Jump to content

SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, De Overheid said:

Some possible perks for veterans would alleviate the pain for me:

  • We can claim a starting location before release (Aphelia claims a ring of tiles around a market so no one has that benefit)
  • We get to keep one basic XS ship, think double pocket speeder allowance with space capabilities to start off with
  • We get the old element textures (yellow containers, etc.) as skins to show our mark of veterancy
  • We get some pocket quanta and talents to spend.

That's it, thanks.

 

I think the benefits for the early players you have listed are quite reasonable and would go a long way to giving veteran players a boost as it would allow them to move away from the safe zone early and rebuild their empires either solo or as a group without too heavily impacting the disparity between new and old players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PleiJades said:

I basically do not understand most of the DU playerbase, which is also a reason I quit because they are very toxic when it comes to other gameplay loops other than "build nice things".

 

Well, have you ever wondered why people are playing Mindcraft? Some humans are more creative than destructive, that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leppard said:

 

Well, have you ever wondered why people are playing Mindcraft? Some humans are more creative than destructive, that's all.

Minecraft is fun. Has exploration and NPCs. And after a wipe I just restart again. When it comes to the wipe discussion I think minecraft is a bad example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, PleiJades said:

Minecraft is fun. Has exploration and NPCs. And after a wipe I just restart again. When it comes to the wipe discussion I think minecraft is a bad example.

 

No, it's not. You could run your own server without wiping ever, There are servers running since 2010 until today that never had a reset. But this was not the argument here, the argument was creativity vs. destructivity. If you touch another players structure in freedonia without his permission, you get banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres an idea.. Some people have suggested a intergalatic dimension to travel from system a to system b.

 

Why not simplify it dramatically.  Make the two systems in the same server., but make them rediculously far apart. So far a part that it was take two weeks slow boating to get to system a to system b.  

 

If a player did decide to warp such a distance, it would cost tens if not hundreds of millions to transport those duplicated items, which would then bump up the price of those items if they did get those exploited items across, otherwise it would be a major loss in profit. Then the trick is how to prevent money transfer between the two systems. Perhaps a banking/range system? 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, De Overheid said:

Here is my take on the points brought forward by NQ, it took a while to read through all the other posts and form my own reply. I have not been an avid responder on the forum but please consider the following:

 

On the premise that

  • NQ fixes known bugs and exploits.
  • NQ actively prevents, punishes and reverts exploits in the future.
  • NQ creates a somewhat stable and equal economy (we were getting there).
  • We paid to PLAY the game. Our gains like quanta, ore and inventory should not be a given right.
  • Persistence of our intellectual creations (blueprints) is preferable.
  • Our real live investment (time, money) should be considered.
  • There should be no more wipes from here on out. Make sure the game is interesting enough for veteran and new players alike.

 

Factors under consideration

  • Removing unpopular things: I see no need to do this. Please keep schematics, they work fine. Fix things that need fixing
  • Resetting the game economy: I can really see the benefit of this. Let us become industry moguls on a level playing field. The wealth created during beta is void.
  • Experienced veterans: Please don’t take away our nice experiences, encounters and joy we had playing.
  • Right start for new players: Sure, Let them do the FTUE and grind like we did. We can help them.
  • Persistent blueprints: Sounds like a very good idea, please make them progressive: You can deploy them with just a core and then “fill” them with voxels and elements.
  • Planet revamp: Please go right ahead and create something truly nice for us. Be generous in helping those who will be inconvenienced.

 

Alternatives:

  • No wipe: An option, but it would create an immense balance problem. Unfortunately I say no.
  • Partial wipe: Keep only voxels, remove elements. Do planet revamp and allow a one time magical blueprint for affected players. Help them relocate. Feels like a little of nothing on all ends.
  • Legacy server: Double the cost, half the players. No.
  • Full wipe: Starts to feel like the best option but you need to compensate players for the time and money they invested already. Keep blueprints for everyone, remove quanta and talents but give them something back for every month they played or paid, from those "rewards" we could buy back talents and/or quanta, at players choice. No idea how much this should be but somewhere between sufficient and all.

