Dual Universe, a vaporware competitor with Star Citizen that promises to be the first “build your own ship” space sim MMORPG with planetary landings and base-building has been making waves in the SciFi genre for a few months now since their Kickstarter success back in 2016.  But despite failed promises made to deliver a playable alpha by Q1 2017, their fans are still cheering them on, even while they pull more and more benefits back from their backers.

To be fair, they do have demos they are not releasing yet.

But what became disconcerting was the email that every backer received this morning.

We made a few changes to make [our Kickstarter rewards] roughly equivalent to the original packs once the physical rewards are removed

This was predicated by a statement that players had been “asking” for this for the past week. But something seems off here. The game’s achievements seem to be centered solely on how big they can grow their community and how well they can hype their game.

They seem to be more thrill seekers for attention than actually producing a video game.

Other things seem to rub the wrong way such as the primary storyline in-game is being sourced by fans in competitions held by this developer. Basically, Novarquark gets out of paying $50,000 to each writer, while some fan toils away voluntarily at their keyboard for a few months and hand-delivers them a free-and-clear no-obligation story for the game.

Call it “gamer’s intuition” but something just doesn’t feel right here.

Dual Universe first went up on Kickstarter under the common knowledge that it would be a monthly pay-to-play cycle to help fund their servers, but late last year, they hit their backers with a huge blow when they introduced the use of DAC, or Dual Access Coupons, which is the equivalent of EVE Online’s PLEX effectively turning this game into the same soft-core pay-to-win scheme that turned me, a hardcore EVE Fan, away from the game entirely.

The developers at Novaquark spent days trying to argue with their players that this wasn’t pay-to-win, but is it? There is a simple litmus test for pay-to-win that I’ve employed for years. In any society you have haves and have-nots, I’m sorry if it is offensive, but it is my experience. The question boils down to one simple boolean statement (true or false): Will the haves have any advantage over the have-nots? In other words, if Todd who has a game budget of $30/mo, and his twin brother Tedd (equal in skill and tactics) who has a game budget of $30,000/mo, were to start this game at the exact same time, would Todd have any advantage over Tedd? True: Pay-to-Win. False: Pay-to-Play.

Update on April 18, 2017 @ 7:24pm EST

Because it has become apparent that fanboyism, by its very nature will attempt to do anything including changing the narrative by the changing of definitions and meanings of terms, I’m going to add some clarity to the abovesaid litmus test.

First, in any competitive PVE game or PVP game, you have losers, which means you also have winners.  While the “win” in pay-to-win doesn’t directly mean “to win the game” it means to “get ahead” of your opponent.  When a system is added to a game which allows any means of getting ahead to involve the use of real world currency to affect even the pace at which that can occur, it is paying to get ahead, which means it is paying to win.

So, in the case of EVE Online, where Tedd buys 40,000,000,000ISK while they both start the game and while Tedd then visits the market and buys all officer fit items, all skills books and injectors, ammo, and insurance, he will have a clear advantage over Todd who starts with no ISK. Only the most flamboyant fanboy would say otherwise.  And on that note, Tedd can afford to lose any ship he buys or progresses to, as many times as his real-world wallet will allow, while Todd must take extra care and be extra conservative in combat which means that being sometimes the best defense is an aggressive offense, that means Todd would be disadvantaged.  I see this in shooter games, I tried to play Battlefield once, but it became unnerving pretty quick to see players jump out of cover and rush a fortified position.  In the real world where you don’t have the ability to “respawn” this simply doesn’t happen, and their ability to do this to a group of vets that hunkers down became advantageous to the players who had never seen combat.

To anyone unfamiliar with EVE Online, ISK is the in-game currency.

 

The developers of Dual Universe has admitted freely, “Yes, those who buy considerably more DAC for trade on the market would be able to purchase ships at a much faster rate”.

This is the same in EVE. Players, especially the fans, will argue this is untrue and that because DAC and PLEX can be freely traded on the market, allowing everyone ‘access’ to it on the in-game economy, that it somehow voids it from the Pay-to-Win stigma. The argument rails through as if ‘access’ is somehow a technicality and a loophole in the definition of Pay-to-Win while Pay-To-Win remains the spirit thereof and not a definition.

But there is an issue much greater than the moralities of pay-to-win vs pay-to-play, a real concern is born the moment you ask yourself “what if?”

As in, “What if I buy $30,000 worth of DAC, and they suddenly go out of business, do they have a Trust for that in accounts payables or am I just out of $30,000?”

The answer is, you’re just out of $30,000. According to their Terms of Service, anything you buy in the game has no cash value. This isn’t uncommon and they’re not the only ones as CCP also does this with EVE Online’s PLEX system. For these companies, it means that every dime you pump into DAC or PLEX goes directly to the company’s cash accounts and carries with it zero liabilities unlike buying a subscription that carries many consumer protections under the MasterCard and Visa Merchant Agreements.

