting the community)

- pirate servers (people who play there DON'T pay nq as they should, so they're RL pirate too)

- You defend those guys because "hey, they couldn't pay for a sub so it's not that bad. At least they can play DU. But yeah, sucks for nq because they lose money"

 

Are you serious? Wtf is wrong with you? Sorry but I just can't understand you there. At all. 

- splitting the community into builders who just want to build and a everyone else

No. I have already stated that it may attract players who wouldn't play otherwise and those that want the community experience will still play on the main server.

 

- RL piracy. Those guys who take money from nq to get smth they want

Piracy cannot be guaranteed to be avoided. I am saying that there are scenarios in which NQ could orient itself to benefit from piracy if it arises. (think disgruntled employ scenario and other possibilities)

 

- pirate servers (again splitting the community)

See previous.

 

- pirate servers (people who play there DON'T pay nq as they should, so they're RL pirate too)

See previous.

 

- You defend those guys because "hey, they couldn't pay for a sub so it's not that bad. At least they can play DU. But yeah, sucks for nq because they lose money"

It's not so much a defense as a reality. You can't control everything all the time. Knowing that in the entire world, there will always be some form of piracy, you can either acknowledge that fact and adapt to or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wizardoftrash said:

It really only works with Empyrion and Space Engineers *because* the game is built to be run single-player and run like garbage in multiplayer. If you take a game like DU that isn't built to be run in single player, there is just no easy way to simply add single player without creating serious problems. And then what, you end up with a free modded version of the game getting shared on 4chan and private servers popping up that look more like 2nd life and all that work is for nothing.

 

Now the ability to use creative mode to blueprint a construct while online, I could see that being a feature that could eventually be added post-release (having a prototyping bay or something), however it would get pretty dang complicated if you also needed to be able to test those constructs. Its one thing if you are plopping down voxels and elements you don't have just to produce a file, but for the game to make an instanced version that works gets tricky, and opens up the door for potential exploits.

 

I think the way constructs will behave during the construction process should be pretty predictable, and between in-game tutorials, wikis, and safe zones, there should be plenty of ways to mess around with building constructs that doesn't involve creative mode equivalent.

 

This could all be done with a separate NQ hosted instance. For real testing of constructs they would have to provide this or a simulacrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lethys said:

This is a game, no program to work with.

 

And DU isn't, shouldn't and hopefully will NEVER EVER be instanced. They want to avoid that crap and make something new - not go back to that dark age of the old times

Just to be clear this isn't about instancing the game. It is about creating an in game app that allows you to effectively create and test constructs. It can be built so that using it as a separate instance in the long term isn't viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wizardoftrash said:

 

Yeah piracy is generally something you want to avoid.

 

But lets think nice and hard about what you are asking for here. Either creating yet another parallel server, hosting private instances for each player who is experimenting with creative mode, or building a whole accessory program that allows a player to run a creative mode single player client offline... so that the people what are already playing the game and building stuff can build blueprints of things they can't afford to build in-game.

 

I just don't see how that could possibly be worth the money or man-hours it would take to make it work. It would add so little to the game, it would actually reduce the active player count and run counter the game's purpose, and it decreases the actual construct count in-game to boot (because if you are building something in creative, that same construct isn't being built in the actual game, and there is no guarantee it ever will).

 

Just wait till Saturday hits and try-out what they already have. then re-visit if you think something like that would really actually add to the game.

I still think the benefits outweigh the positives here. 

 

They could run it on the same server. A zone/s so far away from the played part of the game that it is functionally separate, wiped daily. Individual zones should be doable from what they describe of their tech. 

 

People building things they never could afford to in the game at worst sparks their creativity and allows them to test what is possible. That most likely, overall, will translate into more creations by more people than less, since it matters what the population does and not the individual, in this case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm arguing that its not worth it.

 

how many man hours and money would this take to put into place (quite a bit) and delay other features of the game while its being developed. How many players lose interest while the feature they were primised is on ice and lapse their sub.

 

weight that against the people who would only sub if this feature is implemented.

 

we are looking at a minescule gain against a significant cost *and* a risk that might out-stretch the gain.