 

Some possible perks for veterans would alleviate the pain for me:

  • We can claim a starting location before release (Aphelia claims a ring of tiles around a market so no one has that benefit)
  • We get to keep one basic XS ship, think double pocket speeder allowance with space capabilities to start off with
  • We get the old element textures (yellow containers, etc.) as skins to show our mark of veterancy
  • We get some pocket quanta and talents to spend.

That's it, thanks.

If they wipe and all I get from my two year Grind is a xs craft that will be an insult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Raider00321 said:

Heres an idea.. Some people have suggested a intergalatic dimension to travel from system a to system b.

 

Why not simplify it dramatically.  Make the two systems in the same server., but make them rediculously far apart. So far a part that it was take two weeks slow boating to get to system a to system b.  

 

If a player did decide to warp such a distance, it would cost tens if not hundreds of millions to transport those duplicated items, which would then bump up the price of those items if they did get those exploited items across, otherwise it would be a major loss in profit. Then the trick is how to prevent money transfer between the two systems. Perhaps a banking/range system? 

 

 

 

 

Same server, different solare system with a long range, and then a community project for the construction of a portal between the two worlds, which will allow time for the new systems to develop. (chat communication possible between the systems)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we all know DU Wipe hype has currently crippled the game after the post.  Less and less people are logging in as a result sadly.  This is also a good opportunity to go back to original plans perhaps?

 

1) DU was always suggested to be a Civ building game with one safe zone.  You cannot build civilizations if everything is protected on every world under a safe zone bubble.  We should remove the safe zones that were added and go back to the original plans of the game.  The purpose for example of sanctuary was a protected world (I presume Haven is too).  Without NPC's the game needs that conflict mechanic so should you need to go out you need 'friends' not totally do everything solo.  It is an MMO after all.  I still remember early Beta people did such that and when hauling ore used defence ships for escorts.  Now we warp from safe zone to safe zone.  With all mining in a protected areas you can never remove a person who got 'lucky' and found an infinate ore.  So why not go back to original plans from the get 'go'.  Or at best keep Alioth, Thades, Madis etc Safe but everywhere else non-safe zone.  

 

2) Element sinks both PvE, PvP are 100% needed or you'll go back to this situation in 12 months time or less.  Even in PvP element lives dont disappear reguarly (may more in Athena as more add voxels to builds).  Again industry needs the ability to make quanta and it is an ore sink so 100% makes logical sense.  Or alternatively introduce a 'decay' formula.  You use it more it slowly loses HP to where every fully repair reduces the elements max HP down till you eventually need to replace it.  This worked GREAT in Star Wars Galaxies.  

 

3) Mining could have 'fields' that sporadically change.  Worked great in Star Wars Galaxies.  It would mean you may have to re-scan, redeploy every so often.  But ore values change in time so one field is never 100% to remain like that forever.

 

4) Add NPC's for PvE.  Eve has it, why doesnt DU? the events we've had are not always brilliant but sadly NPC's would give people to target something and capture (good for practice)

 

5) Add alliances.  Legit alliances so they show different colours on your tooltip?  i.e Organge Friendly, Green Org and Red anyone else.  Alliances can be declared by the Super legate.  IF you wanted to expand you can have alliance constructs.

 

6) Base shields extend to all constructs including planetary shields for TW (when it is added) timer system needs tweaking but concept is 100% there.  Of course this would work well with planetary atmo pvp so maybe a full future expansion.  Plan it in place?

 

7) If an expliot occurs REMOVE what they gained.  Dont shrug it off.

 

😎 Removing alts (free Beta Keys).  Obviously if a wipe happens this will force people to buy their alts or not.  Legit doesnt bother me if someone pays for 10 alts to mission run.  Situation we are in is some people have 80 Beta account alts for free!!!

 

9) More Lore, more events.

 

10) player market and taxes.  We need removing the NPC ones and bringing player markets in.  Come on why have NPC ones when Freeport for example is excellent or Utopia Station where legit we need player driven content

 

This is a snapshot.  This could be an amazing game title people love building, people want a legit combat mechanic, people want that civ building too.

 

Honvik

Premier of the Empire

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2022 at 2:49 PM, CyberDay said:

"If one party makes a statement or a promise that causes another party to rely on that statement in such a way that he or she is financially injured by that reliance, then a court will enforce the statement or promise as if it was a completed contract. The court does not need to find an agreement or consideration in order to enforce the promise like a contract, but it is difficult to prove a statement was made without a record of it."

