Jump to content

Concern about the future of the game


 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:

But there are a few examples like Second Life, Minecraft etc. where in fact it does work.

I dont know about 2nd life. But minecraft's persistent gameplay heavily focuses on PVE. 

With a world rich with NPCs, structures and secrets. With often game resets. 

 

Does 2nd life have any combat? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly? This game hasn't had a future for a long time...

 

It's been ~7 years of banal debate about PvP -- and when people aren't puzzled about the core concept of this game, they are puzzled by the poor implementation of those concepts! 

 

Let's be real: DU is a bad concept and it always was.

 

There was never any cohesive design for how this game would work. On one hand, builders investing thousands of hours on construction. On the other, PvPers that want actual mechanics, politics, and meaning beyond a fancy garden of constructs. 

 

In 7 years, they never figured out how this design would work. They still don't know. 

 

And even if they did know how to make it all work? They have proven time and time again that they cannot physically change the game enough to get there...that the "foundations" built under JC are made of non-voxel sand. 

 

The only thing DU did well was create a vivid canvas in each players' mind. Everyone that bought into the premise filled that canvas with their idea of what DU would be.

 

So many people say that DU had "such great potential". The actual potential they saw had little to do with NQ or DU -- the potential was imagined by gamers based on the concept. That potential was never reflected in reality -- DU never became more than a blank canvas filled by each players' idea of what it might become. 

 

It's still that blank canvas, with people saying it has "potential". 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they should've done something with safe zone asteroids, instead of only having 8 or so, have many more smaller ones. And I hope they change the asteroids from all respawning on the same day every week.

 

I don't expect much new safe zone content until after release. Some survival mechanics would go a long way I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly the only thing this game does better for me is the simpler ship building mechanics compared to Starbase.  You can just put any random thing on your ship, in the way it’s supposed to logically work.  For it to just work.    At least before schematics you could just straight up experiment around and have your first ship up and running, before someone in Starbase has even figured out how to link their first test Thrusters/several types of flight computers/controls together.

 

This game is so massively flawed in how it’s using gating mechanics.  Want to PvP you’re stuck behind a real time skill queue.  Want to craft you’re stuck behind a schematic wall.  Want to mine you’re stuck behind a grind wall of bringing tiny loads to market, to earn your first serious ship.

 

compared to Starbase the first time PvP can be put on a tripod or play marine to try boarding (got my first PvP kill in Starbase last night playing marine, and some ok loot with a warp core).   Want to mine you just need to earn your first 100k to buy a Worker Ant through either the terrible Laborer free ship or a couple of mini games that teach you how to take apart ships fast/mine faster.   Want to build a ship, well lol go watch a couple of hours of tutorials (not good, but it’s meaty content at least).

 

honestly this game killed itself with schematics, and Starbase is going to ensure the nails stay in the coffin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Haunty said:

I think they should've done something with safe zone asteroids, instead of only having 8 or so, have many more smaller ones. And I hope they change the asteroids from all respawning on the same day every week.

 

I don't expect much new safe zone content until after release. Some survival mechanics would go a long way I think.


 

Honestly, I have a hard time seeing what NQ will be able to implement as a PvE feature.
 

If they do a redesign for the design of the ships with contributions and limitations (to give example de Starbase which on this point really pushed the principle). I think the majority of PvE will be unhappy.
 

Survival mechanics will also be badly perceived by PvE players because they will complain of already having trouble surviving, so now spending time and resources to have an oxygen management or other ... imagine the drama.
 

One would also have thought that NQ makes the planets of the outer rim less "liveable", much higher gravity, denser atmosphere, corrosive environment or higher temperature which will degrade the hp of the elements of the ships and the voxels. PvE players would once again be offended not to be able to go to Planet X because it requires a specialized ship.
 

Imagine that NQ put more rare and special resources in the PvP zone in order to make useful this part of the universe and to boost player interactions and the economy. And we have this kind of topic ...
 

The only thing I see that is being requested en masse by PvE : that NQ put bots in play so that they can go PvP with them but without the PvP players bothering them. But Dual Universe will certainly never be able to support this kind of in-game AI. It seems like a very unrealistic request to me.

Maybe that before having that it is necessary that the PvP player against player is functional so that possibly a player there is other threat.
 

