sHuRuLuNi Posted December 1, 2021 Share Posted December 1, 2021 I delayed this as long as I could .... Zireaa, Nayropux, JohnnyTazer and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 1, 2021 Share Posted December 1, 2021 A+ on all your points, The shitty skybox is the easiest thing they can change but knowing NQ i very well doubt it. I cant believe they changed it in alpha. There is no way someone could think the nebula looks good compared to the old skybox they had. As far as civilization building game, ive said this for a long time, its not. There is no civilization when everything is done by yourself. No reason for cities, no reasons to explore, no reasons to take precautions or have risk traveling to an outer ice planet looking for rare ores. Everything is safe, your avatar never dies. All around just terrible. NQ really needs to watch this video. But the only actual hope we have in reality is if NQ loses the rights to DU and another company steps in to develop it and make an actual game. NQ has proved incompetent time and time again. As shown with something as simple as fucking up the skybox. JohnnyTazer, Oblivionburn, sHuRuLuNi and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underhook Posted December 1, 2021 Share Posted December 1, 2021 Good video, well done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xennial Posted December 1, 2021 Share Posted December 1, 2021 It's a good video but most of the people left I'm sure would just tell you "pvp is the challenge and only true purpose of the game". They won't understand the grander meaning of the core faults with DU's gameplay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sHuRuLuNi Posted December 2, 2021 Author Share Posted December 2, 2021 This comment from this lad speaks for itself I guess ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 23 minutes ago, sHuRuLuNi said: This comment from this lad speaks for itself I guess ... When you really look at it, this comment has no substance other than trying to appear like they are unique or something. 90% of gamers move from game to game. Some for pvp, some for single player, some because their friends are playing a game, anything. Not many people play ONE game and do so for year straight, or many years. If anyone does they are in the vast minority. Even people who have a main game like when I played eve religiously, I still occasionally player other games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sHuRuLuNi Posted December 2, 2021 Author Share Posted December 2, 2021 2 minutes ago, VandelayIndustries said: When you really look at it, this comment has no substance other than trying to appear like they are unique or something. 90% of gamers move from game to game. Some for pvp, some for single player, some because their friends are playing a game, anything. Not many people play ONE game and do so for year straight, or many years. If anyone does they are in the vast minority. Even people who have a main game like when I played eve religiously, I still occasionally player other games. Sure, but what he is saying is that they actually are an organized lobby who DOESN'T CARE about the game. They only want to destroy stuff - so they bombard the Developers and push them to add more and more PVP features, but once the developer does this - they leave and go to the next game. So, the point is: they do not care about any other feature of the game and they do not care that by pushing their agenda they are actually destroying the game for everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 31 minutes ago, sHuRuLuNi said: Sure, but what he is saying is that they actually are an organized lobby who DOESN'T CARE about the game. They only want to destroy stuff - so they bombard the Developers and push them to add more and more PVP features, but once the developer does this - they leave and go to the next game. So, the point is: they do not care about any other feature of the game and they do not care that by pushing their agenda they are actually destroying the game for everyone else. Sure but ive been around DU for 3+ years, and i care about the game, and ive bombarded the devs with wanting more and more pvp. So...how much influence do you think they have? Vast majority of people who i played with in DU wanted more pvp. Let them think that they make a difference with their 12 dudes who probably circle jerk in their own discord. Doesn't effect actual development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Novean-32184 Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 1 hour ago, sHuRuLuNi said: This comment from this lad speaks for itself I guess ... I'm sorry, but if it looks like a trollpost and smells like a trollpost, it probbaly is .. a trollpost.. I woudl not actually give it the attention it's getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Novean-32184 Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 Excellent points made in a solid, wel presented video, some are a bit over amplified but valid nonetheless. @NQ-Abu and @NQ-Sesch should really be sat down and watch it. The problem is that from NQ's perspective you "just do not understand".. /s The part about the PVE content which in turn becomes a PVP opportunity where the reward from the PVE content is valuable and serves a purpose in the game overall. That is what sets a game like EVE so far apart from its competition since _everything_ in EVE has a meaning, a purpose and value, it may not be much in some cases, but it does. Everything in EVE matters in one way or another, _that_ is why EVE is still such a varied game appealing to many different player types nearly TWENTY years after it was released. The total