 

and you might argue that the ability to test creative-mode built constructs would be worth it? What about the odds that a player will spend their time simulationg and not actually playing (therefor contributing nothing). What about the odds that a player will spend time simulating, and get frustrated with how hard their construct is to actually build and quit? What about the odds that a player will spend a month finishing their construct and then lose it to a raid or to pirates because they couldn't simulate pvp, or because they didn't actually spend time gaining experience in the game.

 

what you are asking for here is a neat feature, but a costly one, and that has he potential to cause more harm than good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players would have to sub to play creative, so it is revenue to NQ.

 

I don't see the harm. Personally this is a feature that I would wait for and imagine given the ideas put forth. Specifically the idea of creating creative areas a distance so far from the populace as to make them functionally separate from the game and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.

 

I think the potential success of this can be found in the success of minecraft builds. I don't think the idea of a creative mode can be minimized.

 

Losing your build to pirates/other players is going to be inevitable. A creative mode gives all players the capacity to streamline the rebuild/redesign process should they choose to do it.

 

In fact, the mode that I mentioned earlier in this post would allow groups to practice pvp with their new constructs should they choose to use it. 

 

If NQ created a form of simulation that was more feature rich, minigames could even be emergent that are less likely without a simulated mode.

 

I think in general this sort of feature, which is more of a tool for use of the game, can be designed in such a way as to enhance not hinder the game and could lead to other possibilities that could enhance the culture of DU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of what you stated there answers the primary negative impact that it would have, that is for every player spending time messing around in creative zone, that is a player who isn't actually playing the game. They aren't in the world space, they are not contributing to societies, and the only thing they are adding to the world is blueprints.

 

people are going to be building all the time as it is, blueprints will be everywhere, and having a way to produce blueprints in-game without any access to the material de-values blueprints as a commodity.

 

by far the most dangerous thing suggested here though is the idea that you would be able to test pvp with multiple players in creative mode. That would badly fracture the player popularion, as the only pvp-minded player left in the actual world then would be pirates and conquerers. All of us folks who want to fight, but who don't take any pleasure in ruining other people's creations would be playing effectively a whole other game in creative instead of bounty hunting or joining a militia.

 

the backbone of this game is the number of people actually playing it. If you are testing blueprints, you'll need the resources and space to do so. If you are testing military tech, it'll need field tests. That's just what an emergent gameplay environment is all about. If that's exciting to you, join a military tech development org (heck I started one, the Alchemists, and thats exactly what I plan on spending my time doing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wizardoftrash said:

people are going to be building all the time as it is, blueprints will be everywhere, and having a way to produce blueprints in-game without any access to the material de-values blueprints as a commodity.

 

This is a key point and one that didn't cross my mind.

 

I said in an earlier post that a creative mode would take away from multiplayer content but it would also ruin the economy.

 

The whole economy is based around scanning and mining resources. If you don't have to actually have the resources to make a blueprint then everyone will have blueprints and most builders will be out of a job as everyone will just spend time making blueprints before playing the game. Also with no resource requirement to start building resources would get devalued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

- splitting the community into builders who just want to build and a everyone else

No. I have already stated that it may attract players who wouldn't play otherwise and those that want the community experience will still play on the main server.

 

YES, you explicitly SAID that:

6 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

I don't see the harm. Personally this is a feature that I would wait for and imagine given the ideas put forth. Specifically the idea of creating creative areas a distance so far from the populace as to make them functionally separate from the game and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.

 

So please NO, don't split the players. EVERYONE should play and build on the SAME server, in nearly the SAME area with protective measures taken by NQ to protect monuments (which they already did take: the arkzone!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again... this game and it's technology is build around MMO. Client will not exist without server. And the biggest attraction of this title is a single shard universe. I bet this fact alone attracts far more MMO players because of that as oppose to creative builders. Because they understand implications of this style and embrace it. And DU attract this kind of audience. 

 

Sure I understand, some would prefer creative mode, but this game is simply not for them. Go play SE, minecraft or whatever. And I doubt there will be community split here.

This game is for those who understand what, how and why. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bitmouse

A creative mode won't bring more content, cause the very PURPOSE of the game's unique cloud-hosting server tech, is that the amount of players in one place IS the content. 