If you would try and make this case relating to NQ once they wipe .. you will be laughed out of court faster than you could say WIPE

 

You are not in any way "financially injured", certainly not in the context of this quote, if NQ decided to wipe, even if they did a full  wipe. The T&C for the game, which you agreed to as you signed up and which woudl superceed any comments made by individual NQ staff, leave it entirely for NQ to do as they deem is needed, including a full wipe.




 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

1) DU was always suggested to be a Civ building game with one safe zone.  You cannot build civilizations if everything is protected on every world under a safe zone bubble. 

The conditions for lifting safe zones around planets has been pretty well defined and the required state of the game has not yet been met. The big blue ball around Alioth/Madis/Thades was a direct result of the warmongering and "we wil lcome and kick over your sandcasteles as soon as we can" talk that happened prior to and earlu into beta. DU is not a PVP game and the devs rightly will/have/should protect the game against that part  of it becoming all emcompassing and going everywhere.

Basically, the trigger happy crowd jump the gun and by doing so shackled themselves.

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

2) Element sinks both PvE, PvP are 100% needed or you'll go back to this situation in 12 months time or less.

The whole loop this relates to is extremely under developed and really is one of the big pointers the game is really still knee deep in alpha.. Unfortunately I doubt NQ will ever get back to fixing this as they will not have the time to do so and the game will not be around long enough to justify it

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

3) Mining could have 'fields' that sporadically change.  Worked great in Star Wars Galaxies.  It would mean you may have to re-scan, redeploy every so often.  But ore values change in time so one field is never 100% to remain like that forever.

NQ's original idea was good but because their inability to really build the rest of the gam efrom there and their horrid planning and financial management led to this being all but a shell of what it was menat to be and again, I can't see them find opportunity to ever recover from that.

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

4) Add NPC's for PvE.  Eve has it, why doesnt DU? the events we've had are not always brilliant but sadly NPC's would give people to target something and capture (good for practice)

The game has no hooks or logic to support NPCs, any and all "content" NQ creates is entirely static.  JC thought he could literayy just build a box and dump sand in it to then see massive amount sof players come and buils the game for him. Many of us have told NQ that was a pipedream from very ealy on and obviously, NQ did not listen or care.
 

In EVE, PVE content and NPC activity lies at the core of everything that happens in the game, it is the well from which all player activitie flows. For DU to even have a basic form of that woudl probably require a massive rewrite fo the core game, something which simply wil lnot happen.

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

5) Add alliances.  Legit alliances so they show different colours on your tooltip?  i.e Organge Friendly, Green Org and Red anyone else.  Alliances can be declared by the Super legate.  IF you wanted to expand you can have alliance constructs.

Here again, NQ has no gamedesign skillset, they created a technical solution which has no gameplay value in RDMS. A relational mechanic which defines Neutral, Friend or Foe woudl be a very basic thing to have but again, it's not something NQ seems to consider or be able to come up with.

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

6) Base shields extend to all constructs including planetary shields for TW (when it is added) timer system needs tweaking but concept is 100% there.  Of course this would work well with planetary atmo pvp so maybe a full future expansion.  Plan it in place?

Fair, Frankly, if I look at the siege mechanic Frozenbyte is designing for STarBAse, it is simple, effective and clear. You initiate the attack, the defender sets the time for the attck to commence. If you manage to capture the defeated defenders get he opportunity to take it back and if they can't it's yours and a safezone is re-established.

 

It's really not hard and while DU lacks many of the intricate parts of what EVE and also StarBAse do, at least they can get close enough to make the mechanic work, interesting and worthwile. But again, I do not think the game will be around long wnough for it to flesh out.

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

7) If an expliot occurs REMOVE what they gained.  Dont shrug it off.

I believe part off why NQ never really aggressively pursued expliots is because it was _always_ the plan to wipe come release.

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

9) More Lore, more events.

You need imagination to create lore and events. And unfortunately NQ has yet to show a sense of that.

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

10) player market and taxes.  We need removing the NPC ones and bringing player markets in.  Come on why have NPC ones when Freeport for example is excellent or Utopia Station where legit we need player driven content

Agree

 

 

5 hours ago, Honvik said:

This is a snapshot.  This could be an amazing game title people love building, people want a legit combat mechanic, people want that civ building too.