But what this boils down to, is you are buying a promise when you buy DAC or PLEX that, however much you buy, the game will be there for you to redeem it (or for your friends or trade partners to redeem), but it is just a promise, and judging by the way the Terms of Services are written, there are no plans or accounting to ever ensure that the receipts for DAC or PLEX sales will or could ever be rendered through service. In the world of accounting, when you pre-pay a service, it is a liability for the company and they owe that amount to you in the form of money or services rendered. However, for DAC and PLEX, it is a no-liability sale, there is no service that has to be rendered other than a virtual delivery of the item you bought. In every other industry, this is called overselling and is viewed in many countries as a fraud and it is illegal.

All in all, this is one of the broadest ways for a company to ensure that they are not accountable to you, the consumer.

The acceptance of this behavior by the fans of Dual Universe is called the fanboy’s paradox. A fanboy is an avid fan of any product or service. You can be a fanboy of a presidential candidate, or you can be a fanboy of a game or development team. The term itself is very broad and encompasses fans that go beyond basic fandom to prop-up an entity. Fanboys, by their nature, will do anything within their power to change the narrative of the community’s view of a game to inflate its reputation on a false platform of positivity. Developers, like a vicarious guardian to a child, inherently sees little wrong in their creations which fanboys unknowingly exploit creating a large, yet false bubble of acceptable development directions. As previously stated, fanboys will do anything including omitting the facts and truth to affect a false narrative of positivity about a game even while the development path proceeds in a very undesirable direction.

This bubble, however, generally pops when objective gamers notice they’ve been deceived causing them to publish factual reviews and findings in public. The deception that these objective players experience is often cause for their reviews to be overtly negative and more often than not, perceived as strongly disrespectful to the developers of the game. In fact, fanboys generally label these community members as “haters” of the game. This circular behavior then seems to cause the developers to ignore this feedback and use the fandom feedback as the go-to source for how they should implement changes in their development direction and roadmaps. Slowly, and sometimes quickly, the development budget begins to leak like a sieve. The game always suffers as a consequence while the developers of the game reel back, confused to how it all went wrong wondering ‘what’s next’ for their careers. All the while fanboys sit quietly in disbelief that their beloved game has failed, yet continue to viciously attack anyone who points them as the progenitor of the game’s demise, sometimes even pointing back to the devs with tired arguments of, “It was their game, they shouldn’t have followed my advice then”, while it was they, the fanboy that consistently repelled any critique about the game in which illuminated the game under any negative or neutral light.

All developers should be well aware of the fanboy’s paradox and ensure they steer clear of it to ensure a healthy deployment of their games.

Sadly, we have all bore witness to this paradox for many games that have hit Steam’s Greenlight. As the developers tend to latch onto these fanboys and allow them to steer their ship in development, we see games that become abandoned such as Miner Wars and Starforge on the heels of strong criticisms that begin to pierce the fanboy created bubbles and violently shake the developers back to a state of reality.

After a severe backlash from Dual Universe’s announcement on Kickstarter, showing the funding level drop nearly $200,000.00 USD in twenty-four hours, they drove forward on the advice of many of the fanboys’ word and barely met the goal that secured them their Kickstarter funding. I do sincerely send my congratulations for that achievement. I thought at this point, the community had sent a clear and loud message to the developers, but that was not the case. After reaching out to the Novaquark team, they responded to my inquiry of the bad experiences players have had with PLEX in EVE Online of fly-by-night PLEX’ed corporations:

Do you have something to back your declaration about PLEX system being inefficient besides your own words? If it’s the case, we are interested in this data.

And then continued:

[other than] your (unfortunate) experience on EvE Online.

EVE Online is the first and last, until Dual Universe to ever employ the use or plan the use of tradable game-time.

However, in my first attempt to reach out after I canceled my pledge to explain why they responded in kind calling my withdrawal a “threat” and hunkering down on the stance that DAC was there to stay:

However, loud voices and threats of unpledging without solid reasons will not affect game design decisions.

It is very obvious that the Novaquark team is very defensive about DAC, likely, over-defensive. The problem here isn’t game development directions, but the funding model that they have quite obviously already etched in stone. That is a bad omen for Dual Universe, as it may turn out to be a great game, but the loathers of Pay-to-Win that EVE Online lost will ultimately and absolutely avoid this game. And everyone should take note that EVE Online started considering Free-to-Play only months after the introduction of Plex. The math doesn’t look all that great for Dual Universe, but I do hope, for their sake, it is simply a calculation error.

Why is it a paradox? Fanboys are usually fans to a game, as explained. The last thing you ever expect from a fanboy is that they would sabotage the game that they’re a fan of. But under close examination, they do, which is gives us the paradox of an absurd and contradictory statement being a testable fact.