Even at the industrial level, if NQ make the gameplay more complex, the PvE will cry of addition of slowing mechanics. If, for example, you have to have a large industrial unit to print your blueprints and you can no longer instantly pop your ship L, I can already see the drama happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nq won't get the kind of population without doing more for pvers.  The marketplace will struggle with products without bots supplying elements and the universe will be as barren as it is now. The focus on pvp is unsustainable without proping up the support because there isn't that many gamers interested in playing with full time pvp free for all and dealing with griefers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, shadowfyre2 said:

That take quanta, if I had quanta I wouldn't need to mine for quanta. Furthermore without miners going into pvp zone, you won't have t5 for pvp. Although some pvpers mine, it won't be enough to support the fighters long term and non pvp miners won't find it fun dealing with  pirates just for t5 ore. Your viewpoint is that pvpers are necessary for buying t5 elements and I say non pvpers are necessary to sell t5 elements. We both are right. So why lock out non pvpers for the sake of pvp pride?  We already see a serious shortage of elements in the marketplace because of the ignoring the economy for the sake of pvp. They don't want the pvpers to be self sufficient by making their own elements.  They want an economy where fighters buy from merchants. But ignoring nonpvp gameplay and telling us to stay home won't  fulfill a thriving economy. If they want to make a pvp game,  it's their choice but let me know so I don't waste my time. If they want a real thriving universe then my opinion matters and my gaming experience is as important as a pvper's experience. 


"Furthermore without miners going into pvp zone, you won't have t5 for pvp."
=> False we have already harvested hundreds of thousands of liters of T5 and apart from the scraps we have no real use. And we are a PvP team.

 

"Although some pvpers mine, it won't be enough to support the fighters long term"
=> False we already have enough to make a fleet of several hundred PvP Meta ships, we don't really need to mine anymore, we just do stock maintenance operations


"and non pvp miners won't find it fun dealing with pirates just for t5 ore."
=> True but not for the reasons you might think, the T5 is useless no one trades for trade with. See our regularly collaborating with PvE players for commerce. Yes we PvP players allow the PvE player to equip themselves with ships and other spare parts. And we are much more efficient and cheaper than the PvE teams offering these services.


"Your viewpoint is that pvpers are necessary for buying t5 elements and I say non pvpers are necessary to sell t5 elements."
=> If the game evolves and these items become interesting yes. But we don't need the non PvPers for that, we already do everything better and much more efficiently than them.


"We already see a serious shortage of elements in the marketplace because of the ignoring the economy for the sake of pvp."
=> A serious shortage of elements? We have almost every current game item in the hundreds of copies ready for sale in our industry. Do not confuse a rise in prices with an element shortage. Things are worth more because we don't need to buy anything. Indeed, non-PvPers players never lose ships.

"They don't want the pvpers to be self sufficient by making their own elements."
=> PvP players are not allowed to do this? You still want to take me out of the gameplay because I say I do PvP, it's wrong. While PvP players shouldn't be self-sufficient, neither should PvE players.


"They want an economy where fighters buy from merchants.
Fighters aren't going to be merchants enough to support pvp only game and non pvpers won't be attracted to the game."
=> Why would PvP players buy things from PvE players when you forbid them to play? Yes, leaving the same resources in PvP as that found in the Safe zone is to prohibit / prevent players from practicing PvP.
For players to play the game there must be economic opportunities and goals. Being able to have it all without risk like gambling until now has driven things this way.

We had full PvE in play, watch where it took us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems real arrogance and ignorance in the prior post. But they have a right to their opinion. I made a ship, shared it with a friend via blueprints. He couldn't make it because is was no small landing legs for sale at any price.  I am working on a heavy hauler. I want to put a large agg on it. There isn't one for sale at any price. Seems to me that's a shortage. Maybe pvpers don't notice it because they don't need it. If it's worthless to mine anymore, why bother improving that aspect of the game at all?  As for stockpiling ore, I guess you're happy with the population of the universe and don't want new players in try the game and have the opportunity to build their own wealth. It seems that is true for many pvpers. You maybe able to force people into the pvp zone by locking content there but you can't force people to play the game. If you want more than a few pirates running around, you have to make it enjoyable to play. Not everyone enjoys pvp. I am not saying to take pvp out of the game but there has to be respect for non pvpers in a persistent world to have a thriving ecology. If you want a populated universe you can't be so selfish 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, shadowfyre2 said:

Seems real arrogance and ignorance in the prior post. But they have a right to their opinion. I made a ship, shared it with a friend via blueprints. He couldn't make it because is was no small landing legs for sale at any price.  I am working on a heavy hauler. I want to put a large agg on it. There isn't one for sale at any price. Seems to me that's a shortage. Maybe pvpers don't notice it because they don't need it. If it's worthless to mine anymore, why bother improving that aspect of the game at all?  As for stockpiling ore, I guess you're happy with the population of the universe and don't want new players in try the game and have the opportunity to build their own wealth. It seems that is true for many pvpers. You maybe able to force people into the pvp zone by locking content there but you can't force people to play the game. If you want more than a few pirates running around, you have to make it enjoyable to play. Not everyone enjoys pvp. I am not saying to take pvp out of the game but there has to be respect for non pvpers in a persistent world to have a thriving ecology. If you want a populated universe you can't be so selfish 


Damn we had everything we currently have without the asteroids.
NQ is adding asteroids and you're not happy saying it degrades your gaming experience.
It's more content. It changes NOTHING about what you did before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the real world,  full time pvp players make a relatively small percentage of the gaming community. It's why games aren't catering to the pvpers more and the ones that do are in a niche game. Nq has stated they want a fun robust game,  their focus on pvp right now is making a niche game. For du, pvpers can do everything themselves,  but if you want a large universe thats populated, you need pve. Your choice, small pvp game or thriving universe with pve. 