DU is still alpha, it is a collection of mechanics with no glue and no substance.

 

NQ ran out of ideas, lost their vision and ha sno funding. They are stuck and al lthey have is hope that pushing a release and rushing to it triggers in influx of players big enough to survive long enough to get to the next expansion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion all information given is way too superficial and vague.
 

Quote

- Doing no wipe at all.

 

Pros:

  • Satisfying for some of our long-time builders and traders

Cons:

  • Unsatisfying for players wanting to discover the game and start with a more polished version of the game.
  • Does not allow to remove Schematics properly.
  • Does not allow to revamp the old planets properly.
  • Does not allow the rebalancing of the economy properly.
  • Potentially keeping bugs related to very old Constructs.

I consider myself a long-time player and I vehemently support a full wipe. BUT NOT at the current moment.

How is the more polished version of the game supposed to be? When can it be expected? What kind of features do you want to implement until it is polished enough for previous mistakes to not happen again? It is hard to estimate the pros and cons of a wipe without any information.

What will industry look like after removing Schematics again? Will machines have some kind of durability? Will some energy concept be implemented in the near future? How do you want to implement a decay of not only ship parts, but industry and more? How do you plan to implement these things in the currrent state of the game when often random problems occur and a ticket is needed to resolve problems, without any insight being possible into why something happened. When are those things supposed to happen? Taking into account the current update time frames any bigger update is still far away and even then polishing and bug fixing should be the big priority.
 

Quote

- Making a partial wipe where the economy would be wiped, but not the Constructs, which would keep all player-made creations intact, with also in mind to prevent some players from storing resources on said Constructs to circumvent the reset of the economy.

 

Pros:

  • Relatively satisfying for some of our long-time builders.

Cons:

  • Extremely complex to put in place properly without the known loopholes interfering (such as piling up Resources and Elements on existing Constructs before a wipe and removing them after to sell them).
  • Unknown loopholes could break the wanted healthy economic reset.
  • Does not allow to revamp the old planets properly.
  • Potentially keeping bugs related to very old Constructs.

You already rule this out yourself. I do not think there is any further comment needed here.

Quote

- Having a full wipe (except blueprints) with solutions to make old time players able to rebuild their favorite Constructs quickly through various means.

 

(Here are a few examples of discussed ideas to reach this goal: for our veteran backers, starting pool of talents points and/or quanta, resource multiplier event right after the reset, etc.).

 

Pros:

  • Prevents loopholes for an economic reset compared to a partial wipe.
  • Most efficient, proper way to remove schematics.
  • Most efficient, proper way to handle a planet revamp.

Cons:

  • Some possibilities discussed could be seen as an unfair advantage.


Keep in mind, if the above solution is decided on, that an improved version of the Blueprint / Construct deployment tool available to all players will be implemented in-game at the time (or maybe even before) such a solution would be applied to the game.

Such improved version will enable players to have:

  • A preview of the Construct before deploying the said Construct from a blueprint (this feature should be available with Athena release).
  • An ability to auto-align the preview of the Construct on an already deployed Construct (this feature should be available a bit later after Athena release).

So this seems to be the clear option you prefer.
I do not see a point in giving out quanta that then would hopefully be worthless for the beginning.
I'd hate to see my talent points go, but I would not have too big of a problem with it, if there were some kind of compensation for the time already spent playing/ maybe even paying. For example DACs.

Why does the ability to auto-align the preview of a construct seem to be so far down the line. It is a long requested feature.
The same also could be said about editing blueprint contents. Whether it is the kind of honeycomb or different kind of engines... Why can constructs not be easily disassembled back into a container with one click? Why are aphelia missions (one big part for the economy failure) even a thing in a player driven game? The same goes for taxes on tiles, the new space market and many other things. Why are there no player driven solutions, approaches or proposals to manage the economy? Instead of a space market you could give us the tools to build a market like this ourselves.

Those are just a few points of all the things you should improve, polish and take into account before you can even think about wiping the game or making any other incisive change to it. In its current state it is too far from being finished or balanced and a wipe now would just restart the sequence of things that lead to the current situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys have done nothing to help those that want to avoid the pvp aspect , instead you have pushed them more into that direction. Mission times longer  by slowing down ships and speeding up smaller ships. I really wish you would reconsider helping haulers  some instead of discouraging them, But hey its your game build it how you like.

