Jump to content

New gameplay footage!

Recommended Posts

Cross fingers for gas giants of death though.


I, too, shall have my fingers crossed for gas giants.


I also want to describe something I think you guys aren't thinking about from the perspective of space faring citizens.


Sure, a 100km radius world would be hard to explore by foot. 125000 km^2 seems like a lot. But when you are flying over it as a space ship. You will be seeing easily 60000 km^2 from space, and getting more and more fine tuned as you get closer and closer to the planet.


From space you can see North America, Europe, etc all as a collective regardless of "the size of Greece." or the UK. The point of a space game is not to walk everywhere. The walking distance is moot.


Don't let the number skew your perspective of what it will be like based on the video we just watched. You can SEE buildings from space depending on their size. You can find a good altitude, cruise over sections of the planet and just scan with your eyes, 10's of 1000's of square kilometers per second.


What then is a good sized planet?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

They just upload it to IGN   http://www.ign.com/videos/2016/07/18/10-minutes-of-dual-universe-gameplay-no-mans-sky-style-game     Thoughts?

Man....man.....man.........man.............I dont wanna wait.....man......man......I wanna play now!

So, I've actually done the math(while fully awake, don't worry) and a 100 km radius planet(cut these figures by roughly 75% for 50 km radius) at 29% dry land(which is what Earth is) would have about 36,442 km² of land. It would fit 1 million people with a population density of 27.44 people per square km(110 people per sqr km if 50 km radius) if we spread out evenly. Round this up to 28 people. One square km is roughly 247 acres. That would mean everyone would get around 8.8 acres of land to themselves(or 2.2 acres per person on 50 km radius)


Let's say that 100k people is the most at launch or the first six months. That would put 3 people per square km. Giving everyone 82.33 acres of land. That is a lot of land for such a small planet. These numbers don't even include water bases or any part of the water someone might have ships set up on. If you go by the surface area of the planet, with a population of 1 million, that puts 8 people per square km, giving everyone 30.875 acres of land.


A planet with a radius of 100km is more that enough to support up to 1 million people. Also, remember that people will be leaving left and right as soon as they achieve space travel. I will also include a picture of three spheres I put together in 3ds max. The large green one is the earth, the super light blue is the moon, the red is a planet with a 100 km radius, and the little bitty blue one is 30 km radius.


http://imgur.com/Sw5tDaH It won't let me put the actual picture in here....


ALSO, if my math/conversions are off please let me know what I did wrong, so I can learn from my mistakes :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

We discussed this already concerning tab targeting: Realistically, far future tech will always be superior to humans, but having everything automated will not make a satisfying game. I want to be Luke Skywalker, not his great-grandchild who is only a passenger in the X-Wing flown by the follow-up model of R2D2.



You have a point: A planet big enough to provide a lonly spot for every member of the game population, and that is also as diverse as Earth to provide different climatic zones, landsacpes and all reassources, would be too much realism. I agree there must be an incentive to explore other planets and systems. But it should be big enough to at least appear realistic and not like a toy.

No offense good sir, but given some scientific facts,, there should be no X-Wing fights in space... like... at all. Get a destroyer class ship instead. It's bigger, it's maneuverable, it has more ammunition and it actually has a bidet installed, less your trip from one planet to another becomes... full of  shit *ba dum tss*. #WorstPunEver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense to you, but you still don't seem to get that I advocate satisfying gameplay over hyper-realism. And no, a destroyer class ship can never be as maneuverable as a fighter class ship with considerably less mass. And there will be small ships in the game, as in the released footage, and surely not just for fighting but also for exploration, racing, or whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense to you, but you still don't seem to get that I advocate satisfying gameplay over hyper-realism. And no, a destroyer class ship can never be as maneuverable as a fighter class ship with considerably less mass.

The PvP, as the devs explained it, will be more about how you set yourself up, not how good you are at doing ridiculously flights inside a death star's trenches. Sure, your speed and approach is going to play a role when fighting one on one, but you know, actual space battles with ships will probably be space-jousting. And jet-fighters will probably have to rely on superior maneuverability and scripts to engage in ridiculously, pitch-perfect thruster fires to make flips instead of clumsy rolls (if G forces are not applied in the game's physics), and if not, the devs can go for a water-submerged cockpit model to use the water as cushion for the G forces applied to the pilot, which would make said flips on the go happen. Just don't think of battleships dogfighting. 



The way I get the combat, you will be able to need skill to be effective, just not the CoD skill or button-mashing of WoW. It's going to be about angle of attacks, finding blind spots in enemy batteries of turrets' placements and using your smaller jets to deliver creepling missiles to the enemy power-grid system (if you have the intel on where those are). That's what is so intriguing on the game's PvP for me. It's about preplanning and timing, not horde mentality.


Is there more satisfying thing than knowing you defeated a superior foe by exploiting his weakness in strategy? >_> I mean, look throughout histroy, people pulled these things off time and time again, smaller armies defeating enemies with guerilla tactics.


Unless you are the honorable folk who doesn't go for the cheap shot. To which I say kudos to you sir.


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I'm still on the fence about the combat in this game until I see game play of it but this is very impressive.  I hope they show combat or at least  shooting at something but I will give this game a chance. 

This game is about a whole lot more then just ship to ship combat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...