66 Replies to “Dual Universe: A Victim of Fanboy’s Paradox?”

  1. Well,
    It appears as though the author of this article Chip Patton, was and probably is a pathological liar who almost ruined me and the website that I have been using to keep me sane.

    I accidentally met Chip while I was looking for people to write reviews through Steam. He was very opinionated and could get under the skin of a game, or so it seemed.

    Chip, it turned out, was an “expert” in the very program used to make this site. I used to develop it in HTML but I felt that I couldn’t let people write for the site because most people don’t know HTML and finding a secure way to have a community write for a site was a little expensive. In comes word press with its simple drag and drop site building tools. A monkey could do this.

    So long story short. Chip sees my site and makes some very good suggestions to increase its usability and also told me about some fantastic plugins that would increase the user interactivity about the site. The issue was that there was a price tag for a specific theme and options associated with this theme that put it out of reach.

    Chip messaged me several times making some great suggestions so I just levelled with him. Saying that I broke my back and I do not have the money to buy these things. I run the site to stay sane.

    Chip told me about his problems, he was a combat vet and damaged his hips and legs, he seemed to understand pain and believe me, I am in a lot of pain, there are things he said that only someone in pain, or who has read a lot of forums about pain, would know.

    Later that same day, Chip says here you go. He had bought the full theme and just sent it to me! I was in shock. I couldn’t believe someone would do this. I had no idea how to install it and make it work so Chip said, look, I bought this because I want to give back. I have made my money with my web development company, and I can help, so I am going to help you.

    Over the next few weeks Chip built the site, he transferred content from the old site, he wrote Ts and Cs, he made the site look incredible, he also said to me that I should not be spending so much money hosting the site when he could do it for free and then told me about his all SSD servers that he OWNED and he would happily give me 50GB of space, unlimited data and email addresses everything. He handled the transfer from my old hosts and I was so impressed at his kindness.

    But, one day after switching I noticed a MASSIVE drop in visitor numbers, at the time we were getting around 14,000 visitors per day, this dropped to 10s of visitors per day. Chip told me that my old hosts were not counting things properly, they must have been counting bots and based on my figures he suspected that it had been happening for ages. I was destroyed, had I really worked hard for all this time so that bots could trick me into thinking the site was getting more popular?

    I started looking more deeply into the stats and it looked to me like the time on site number was dropping too. Why would bots have a different time on site that was longer on average than 10 human visitors per day?

    I used a few site speed checkers and found that the site was taking over 57 seconds to load. I cleared the cache on my browser (why I hadn’t thought to do this before I will never know) and sure enough, the site was taking so long to load anything that people must have thought it was down.

    I messaged Chip and he said I must have done something to my router because the site was loading in under a few seconds for him, way faster than when he first tried to access it. He was working on optimisation though and said that once he is finished it will be fine. Then he sent me an imgr link showing the site ranking No1 on Google for this Article. It was a Google page and it seems Chip wasn’t familiar with the way Google works in that it will give you personal suggestions.

    I asked Chip some questions I knew the answer to and it seems like he didn’t understand some basic things. The next day after a sleepless night the site was down. I took this opportunity to move my site off of his servers and back to a web host.

    I spent the next few days trying to work out what was up with the speed of the site. I got the load times down to 17 seconds but really needed to get under 4.

    I contacted Chip as I realised the theme was out of date and the auto updater had his details in and wasn’t working. He didnt get back to me so I contacted the company who made the theme and asked for a log in for this theme that Chip had purchased. They had no record of his purchase.

    I decided to switch themes but the integration of the theme he used was so heavy I was looking at t at days of work just to switch over. I built a test site and started to make the changes, switching themes and moving content.

    A few days later and my site was down. I couldn’t gain access to it. I managed to get into the control panel and read an email that my site was shut down as it was being used for a phishing scam.

    I started trying to rectify the situation but in the end I was told that the site was gone and I couldnt get access to it as it would be illegal.

    After 48 hours I found out about something called a nulled package. In wordpress this basically means a cracked version of a theme or plugin.

    Chip had not purchased the theme, he had stolen it. He then went ahead and used that theme on my site, this meant it was not being updated and in fact was open to hackers from day one.

    I spent a week convincing people that I was not a crook. I got the site back, I repaired and fixed it and then spoke to a PR person as I realised it was time to change. We changed the name of the site, the look, the feel, everything about it and now, we have a stable visitor count of over 21,000 people per day and climbing.

    Chip Patten/Michael Wells is a liar and an idiot. He knew what this site meant to me, he knew that I cannot work for anyone else and still did the things he did. Here is the odd thing, there was nothing in it for him, he couldn’t and did not gain from this other than have someone thank him. He jeopardised my well being so that he could pretend he was clever.

    This man demonstrably stupid and I too was stupid for believing him.