23 minutes ago, Musclethorpe said:

Y'all out here actin' like we need the PvE crowd, like, at all. Not only will we PvP against ourselves, we will do whatever PvE necessary (mining and resource control) to further that end.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, shadowfyre2 said:

their focus on pvp right now is making a niche game.

 

So according to you we can't have any focus on PvP? How much focus has been elsewhere until now, and the moment PvP is finally getting some love you come here complaining. This is PvE Privilege at it's finest. You've all had your way for so long, in so many games, that when there is any leeway given to PvP you victimize yourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Musclethorpe said:

 

So according to you we can't have any focus on PvP? How much focus has been elsewhere until now, and the moment PvP is finally getting some love you come here complaining. This is PvE Privilege at it's finest. You've all had your way for so long, in so many games, that when there is any leeway given to PvP you victimize yourselves.

 

The problem i have with guys like you is that when this game fails, you will refuse to listen to the players explaining that they exited the game because a small group of players were making a miserable gameplay for the rest. 

Instead you will hear your pvp m8's opinion and together with yours you will say that the safezones killed the game... 

 

In summary, you will not learn a thing from this experience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

 

The problem i have with guys like you is that when this game fails, you will refuse to listen to the players explaining that they exited the game because a small group of players were making a miserable gameplay for the rest. 

Instead you will hear your pvp m8's opinion and together with yours you will say that the safezones killed the game... 

 

In summary, you will not learn a thing from this experience. 

 

Keep pretending PvP and its players are the slayers of games. This undoubtedly helps you sleep at night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that people are still bickering about PvP in this game is hilarious.

 

This argument has been going on for 6+ years now. 

 

The fact that it's still going on is proof of a fundamental design flaw that has never been solved and never will be. 

 

Sadly, people like to turn on each other and pretend the problem is somehow with other players. It's not. 

 

There is no issue with PvP players or concepts, and there is no issue with builders or peace-loving gamers. That's never been an issue. 

 

6+ years of people struggling to understand what role PvP should have is a tragic example of utterly failed game design. Nothing more. I don't understand why this is hard for some gamers to understand...

 

I'll believe DU has a future when discussions about the merits of PvP stop, because NQ has properly designed it to everyone's satisfaction. In other words, DU doesn't have a future and frankly it never truly did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Musclethorpe said:

 

Keep pretending PvP and its players are the slayers of games. This undoubtedly helps you sleep at night. 

Its about winning and loosing. 

One generates happiness the other generates frustration. 

 

If the same group of 20 guys keep stacking wins, against 100-1000 players you end up with 20 happy guys and 100-1000 unhappy victims. 

 

Its not sustainable. 

 

Ofcouse good PVPers should use their skills and friends to win against everyone. 

But a game solely developed around this pvp is not sustainable and will fail. 

 

Loosing players need a chance to restock ships, weapons and most importantly happiness. 

They need interesting PVE. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Musclethorpe said:

So according to you we can't have any focus on PvP? How much focus has been elsewhere until now, and the moment PvP is finally getting some love you come here complaining. This is PvE Privilege at it's finest. You've all had your way for so long, in so many games, that when there is any leeway given to PvP you victimize yourselves.

I'm saying that the current state of the game is no fun to me because it's too focused on pvp. Pvpers keep saying that the games objective is pvp. I don't enjoy being forced into pvp all the time and the drop in subscribers seems to support my assessment. Pvp game don't survive long in the gaming industry without limitations on pvp so griefers don't ruin the fun and drive away clients. I'm not saying pvp should be taken out. But it does need limits or the game community will not grow. You can't force people to play. My experience with the current state of the game isn't fun for those non pvpers and I am concerned that I don't see much love for the non pvp gaming community in the roadmap. I'm also concerned that the developers are so focused on pvp that they took an aspect ment for mining and gave it to pvp by restricting t3 to t5 asteroids to pvp areas. The developers say they want to see massive space battles but that won't happen without a larger community. You won't have a larger community without the game appealing to more gamers. I've made my recommendations. I'm trying to make a better game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, I'm just floored at the silliness of this back and forth.

 

It's been the better part of a decade... NQ isn't going to figure out how to balance PvP and building.