Sure, you can have a "holographic creation" mode in-game, but you'll have to keep it IN-GAME, while online, not offline, nor in an instance. That's the problem people have with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this topic has been debated enough.....they are not building an external port for your BPs or an offline construction program....or similar...anytime soon. If they decide to it will be later on maybe towards release or after. Whilst the idea might appeal to some....the game is about experiencing this together in a single shard universe....you get all the ups and downs of success or failure together.....key word together. The wait whilst frustrating sometimes is just a fact of life. The game has potential for lots of other little goodies for us, but that is for later. Consideration is not hard fact. The main part is the core. If the core is not solid and the server tech is lacking because the focused on as someone put it "pandering to us ?" . So let the Dev focus on the main parts, before people start to throw the things they want to see in this game, because another game had it. Not saying its not useful to grab ideas....just not at this part in the games timeline....otherwise they would have don't it already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Alethion said:

I believe this topic has been debated enough.....they are not building an external port for your BPs or an offline construction program....or similar...anytime soon. If they decide to it will be later on maybe towards release or after. Whilst the idea might appeal to some....the game is about experiencing this together in a single shard universe....you get all the ups and downs of success or failure together.....key word together. The wait whilst frustrating sometimes is just a fact of life. The game has potential for lots of other little goodies for us, but that is for later. Consideration is not hard fact. The main part is the core. If the core is not solid and the server tech is lacking because the focused on as someone put it "pandering to us ?" . So let the Dev focus on the main parts, before people start to throw the things they want to see in this game, because another game had it. Not saying its not useful to grab ideas....just not at this part in the games timeline....otherwise they would have don't it already.

I think people are confusing the intent of this suggestion. This isn't about together or apart. A creative mode supports the together part of the game in that it is a tool for creations to be used in game. It is just photoshop and the game is Instagram, except in this case they are more or less the same program with minor modifications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bitmouse said:

I think people are confusing the intent of this suggestion. This isn't about together or apart. A creative mode supports the together part of the game in that it is a tool for creations to be used in game. It is just photoshop and the game is Instagram, except in this case they are more or less the same program with minor modifications.

Well you asked for a creative mode "so far away you could say it's seperate". This WILL SPLIT the playerbase, if you want it or not.

People who want to build and not care about security WILL use that - so they WILL NOT interact with others.

 

NQ want to introduce some kind of holo-creative mode - on the SAME SERVER, TOGETHER with others, NOT seperated, NOT offline - but INGAME. That in itself introduces other problems, but as you obviously can't see the problem with your idea - I won't even start on those

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wizardoftrash said:

None of what you stated there answers the primary negative impact that it would have, that is for every player spending time messing around in creative zone, that is a player who isn't actually playing the game. They aren't in the world space, they are not contributing to societies, and the only thing they are adding to the world is blueprints.

 

people are going to be building all the time as it is, blueprints will be everywhere, and having a way to produce blueprints in-game without any access to the material de-values blueprints as a commodity.

 

by far the most dangerous thing suggested here though is the idea that you would be able to test pvp with multiple players in creative mode. That would badly fracture the player popularion, as the only pvp-minded player left in the actual world then would be pirates and conquerers. All of us folks who want to fight, but who don't take any pleasure in ruining other people's creations would be playing effectively a whole other game in creative instead of bounty hunting or joining a militia.

 

the backbone of this game is the number of people actually playing it. If you are testing blueprints, you'll need the resources and space to do so. If you are testing military tech, it'll need field tests. That's just what an emergent gameplay environment is all about. If that's exciting to you, join a military tech development org (heck I started one, the Alchemists, and thats exactly what I plan on spending my time doing).

None of what you stated there answers the primary negative impact that it would have, that is for every player spending time messing around in creative zone, that is a player who isn't actually playing the game. They aren't in the world space, they are not contributing to societies, and the only thing they are adding to the world is blueprints.