lack of it in DU is why the game really is boring and pointless. Oh, it's also why EVE, as a F2P game, brings in about €5M in revenue each month.. Just to put that out there.. Players understand and see the value in spending their money on the game, even when a LOT of them never actually do and pay their way with in game currency entirely. I think basic survival mechanics would be fun, but I think not a requirement. I absolutely agree that immersive and engaging PVE content will be a requirement for DU to even stand a chance. The Talent system in DU is pretty much a half-baked copy from EVE but there, it goes hand in hand with using your ships fitting, the availability of boosters and drugs and most importantly gaining actual EXPERIENCE playing which will make the learned skill meaningful. In EVE, you can compensate to as good degree for not having skills by using modified/faction modules which are more expensive but will offer some benefits otherwise available through skills. Industry in DU uses schematics but for the game, schematics really have no purpose but being a money sink. In EVE, basic tier 1 blueprints (which is what they are called there) can be bought yes, but you can also find them in the game, you can research them, improve them, boost them, invent better versions, and sell copies of your modified versions for others to use. I do not want to turn this into a "make DU more like EVE" argument as that is not the point. The point is that NQ clearly draws "inspiration" from EVE but so far has failed to both understand and capture the essence of what they are going for. I asked this question in the Q&A: The answer that came back, really just shows NQ has no actual clue about where such a question come from and just gives a pretty stock answer The answer shows that NQ has no eyes on the discussions going on in the forums (or if they do, the message is not transmitted internally), does not understand what is driving us to ask these questions nor do they show any interest in actually engaging with it. It's just a bland, boring and lifeless response. Which unfortunately aligns pretty closely to the state of the game VandelayIndustries, apollo0510, Maxim Kammerer and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scavenger Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 Some good points in the Video. Survival aspects would definetly give a purpose like in reallife where you also work/workout/socialize mostly so you survive as long as possible which should be enough motivation to keep up. In a game like "Sims" it shows that if this aspects of life are simulated in a videogame it can be indeed very addicting and fun. And with more restriction/problems to solve at building it would expand the fun of building into a longterm challenge. Stuff to explore? Everyone wants that. Just hire some Voxel builders spending thousends of hours into building giant structures (Trust me i know how time consuming huge buildings are) to explore just so player have a shortterm experience which is satisfying for a few minutes? Not worth it from a developingtime/playersatisfaction ration. BUT DU is still developing so we might get this features anyway, all it needs is time. Time and money factor cant be skipped. At this point i probably just sound like a fanboy try to defense NQ. (trueeee) But i also see it realistic. Just to develop proper physics for ships and planet voxels would probably take a year to make it right. So should it have priority right now? I dont think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enjeyy Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 Great video, sHuRuLuNi, many things on point, especially the most needed pve/pvp mix, the inability of players to provide such content themselves and the detrimental skill system. One thing though, please leave out survival mechanics like the constant need for food and water. Enviromental hazards by all means, like the need for a proper underwater or space equpment, but not the constant need for grind. This turns fast into a chore, take the water in Last Oasis for example. Such survival mechanics have their place in the respective genre, but are not so different from the current tax system, forcing players to focus on something else than what they actually feel like doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 1 minute ago, enjeyy said: Great video, sHuRuLuNi, many things on point, especially the most needed pve/pvp mix, the inability of players to provide such content themselves and the detrimental skill system. One thing though, please leave out survival mechanics like the constant need for food and water. Enviromental hazards by all means, like the need for a proper underwater or space equpment, but not the constant need for grind. This turns fast into a chore, take the water in Last Oasis for example. Such survival mechanics have their place in the respective genre, but are not so different from the current tax system, forcing players to focus on something else than what they actually feel like doing. I agree, eating and drinking can be tedious. Also ask yourself, what gameplay does that add? Now enviromental, that fits i think with the game already, and can add actual gameplay that can be fun and add some challenges. Not every planet, but some more hostile ones can need certain suits that your avatar can buy/equip. We already have recyclers, so adding in oxygen to suits could be a thing if done right. We just need something that gives more meaning to our avatars, where they arent invincible. When we never die its just boring and no risk. And even if a planet isnt a pvp planet, it if has some enviromental challenges to overcome, that can