 

Not with your suggestions that have been discussed a billion times already, not with another 3-4 years, not with another 10 years. It ain't gonna happen.

 

If you want to talk about the future of this game, go back and look at the past 6-7 years of it first. Same discussions. Same ideas. Same results.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Its about winning and loosing. 

One generates happiness the other generates frustration. 

 

Loosing players need a chance to restock ships, weapons and most importantly happiness. 

They need interesting PVE. 

right !

 

I personally don't like to fly the "ugly PVP cube" just because its the ideal. But still it seems the best choice for PVP. However, you either prepare yourself for PVP or you prepare for running away. A solo Miner will go for option 2 I guess.

 

So, if I play 2 days (2x 5h) to build up my ship for mining purposes and I loose my ship to the cubes waiting for bait, I'm TOTALLY FINE even if I couldn't return anything from my trip. But if I have to invest a week for that, e.g. 5x 5h to grind/build/prepare that trip and my chance to return my investment is less then 20%, the happiness sinks to zero.

 

That's why I think the balance is so important.

 

I'm not attracted to Asteroid mining at the current state because as it is, its just a big loss to the MUARHARHAR gangbangs. But there is the chance to add some outer rim belts with little boulders for the solo Players. Both, the rocks and the lonely wolfes are hard to find and far away to install the win/win for both parties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Captain Hills said:

So, if I play 2 days (2x 5h) to build up my ship for mining purposes and I loose my ship to the cubes waiting for bait, I'm TOTALLY FINE even if I couldn't return anything from my trip. But if I have to invest a week for that, e.g. 5x 5h to grind/build/prepare that trip and my chance to return my investment is less then 20%, the happiness sinks to zero.

As a casual gamer, I get an hour or 2 a day. Sometimes not even that.  Having ut destroyed with a single shot isn't fun at all. If I'm going to play, it's going to be in a fun game. If du isn't fun for me, I'll move on and I'm not alone. That being said, it's beta testing people. Now is the time to speak up to make the game more fun to more gamers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, shadowfyre2 said:

full time pvp free for all and dealing with griefers

those two are not the same thing and you know it. FFA pvp != griefer

 

7 hours ago, shadowfyre2 said:

I'm saying that the current state of the game is no fun to me because it's too focused on pvp. Pvpers keep saying that the games objective is pvp. I don't enjoy being forced into pvp all the time and the drop in subscribers seems to support my assessment. Pvp game don't survive long in the gaming industry without limitations on pvp so griefers don't ruin the fun and drive away clients. I'm not saying pvp should be taken out. But it does need limits or the game community will not grow. You can't force people to play. My experience with the current state of the game isn't fun for those non pvpers and I am concerned that I don't see much love for the non pvp gaming community in the roadmap. I'm also concerned that the developers are so focused on pvp that they took an aspect ment for mining and gave it to pvp by restricting t3 to t5 asteroids to pvp areas. The developers say they want to see massive space battles but that won't happen without a larger community. You won't have a larger community without the game appealing to more gamers. I've made my recommendations. I'm trying to make a better game.

no it doesn't support your argument at all. subs drop because there is nothing to do, or because ppl are bored. or because schematics are a nightmare to them....you don't know why they leave. it's just your personal bias that you think it supports your argument, which is a logical fallacy.

 

Again, pvp != griefers. don't conflate the two as they have NOTHING in common. If you constantly conflate those two then you constantly paint pvp players the wrong way

 

As someone else pointed out earlier:

PVP finally gets some attention after 7 YEARS and it needs WAY MORE than that as it still is a pretty boring and weak pillar of the game. Every other pillar and aspect of the game received way more attention and love than pvp - which is fine, because you first need a foundation first (and tbh that foundation is still not there but that's another topic).

 

DU was always meant to be a FFA pvp game with the vast majority of the game being in the pvp zone - and only a small portion of it being in safe zones. Those got extended already, which is totally fine. All that pvpers ask is a fun game where conflict over ressources, politics, wars and interesting, engaging, emergent and fun gameplay prevails. Which can't happen when everybody can do everything in the safe zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lethys said:

those two are not the same thing and you know it. FFA pvp != griefer

 

 

Sure. But you understand that FFA pvp is the perfect enviroment for griefers to operate. 

And some do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joaocordeiro said:

 

Sure. But you understand that FFA pvp is the perfect enviroment for griefers to operate. 

And some do. 

Sure. But thats not why he intentionally (or not? Who knows) conflates those two. Even a pve player can enjoy griefing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All ffa pvp gamers aren't griefers. And some griefers are pvers.  However there are rules for pvers so that they can't ruin the fun for others and when someone finds a way around those rule, it changes so people can just grief.  Ffa pvp without rules can't do this. There has to be limits to pvp to so the game is financially viable by appealing to a larger audience. 

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...