 

You are assuming these are going to be the same players. There are going to be three main types of players here, in general, players that use only creative mode, players that don't, and players that use both. In terms of server usage players that don't use creative mode are negligible to this point. Players that use both and players that use only creative mode are the groups you are talking about in reference to this point. Players that only use creative mode are likely to be minimal, especially if NQ structures creative mode in such a way as to make it unsatisfying to use as a game long term. This could easily be done by wiping the instance or zone used after use. Players that use both are going to be the majority of players that use creative mode. It is unlikely that players who would want to play Dual Universe and utilize all it's features are going to be likely to just play creative. These players are already invested in playing the game for what it is.

 

In a sense you have a point that some players might choose not to play in the main universe mode if they don't have to and would choose just to tool around in creative mode. However, it is a bad policy in general to force people to do something they would prefer not to do. In this case preferring to play in a creative mode versus the main universe mode. That is just bad policy and not the right thing to do.

 

Again, I think that more likely than not that you wouldn't see that many people just playing creative. No more than you would see in the main game mode. It may be possible to just build and rebuild with the resources you have. This would satisfy the, "I just want to play creative mode itch." If you have a player/players that really would prefer to just create, they are going to move on to another game/application. Doing the work to implement a creative mode in a way that is seamless and low investment on what is currently being developed only increases the possible player base. It also ads an ease of use feature which for some may be a big selling point.

 

people are going to be building all the time as it is, blueprints will be everywhere, and having a way to produce blueprints in-game without any access to the material de-values blueprints as a commodity.

 

This is a good thing. Blueprints should be valued on the quality of the design, not an inherently meaningless processed utilized to gain the materials necessary to tool around with the design. Would a futuristic society not have the means to draft a design before building it?

 

by far the most dangerous thing suggested here though is the idea that you would be able to test pvp with multiple players in creative mode. That would badly fracture the player popularion, as the only pvp-minded player left in the actual world then would be pirates and conquerers. All of us folks who want to fight, but who don't take any pleasure in ruining other people's creations would be playing effectively a whole other game in creative instead of bounty hunting or joining a militia.

 

I disagree here. The idea about it's potential as a pvp test bed is for practice and minigames only. Dual Universe will force some level of engagement with PVP. This mode could serve as a way to practice your skills without having to ruin anyone else's day or your own.

 

the backbone of this game is the number of people actually playing it. If you are testing blueprints, you'll need the resources and space to do so. If you are testing military tech, it'll need field tests. That's just what an emergent gameplay environment is all about. If that's exciting to you, join a military tech development org (heck I started one, the Alchemists, and thats exactly what I plan on spending my time doing).

 

I think this is a very valid point. However, I want to point out that on the realism side of things, simulations and drafting are already very much a part of the design process in the RL at our current level of development. I imagine that by the time we are capable of seeding another earth like world in a distant solar system we will be able to simulate physics enough to create much more meaningful simulations for this sort of design. It simply fits with the realism of the universe. To me a much more interesting question would be, how does a military design and test it's creations in the future? I don't think a creative mode as we are talking about it allows for full in vivo testing of creations. Even if you loaded in your best buildings and defenses that is not the same as testing it against your enemies and unknown situations/tech. Even the best run military exercises are a poor substitute at best for real world testing. The whole point of a creative mode is to streamline the process in a way that is realistic and serves the community. It would allow you to return to the creative mode after your real world tests and revise. This process could be very exhausting even with a creative mode. I don't think it will take away from the design, iteration, testing process.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Myriad said:

 

This is a key point and one that didn't cross my mind.

 

I said in an earlier post that a creative mode would take away from multiplayer content but it would also ruin the economy.

 

The whole economy is based around scanning and mining resources. If you don't have to actually have the resources to make a blueprint then everyone will have blueprints and most builders will be out of a job as everyone will just spend time making blueprints before playing the game. Also with no resource requirement to start building resources would get devalued.

You of course will need to mine the resource to build the blueprint and whatever facilities or time is required to spawn said blueprint.

 

The value of a blueprint will be in it's design quality. Builders will have a job in design. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lethys said:

 

YES, you explicitly SAID that:

 

So please NO, don't split the players. EVERYONE should play and build on the SAME server, in nearly the SAME area with protective measures taken by NQ to protect monuments (which they already did take: the arkzone!)