be a good group effort to take on those challenges for the rewards that it could bring with rich unique ores, or gases, or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enjeyy Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 6 minutes ago, Scavenger said: ... Stuff to explore? Everyone wants that. Just hire some Voxel builders spending thousends of hours into building giant structures to explore ... This right here is the solution to exploration, worlds adrift is the best example that it can be achieved, with all the player created islands and structures. Let creative minds be creative, establish some kind of quality assurance for the creations and throw them into the game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Novean-32184 Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 31 minutes ago, Scavenger said: Just to develop proper physics for ships and planet voxels would probably take a year to make it right. It would require a complete rewrite of the entire game core. The whole concept of DU was designed around the notion that "millions of players" would come and build. To accommodate the chance of that working, the core design eliminated all the things that make a MMO.. well.. a MMO... It removed all the things which would make DU tick as a game, and it was spun as "we're doing things differently". DU literally is just a box with sand, that is all it is, and unless NQ finds the resources to go back and redo pretty much the entire thing that is all it will ever be. The big thing was that NQ said that they would bring the tools and give us the systems to then build the game, they never did. All that has happened and is still happening is they are cutting out more and more to be able to initially keep the performance up and now keep the cost at a level they can afford to pay.. until they can't. DU will need many tens of thousands of players to pay subscriptions to stay afloat, problem is the game really has nothing that would allow that to happen, The momentum for the game to attract the players who will build out gameplay for other players simply is not there. VandelayIndustries, CptLoRes and Sevian 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 I agree with most your critiques. But we have to be careful with the suggestions we present to NQ. I dont think making the life harder to the player will the game more interesting. Food, O2. I think that in an already interesting game, those things could be a nice complement. I agree with "you cannot be a expert of all at the same time" but i put emphasis in "at the same time" But i believe a player should be allowed to change his specialization from time to time. To me the game is already too specialized. I dont understand why cant a player make a industry produce O2 without a talent and a schematic. And dont get me wrong. I think someone should specialize in producing O2. And becaude of that specialization, that player should have a huge advantage against other players. But having an advantage is quite different from preventing others to do it. To me before we implement anything you said, we need content. We need NPCs, ruins, loot boxes, self detonating abandones ships, AvA. The reason im saying be careful with sugestions is because NQ can easly screw things even worse. When you say the game needs specialization, they may hear "we need to increase taxes for mining so only specialists can mine" When you say the game needs a food system, they may hear "we just need to add 1 single food in the market that no one can produce (like schematics) and either ppl can afford it or they enter a death-respawn loop" In the end of the day, experianced players, like you and me, may be able to overcome those new challenges. But new players will feel overwhelm and quit the game. In general, games dont become interesting with the addition of pain mechanisms. Games become interesting with the addition of ways to overcome the trouble. The specialization of industry made the game less interesting because it reduced the number of solutions available to craft. The question to "how to set up an industry line" is answerd by "spend allot of quanta and talent points". There is no real choice between solutions. Because there is only one solution. In the end this did not make the game more interesting. It created more static pain and static barriers where the solution is 1 and known. Not a challenge, more like a tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 Lets take a look at food. Valheim - you dont actualy need to consume any food in the game. But food will give you boosts. The base HP is 30(25?) but eating stew can grant you 200hp. Other food will give you less hp and more stamina. Everyone hunts for food, crafts, and makes choices of what food to consume next( a rare one to fight a boss, or a more common just to tank a little) Dayz - while you die if you dont eat, food in dayz has a much bigger role. Eating the right food can make you heal faster, withstand more damage, while eating the wrong food can make you sick, shaking, lesa resistant. In dayz food in embedded with PvP, getting food by looting, farming or hunting increases the chances of conflit, each with different pros and cons, presenting the player with choices and consequences. Empyrion - food has little efect on the character it self, it only serves as fuel for stamina. Someone with more food can afford to sprint more often. Food also heals. But the choices offered to the player to how he gets food are very variante hunting, farming, growing, looting buying, etc. If a player wants to farm, he needs O2 and power of their crops will die. Some good will spoil, some food will not. This creates a full tree