 

 

I like to pvp but not in its current state, is not pvp ready, no real rewards , alien cores , doesnt feel like very big motivation  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blazemonger said:

If you would try and make this case relating to NQ once they wipe .. you will be laughed out of court faster than you could say WIPE

 

You are not in any way "financially injured", certainly not in the context of this quote, if NQ decided to wipe, even if they did a full  wipe. The T&C for the game, which you agreed to as you signed up and which woudl superceed any comments made by individual NQ staff, leave it entirely for NQ to do as they deem is needed, including a full wipe.




 

The conditions for lifting safe zones around planets has been pretty well defined and the required state of the game has not yet been met. The big blue ball around Alioth/Madis/Thades was a direct result of the warmongering and "we wil lcome and kick over your sandcasteles as soon as we can" talk that happened prior to and earlu into beta. DU is not a PVP game and the devs rightly will/have/should protect the game against that part  of it becoming all emcompassing and going everywhere.

Basically, the trigger happy crowd jump the gun and by doing so shackled themselves.

 

 

The whole loop this relates to is extremely under developed and really is one of the big pointers the game is really still knee deep in alpha.. Unfortunately I doubt NQ will ever get back to fixing this as they will not have the time to do so and the game will not be around long enough to justify it

 

 

NQ's original idea was good but because their inability to really build the rest of the gam efrom there and their horrid planning and financial management led to this being all but a shell of what it was menat to be and again, I can't see them find opportunity to ever recover from that.

 

 

The game has no hooks or logic to support NPCs, any and all "content" NQ creates is entirely static.  JC thought he could literayy just build a box and dump sand in it to then see massive amount sof players come and buils the game for him. Many of us have told NQ that was a pipedream from very ealy on and obviously, NQ did not listen or care.
 

In EVE, PVE content and NPC activity lies at the core of everything that happens in the game, it is the well from which all player activitie flows. For DU to even have a basic form of that woudl probably require a massive rewrite fo the core game, something which simply wil lnot happen.

 

Here again, NQ ha sno gamedesign skillset, they created a technical solution which has no gameplay value in RDMS. A relational mechanic which defines Neutral, Friend or Foe woudl be a very basic thing to have but again, it's not something NQ seems to consider or be able to come up with.

 

 

Fair, Frankly, if I look at the siege mechanic Frozenbyte is designing for STarBAse, it is simple, effective and clear. You initiate the attack, the defender sets the time for the attck to commence. If you manage to capture the defeated defenders get he opportunity to take it back and if they can't it's yours and a safezone is re-established.

 

It's really not hard and while DU lacks many of the intricate parts of what EVE and also StarBAse do, at least they can get close enough to make the mechanic work, interesting and worthwile. But again, I do not think the game will be around long wnough for it to flesh out.

 

 

I believe part off why NQ never really aggressively pursued expliots is because it was _always_ the plan to wipe come release.

 

 

You need imagination to create lore and events. And unfortunately NQ has yet to show a sense of that.

 

 

Agree

 

 

DU is still alpha, it is a collection of mechanics with no glue and no substance.

 

NQ ran out of ideas, lost their vision and ha sno funding. They are stuck and al lthey have is hope that pushing a release and rushing to it triggers in influx of players big enough to survive long enough to get to the next expansion.

What kind of person do you expect to read this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blazemonger said:

The whole loop this relates to is extremely under developed and really is one of the big pointers the game is really still knee deep in alpha.. Unfortunately I doubt NQ will ever get back to fixing this as they will not have the time to do so and the game will not be around long enough to justify it

 

2 hours ago, blazemonger said:

NQ's original idea was good but because their inability to really build the rest of the gam efrom there and their horrid planning and financial management led to this being all but a shell of what it was menat to be and again, I can't see them find opportunity to ever recover from that.

 

 

2 hours ago, blazemonger said:

It's really not hard and while DU lacks many of the intricate parts of what EVE and also StarBAse do, at least they can get close enough to make the mechanic work, interesting and worthwile. But again, I do not think the game will be around long wnough for it to flesh out.

 

2 hours ago, blazemonger said:

 

NQ ran out of ideas, lost their vision and ha sno funding. They are stuck and al lthey have is hope that pushing a release and rushing to it triggers in influx of players big enough to survive long enough to get to the next expansion.