You quoted and highlighted my text, but didn't highlight the exact portion that negated your point.

 

2 hours ago, Lethys said:

I don't see the harm. Personally this is a feature that I would wait for and imagine given the ideas put forth. Specifically the idea of creating creative areas a distance so far from the populace as to make them functionally separate from the game and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.

and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.

 

This point makes this a feature or a tool, and not a separate game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, devu said:

Again... this game and it's technology is build around MMO. Client will not exist without server. And the biggest attraction of this title is a single shard universe. I bet this fact alone attracts far more MMO players because of that as oppose to creative builders. Because they understand implications of this style and embrace it. And DU attract this kind of audience. 

 

Sure I understand, some would prefer creative mode, but this game is simply not for them. Go play SE, minecraft or whatever. And I doubt there will be community split here.

This game is for those who understand what, how and why. 

This isn't about a separate creative mode that is contained in and of itself. As you can see from the title of this thread. This is specifically for a creative mode that allows players to build blueprints for use in the game.

 

I am only acknowledging other's concerns that it could be used as a standalone and troubleshooting ways to minimize that while point out the potential positives if people still choose to circumvent those specific measures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bitmouse said:

You are assuming these are going to be the same players

Well yes, because again: DU doesn't aim for single players. Nor does DU aim for creative mode players. DU does aim for MMO players.

And introducing such a creative world (it rly doesn't matter that it gets deleted or smth) is just against everything DU wants to achieve

9 minutes ago, Bitmouse said:

However, it is a bad policy in general to force people to do something they would prefer not to do

people aren't forced. People are informed that: 1) there will be safezones where you can build and do stuff unharmed and 2) everything outside will be PVP, except if PLAYERS do protect other members. So noone forces you here to build outside. Noone forces you to play DU. You get a game with certain mechanics (which are clearly promoted and which are clearly visible to anyone) - so no, you can't complain afterwards that there is no creative mode on some seperate server

 

edit:

and stop saying you don't want a seperate server for it when you have written that on multiple occasions

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

@Bitmouse

A creative mode won't bring more content, cause the very PURPOSE of the game's unique cloud-hosting server tech, is that the amount of players in one place IS the content. 

Sure, you can have a "holographic creation" mode in-game, but you'll have to keep it IN-GAME, while online, not offline, nor in an instance. That's the problem people have with it.

Yes, and I have more or less agreed and stated ways in which they could implement that that would use existing technology.

 

However they implement it it is going to have to be a risk free way of design constructs. The only risk being the time you put into it.

 

Whether they make that an in game bay you build and walk into or a button you click on the homescreen of the game is a fairly moot point. The first would be more cohesive and immersive. However, functionally it would affect the game play cycle the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Lethys said:

Well you asked for a creative mode "so far away you could say it's seperate". This WILL SPLIT the playerbase, if you want it or not.

People who want to build and not care about security WILL use that - so they WILL NOT interact with others.

 

NQ want to introduce some kind of holo-creative mode - on the SAME SERVER, TOGETHER with others, NOT seperated, NOT offline - but INGAME. That in itself introduces other problems, but as you obviously can't see the problem with your idea - I won't even start on those

I stated specifically in previous posts that those creations would immediately be deleted after the player left the session. It is just for blueprint creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

This change would allow users to utilize the game engine without having to stress their servers.

 

 

17 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

(...) that would play the game only in this limited creative mode.

 

17 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

The offline mode could be built into the main engine.

 

9 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

This discussion has already gotten to the point where we are talking about some sort of NQ hosted created instance.

 

9 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

This could all be done with a separate NQ hosted instance. For real testing of constructs they would have to provide this or a simulacrum.

 

9 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

Just to be clear this isn't about instancing the game.

 

9 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

They could run it on the same server. A zone/s so far away from the played part of the game that it is functionally separate, wiped daily.

 

8 hours ago, Bitmouse said:

Specifically the idea of creating creative areas a distance so far from the populace as to make them functionally separate from the game and deleting them after use should be straightforward enough to implement.

 

So what? it's not about instancing? I don't even know what you are suggesting here when I reread all your comments

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

×
×
  • Create New...