of choices that make the concept of food in the game interesting. Other games, that could not offer an interesting user experience around food, made the choice to present food as a static resource. Like you can only build more units if you have more food. In this games, food is an enabler instead of a tax. What makes a mechanic interesting is the ammount of meaningful variations solve the same problem. Not the ammount of problems. Tetrix would not be interesting if all pieces were 2 by 2 squares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 When i suggested that warp cost could be based on volume instead of mass, i was trying to create a new variation for the problem "how costly is it to travel" We already had a price by mass with regular fuel, why have another price by mass with warp? If values were adjusted correctly, freighters would have a ton of meaningful choices. Some would take a different approach depending on how heavy they are. Others would prefere certain types of ships for certain profit coefficient. When i say that specialization should not prevent players from using industry, im trying to create different solutions for the same problem. Its the ammount of solutions that make the game interesting... Please understand this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kobayashi Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 Interesting video but also goes to highlights the massive differences in people priorities. I would HATE survival elements to be added to the game, or NPCs and have zero issues with the lack of physics or the nebula (I actually prefer it). The thing that really annoys me is the lack of community based elements in game, players markets, the ability to advertise locations and services etc. I should be able to search for race tracks, entertainment venues, security and rescue services within the game interface. That is what I would have focused on to build 'a civilisation' improving the way players and orgs could interact with each other. The stuff you want, means zero to me, infact would make the game worse. The fact that you have been telling NQ what you want since alpha, does not make you right, it is your opinion. Also the lack of territory warfare gets my goat, not because I want to attack people but because i want the risk of being attacked. Oh and energy, that balances the whole game. Actually, if they added territory warfare, energy, player markets and some sort of player directory, I would be a very happy bunny. Not sure that is happening by launch though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blundertwink Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 IMO, conflict is the main driver of engagement, not just risk/reward -- and the two are subtly different. Good building games make acquiring materials dangerous -- in this context, building is the reward. Getting the mats is what drives conflict -- not really SI. The lack of SI can be immersion-breaking, but isn't a huge deal to me. Conflict can be complex. In many ways, building itself can be an engaging activity because the conflict is inherent -- the conflict between "the design in my head" and "making that design a reality". Of course, not every player is compelled by that sort of conflict. Demeter's changes obliterate any concept of conflict around acquiring mats. Before Demeter, there still wasn't much real "risk" in mining. Few people PvP and the chances of running into 'rats was low. It was still at least somewhat engaging because of the need to balance cargo space, where to mine, what to mine, how much time to spend mining, and doing the "mole simulator" game in the most time-efficient way possible. This created conflict, albeit weak conflict, which drove a level of engagement that's now missing. They saw how expensive it was to bury ore hundreds of meters, but rather than tweaking this and preserving this weak engagement, they obliterated it completely. Unfortunately, NQ has proven time and again that they suck at game design, and suck even harder at recognizing their own flaws and improving. That's a really bad combination of traits... I don't see a "way back" for NQ at this point -- but hopefully they prove me wrong and the new CEO can kick some ass and change directions. I'm not holding my breath, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 14 minutes ago, Kobayashi said: Interesting video but also goes to highlights the massive differences in people priorities. I would HATE survival elements to be added to the game, or NPCs and have zero issues with the lack of physics or the nebula (I actually prefer it). The thing that really annoys me is the lack of community based elements in game, players markets, the ability to advertise locations and services etc. I should be able to search for race tracks, entertainment venues, security and rescue services within the game interface. That is what I would have focused on to build 'a civilisation' improving the way players and orgs could interact with each other. The stuff you want, means zero to me, infact would make the game worse. The fact that you have been telling NQ what you want since alpha, does not make you right, it is your opinion. Also the lack of territory warfare gets my goat, not because I want to attack people but because i want the risk of being attacked. Oh and energy, that balances the whole game. Actually, if they added territory warfare, energy, player markets and some sort of player directory, I would be a very happy bunny. Not sure that is happening by launch though. You can say it all you want but this game isn't a civilization building game when everyone had 20 of their own tiles and makes majority of stuff