A lot of what you're saying here just comes across as bashing NQ without offering any suggestions at all.  You're basically pointing out a load of problems and saying it's too late to fix them.  So why not just shut the whole game down now?

I don't think this sort of thing is particularly helpful.  I've probably been guilty of similar posts myself when frustrated but I always try to at least make an alternative suggestion as well.  I think if we actually want the game to succeed we have to start by assuming it will succeed and working out how rather than starting from a position of 'here are all the ways NQ have messed things up' and no ideas.

I liked a lot of Honvik's ideas you were bashing there.  Some of them would be easy to implement and would make things better ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeddrick said:

I liked a lot of Honvik's ideas you were bashing there.  Some of them would be easy to implement and would make things better ...

 

I was not bashing his ideas at all, in fact I agree with most of them. IMO though, NQ has made choices and has limitations at this point which prevent them from consideration which is a real shame.

You may not agree but at the same time I doubt you can counter my comments with anything meaningful or show them totally false. And in that regard, your post would be pretty much what you define mine as..

I would really lke to see NQ stepup and prove me wrong. Problem here is that I have been waiting for them to do that for the last three+ years and based on their current situation, I have little hope they may yet do so.
 

To me, DU has promise and potential but (due to the mismanagement by JC) is driven be a focus on saving cost and keeping the company developing it alive first and foremost where NQ has, does and will sacrifice and comprimise mostly anything to achieve that. And that is just not a healthy breeding ground for a game the scale and complexity DU can be. If someone were to pull a NMS on NQ, shrink them down to 10-15 people and hunker down with a good chunk of cash then maybe they could make the game work.

You can disagree with my view which is fine and my opinion really does not reflect on any one staffer at NQ. At the top level NQ has already moved on and is in the process of getting their next project off the ground (which I expect is monetizing their server/voxel engine). DU will see a release and from there will be sink or swim with continued minimal support from the side of NQ as far as I have set my expectations..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeddrick said:

A lot of what you're saying here just comes across as bashing NQ without offering any suggestions at all.  You're basically pointing out a load of problems and saying it's too late to fix them.  So why not just shut the whole game down now?

I don't think this sort of thing is particularly helpful.  I've probably been guilty of similar posts myself when frustrated but I always try to at least make an alternative suggestion as well.  I think if we actually want the game to succeed we have to start by assuming it will succeed and working out how rather than starting from a position of 'here are all the ways NQ have messed things up' and no ideas.

I liked a lot of Honvik's ideas you were bashing there.  Some of them would be easy to implement and would make things better ...

 

I'm sensing a LOT of frustration from Blaze.  Believe he gained interest in the game in 2016 - 6 years ago now and still is not seeing many things originally promised.  Myself, I joined in early 2018, around the time one would take work vacation days to be able to play for 72 to 96 hours once a month or so.  Recall telling my wife "Have a great weekend, see you in a couple of days" when the first 48 hour test came out - and yeah, I played 32 of those 48 hours (with sometimes hourly server reboots, launching queues with 1000s of players, etc.). 

 

Blaze is VERY practical and has historically shown light on NQ finances he has scrapped together from public sources.  Like most things, dreams are great, but accomplishing those dreams cost money - something NQ doesn't have a lot of right now, so I think he is seeing things through those lenses - which is, well, realistic.  It is, after all, the FBI M.O. - follow the money, so as an approach is well founded.

 

I know for a fact (because I worked with him on a few efforts) that we have TRIED to help NQ, but JC in particular not only had a vision for the game, but had a specific vision for how the game should be played, and anything out side of that was simply ignored.  That made the game less and less a sandbox for many of us.  Just for perspective, in the early Alpha days, it was perfectly reasonable to have the goal of building a Stargate Universe class ship that could go around and build some future gate technology for use between solar systems.  That got nibbled away, piece by piece, often in thinly veiled excuses which translated to "current system eats too many resources, need to cut cost".

