PC V3.0 Sandbox Siege Sneak Peek

Old Crow said:
Reminds me of Final Fantasy 14's GUI, allowing players to choose what info to show, and even move things around to their liking.
Click to expand...
Cool, I never went past FFI, I was only thinking of the central screen focus. The closest I can
describe how it became to me is, going to the movies, and having a tall person with a lot
of hair sitting in front of me. I can easily see the peripheral of the screen, but my central
focal point is distracting.

I'm good with changing it for my self, I've done it for a long time. But with the options being
added I wanted to see if it was a possibility. For some reason, it feels more natural to look to
the right than the left when I look at the screen.
 
Demonoid74 said:
I would swear that engines USED to have quality levels awhile back!
Click to expand...
Yep, they did. The only thing that came to mind when I first read about the potential
option return is, unless terrain gen speed is somehow increased, that it will mean that
what will actually happen, in order for it to work is.

Everything will have reduced speed, and the top rated turbo-booster will be the same
speed as the vehicles today. So instead of faster levels, it would be including slower
levels, to build up to what is the max already.
 
meganoth said:
There was a question I initially put up to you. I asked you "Why shouldn't they have said that?" because you were not explaining the why. And I added that at least technically there is no problem creating a new road map, because that was the only reason I could think of at that moment.

Instead of answering my question you complained to me that my post sounded like another one I made.
Click to expand...
meganoth said:
Why shouldn't they have said that? A new road map is always possible and it will be as tentative and speculative as the previous one. Plans change, for example when unforeseen events like a ■■■■storm happens.

If they have learned anything from the last road map they could leave out dates at all. But that is their decision, I don't mind anyway. Whatever that road map will contain, there will undoubtedly be inaccuracies as well the farther the road map goes into the future.
Click to expand...

HammerDano said:
This answer sounds alot like your "it was just technically mathematically possible" for them to finish the original roadmap in the time they gave themselves.

I do agree that they should not put dates on the update...I have not been asking for dates...I have been asking for upfront honest communication. Instead of what they did with 2.5


So why should they have probably NOT said anything IMO? because IF plzkthxbye is correct, then TFP cannot honestly put out a updated road map...and "in due time" will be after it ■■■■ing happens.

What plzkthxbye wrote is probably correct.

IF TFP would take the time to tell the community, across the social media spectrum, it would probably help alot. But, they don't feel like they need to. Okay cool...be honest about THAT. just say it...don't leave it to a bunch of defenders on the forum they themselves only sometimes use.

By the way, I see people asking about motives...and where was that info posted, and being told all that was lost in the move. If their social media posts were actually collated on their own forum...they would not be "lost". as it is now...you are collectively asking people to just take "your" word for it ("your" meaning anyone asserting a "trust me bro")

maybe...just maybe, it would be a good time for the brothers to actually step up and clear the air?
Click to expand...
I did answer your question.

But to make it plainer...why did I say one post sounded like another?: in just two pages you gave me arguments why of course it was possible to put out an updated road map but on the next page that it would also be too inconvenient for them to put one out like they said they would. I do get that both things could be true...but...you are not listening to JOEL SAID THEY WOULD.

I am just saying do so or tell us why.
 
HammerDano said:
I did answer your question.

But to make it plainer...why did I say one post sounded like another?: in just two pages you gave me arguments why of course it was possible to put out an updated road map but on the next page that it would also be too inconvenient for them to put one out like they said they would. I do get that both things could be true...but...you are not listening to JOEL SAID THEY WOULD.

I am just saying do so or tell us why.
Click to expand...

Ah sorry, I did miss that. Though here now you say I did say something about it being inconvenient? I said it would be better to leave off dates at all (if you are refering to this), but that doesn't prevent a road map. Nor do they have to follow my advice and leave out the dates, it just has some disadvantages because of lots of people not reading the fine print and the dates usually being missed
 
meganoth said:
Ah sorry, I did miss that. Though here now you say I did say something about it being inconvenient? I said it would be better to leave off dates at all (if you are refering to this), but that doesn't prevent a road map. Nor do they have to follow my advice and leave out the dates, it just has some disadvantages because of lots of people not reading the fine print and the dates usually being missed
Click to expand...
i was referring to this:
meganoth said:
Respectfully, I was not talking about who is to blame. I was talking about whether a new road map was easy to do, when they don't need the details in there set in stone.
Click to expand...
and this:
 
meganoth said:
Internally they surely have a list of features ranked by importance, they also surely know what has to be done first and what depends on other features or is easier balanced with other features. They also have estimates how long each feature might possibly take to develop and who can work on them, so they'll know which features can be done in parallel and might be ready at somewhat the same time.

Now tell me: Would it really be difficult to get from that to a **tentative** roadmap? When you don't have the aspiration to make it rock solid? Not really.
Click to expand...
(sorry it didn't end up on the same message)

I add those two replies together and get the impression that "they could do it" buuuuuuut it would be too inconvenient...because they can't make it rock solid.
 
HammerDano said:
(sorry it didn't end up on the same message)

I add those two replies together and get the impression that "they could do it" buuuuuuut it would be too inconvenient...because they can't make it rock solid.
Click to expand...

Both ways, releasing a road map and not releasing a road map, have pros and cons. I don't think there is a clear winner here, either way they will get flak from part of the players at different times.
 
Ostentatio said:
Is there already something that affects how "healed" you are after respawning? If not, then something to discourage death as a cure-all
Click to expand...
We do indeed already have this. If you set the death penalty to 'injured' on the advanced options tab you keep your debuffs/critical injuries and only get half health and water on respawn.

Technically setting it to permanent death will also discourage dying as a cure all, but that might be a bit extreme.

You can additionally set drop on death to 'delete all' which definitely discourages dying, but on its own that doesn't prevent deliberately dying to remove injury or infection as you could strip all your gear off first.

Personally I play with both settings on, and it makes death recoverable but something you really, really want to avoid.
 
@faatal
I think I found the correct description, for my Gui adjust-ability reference.
I had to go back through my game archives, and read more of the Unity manual
to see if it were under a different name reference. Finally.

It is a programmable "Old name" GUMP, Graphical User Menu Pop-ups, that Unity calls
the UGUI Canvas. Not a re-ask on my part. You gave me a response. I just wanted to
know if that was still, a used hud technique in todays games, or deprecated.

Even the reference that @Old Crow gave me is from 16 years passed. Thank you, that
is what pointed me to the right name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top