themselves. Civilizations come about because you need people. A doctor doesn't moonlight as a cab driver on the side. Just like NQ can call this beta all they want, per industry standards game is Alpha. I can call the earth flat, doesn't make it true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kobayashi Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 11 minutes ago, VandelayIndustries said: You can say it all you want but this game isn't a civilization building game when everyone had 20 of their own tiles and makes majority of stuff themselves. Civilizations come about because you need people. A doctor doesn't moonlight as a cab driver on the side. Please define 'everyone'....... I dont play like that, I know LOADS of people in game, I have bought my ore from the start, I go to racing nights and casinos. My game is not defined by how much I have made per hour or the ore I can mine. I made all my money (and I have a LOT) from selling mainly T1 stuff, both on the market but also via shopping locations. I just wish NQ made it far easier for me to do so. I wish NQ never helped people fix ship but instead promoted player made services. The people I play with, one has literally only ever mined about 200kl of ore since alpha, and instead he sells ships, which means he spends loads of time talking to loads of people in the community on Discord. He has made BILLIONS that way. The interesting thing is, the majority of people I know who are 'happy' with the game, play the way we do. Dont get me wrong, there is still a long way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joaocordeiro Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 I dont think conflict can become the main driver for this game. At least not the current system and definitely not just PVP The current system provides very little choices for the player. There is a simple rule to make a good pvp ship. There is a simple sequence of talents to give buffs to the ship.. After the ship is design and the talents are learned, there is little to nothing a player can do to win a fight. There are no tactics involved no choices. The pilot may aim the ship but there ia only 1 proper way to aim the ship. No choice. The gunners could be replaced by computer macros with 20 lines of code. This simplistic system provides no variety of solutions, only one. This then translates on highly predictable outcomes. Predictable outcomes equals predictable winners and predictable losers. The winners being expected players with mighty orgs supporting them. The losers being the new players. Not only will this drive new players away. But even the experienced players will find this way of winning battles, based on meta designs, fixed talents and the infinite repetition of clicks, a boring and uninteresting mechanic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 1 minute ago, Kobayashi said: Please define 'everyone'....... I dont play like that, I know LOADS of people in game, I have bought my ore from the start, I go to racing nights and casinos. I made all my money from selling mainly T1 stuff, both on the market but also via shopping locations. I just wish NQ made it far easier for me to do so. I wish NQ never helped people fix ship but instead promoted player made services. The people I play with, one has literally only ever mined about 200kl of ore since alpha, and instead he sells ships, which means he spends loads of time talking to loads of people in the community on Discord. He has made BILLIONS that way. The interesting thing is, the majority of people I know who are 'happy' with the game, play the way we do. Dont get me wrong, there is still a long way to go. Just because some people don't doesn't mean anything. The game allows you to be a jack of all trades even with out alts. That's not civilization. So what if u don't claim 20 tiles, I can claim 20 or more solo. Take EvE for example, that is way closer than DU had ever been and probably will be. Majority do not build in that game. A few build a couple things. It takes literal years for a builder to get the skills, BPs, knowledge etc to build majority of stuff in the game. Kobayashi 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VandelayIndustries Posted December 2, 2021 Share Posted December 2, 2021 2 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said: I dont think conflict can become the main driver for this game. At least not the current system and definitely not just PVP The current system provides very little choices for the player. There is a simple rule to make a good pvp ship. There is a simple sequence of talents to give buffs to the ship.. After the ship is design and the talents are learned, there is little to nothing a player can do to win a fight. There are no tactics involved no choices. The pilot may aim the ship but there ia only 1 proper way to aim the ship. No choice. The gunners could be replaced by computer macros with 20 lines of code. This simplistic system provides no variety of solutions, only one. This then translates on highly predictable outcomes. Predictable outcomes equals predictable winners and predictable losers. The winners being expected players with mighty orgs supporting them. The losers being the new players. Not only will this drive new players away. But even the experienced players will find this way of winning battles, based on meta designs, fixed talents and the infinite repetition of clicks, a boring and uninteresting mechanic. This I will agree with. There is way more unpredictability in EvE that's why people get hooked on its pvp. You can go your whole lifetime eve career without having the exact same fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now