 

Personally almost choked on the first phrase of this thread.  NQ has been one of the LEAST transparent companies I've worked with in almost 50 years of gaming (started in 1975).  We love what DU started out as, and have watched that slowly be chipped away until its barely recognizable.  We have also tried, MANY MANY times, via Discord, via this forum, via tickets, via direct mail, etc. to help with suggestions, most often with little more than a "this suggestion will be forwarded" and no other word or action seen.  Sadly "this suggestion will be forwarded" is the most positive response personally seen - most of the time hours, days, and sometimes weeks of volunteer work behind suggestions were simply ignored.

 

Guess this is mostly a vent, but please do try to understand some of the history of our efforts.

 

edit:  Blaze posted his own reply above when I was typing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hey everyone!

 

We wanted to let everyone know that the internal discussions are still ongoing. We have been reading your feedback (all of it - really!), and we wanted to express our sincere thanks to everyone for joining in the discussion.

 

We have also been gathering your questions (please continue asking them if they haven't already been asked in this thread) and we'll do our best to have some answers for you as soon as we can.

 

Thanks again, we really do appreciate all of the feedback. ❤️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, NQ-Nyota said:

 

Hey everyone!

 

We wanted to let everyone know that the internal discussions are still ongoing. We have been reading your feedback (all of it - really!), and we wanted to express our sincere thanks to everyone for joining in the discussion.

 

We have also been gathering your questions (please continue asking them if they haven't already been asked in this thread) and we'll do our best to have some answers for you as soon as we can.

 

Thanks again, we really do appreciate all of the feedback. ❤️

 

Sincerely appreciate you checking in and letting us know!  Any ETA on when a decision will be made?

 

Edited by Pleione
ask question
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vous voulez que DUAL survive, vous comprenez que les nouveaux joueurs doivent être éduqués sur les différentes mécaniques. Vous avez mis des tutoriels. À mon avis, vous devez permettre aux nouveaux joueurs de progresser par étapes du jeu en fonction de leurs mouvements. Cette progression se fait dans ce jeu par planète. Les lunes sanctuaires et Alioth doivent avoir des conditions de vol très favorables (entrée plus facile dans les atmosphères, une gravitation plus légère) Pour Madis et Thades, une gravitation un peu plus forte avec un peu plus de contraintes pour les entrées atmosphériques. Pour les autres planètes, une gravitation plus forte avec des contraintes de vol beaucoup plus sévères (pourquoi pas des arbres qui arrêtent les vaisseaux comme en alpha ?). L’intérêt de cette démarche est de permettre aux nouveaux acteurs de progresser pas à pas et de ne pas avoir un mur de contraintes dès le départ. Ce mur pousse de nombreux joueurs à abandonner dans les premières semaines. En surmontant les contraintes pas à pas, le nouveau joueur se sentira plus à l’aise et restera plus longtemps, voir très longtemps ce que je veux, en tant que joueur depuis l’alpha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Quaideluz said:

You want DUAL to survive, you understand that new players need to be educated on the different mechanics. You have put tutorials. In my opinion, you should allow new players to progress in stages of the game based on their movements. This progression is done in this game by planet. Sanctuary moons and Alioth must have very favorable flight conditions (easier entry into atmospheres, lighter gravitation) For Madis and Thades, a little stronger gravitation with a little more constraint for atmospheric entries. For the other planets, a stronger gravitation with much more severe flight constraints (why not trees that stop ships like in alpha?). The advantage of this approach is to allow new players to progress step by step and not to have a wall of constraints from the start. This wall causes many players to give up in the first few weeks. By overcoming the constraints step by step, the new player will feel more comfortable and stay longer, see very long what I want, as a player since the alpha (compliments of Google Translate)

 

This actually makes a lot of sense to me, I've just never really thought about it.  Alioth (and Sanctuary) became my least favorite places because of their gravity well.  Why make the starting planets the hardest to fly from???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NQ-Nyota said:

 

Hey everyone!

 

We wanted to let everyone know that the internal discussions are still ongoing. We have been reading your feedback (all of it - really!), and we wanted to express our sincere thanks to everyone for joining in the discussion.

 

We have also been gathering your questions (please continue asking them if they haven't already been asked in this thread) and we'll do our best to have some answers for you as soon as we can.

 

Thanks again, we really do appreciate all of the feedback. ❤️


Thank you for the long awaited information. At the moment, I would like to see a decision very quickly, as this current state of affairs is hugely damaging to ambitions and causing resentment in the community. It's just not fun to log in and build something great under these conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...