  2. Actually, i’m from ARK, which you also called “pay to win” in your steam review befopre you ragequit. But since you’ve repeated this behaviour in more than one game, it doesn’t really surprise me that you mix them up from time to time. Since you mentioned this space game, i went to check it out and as it turns out, rotors and pistons are not actually disabled in it, which only further proves that reality doesn’t really care about your opinions.

    1. Actually, i’m from ARK, which you also called “pay to win” in your steam review befopre you ragequit.

      Again, apply the litmus test. If the shoe fits, wear it.

      Funny, I’ve never called Space Engineers pay to win 😉

      i went to check it out and as it turns out, rotors and pistons are not actually disabled in it

      And that’s why you should have checked a few more sources before you spoke and let your dribble fall out everywhere.

      Dedicated servers now come pre-configured with pistons and rotors disabled. Server admins have to manually enable them in the block counts now for them to be allowed on a dedicated server. This is effectively disabling them while allowing an admin override. And yes, we’re talking about a game who has published the source code for the game, nothing can be technically “disabled” without an admin override, but when the developers set everyone’s server to 0 rotors and 0 pistons after a patch and then tell you “Unless you want to deal with Clang, keep this at 0” it is effectively disabled.

      Aren’t you the one that got banned from the Ark forums because the mods told you to chill like 8 times? I recall that someone got triggered, I think it was you, when I pointed out you had the expansion and players were reporting that you were trolling non-Scorched servers with p2w dinos.

  3. @Lethys: “It’s because this is your definition, I could also say that your hatred (same argument as fanboi) doesn’t allow you to accept other opinions on that matter. You’re completly right: You won’t change my mind, and I can’t change yours. You are biased in your own way and completly ignore what I (and the DU community) already did (including arguments with NQ about certain topics – because, you know we too have a critical opinion about DU – which you can’t see because you only go for “YOU ARE FANBOIS, YOU ARE WRONG!”)”
    You might be happy to read that quite a lot of others – me included – came to pretty much the same conclusion by running up against Chip in other games. The best thing to do is to let him have his right and move on to the next game; lucky for us, reality doesn’t seem to care much about his opinions in the big picture 🙂

    1. You might be happy to read that quite a lot of others – me included – came to pretty much the same conclusion by running up against Chip in other games. The best thing to do is to let him have his right and move on to the next game; lucky for us, reality doesn’t seem to care much about his opinions in the big picture

      Yeah, I remember you from Space Engineers and if you recall correctly I made three prophecies:

      1) The game needed a new netcode would be the magic fix for the dedicated server. It was argued by one of the more popular modders that, “The netcode is not some magical bullet, the server will have to be more authoritative”. Guess what, a few weeks later they released a patch that made the DS authoritative. It did nothing. I had people fight with me on that profusely, but as soon as they added a new netcode, 99% of the multiplayer problems were fixed overnight — it was a “magic bullet”. While I don’t claim to be a game programmer or have any proficiency in C#, I am a C++ programmer, and I’m proficient enough at assembly and large-scale calculations that as a high school teenager I worked for IBM and wrote programs for lock stepping AS400’s. The netcode logic of lock stepping AS400’s vs video games is eerily similar, the difference is one is commercial and written in assembly, the other is it is consumer based and written in C#. Let’s have a look at Interstellar Rift — a game where all physics calculations are stepped in lockstep — not only does that game have no synchronicity issues, rubber banding, etc, but cheating is impossible. If you understand lock stepping then you know why cheating is impossible and understand the power of step checksums.

      2) Pistons and Rotors would have to be disabled because Havoc is not the greatest physics engine for large-scale collisions or multiple movable and tethered grids. Most indie games only use havoc for avatar/character physics and use open source libraries for other large-scale physics. And what has happened? Rotors and Pistons are now disabled.

      3. In-game scripts would have to be taken out or disabled because C# is not an optimal scripting language nor is the game setup in a way to properly thread in-game scripts, nor are many of the dictionaries thread safe. They now have an option to disable scripts and are, almost every month, pulling back more API features from scripters and replacing them with more thread-safe dictionaries.

      At each turn, I met heavy resistance from the fanbois calling me wrong, a liar, etc, and each time it turned out I was absolutely right, and not only that, even your failed fanboi attempts to quell my, Vader, and VanGoughComplex’s arguments before it reached the devs failed and the game became a lot more stable because of it. An individual with the ability to learn would take away from this that just because you disagree with someone doesn’t make them wrong.

      1. [Quote]) Pistons and Rotors would have to be disabled because Havoc is not the greatest physics engine for large-scale collisions or multiple movable and tethered grids. Most indie games only use havoc for avatar/character physics and use open source libraries for other large-scale physics. And what has happened? Rotors and Pistons are now disabled.[/quote]

        And from your review of SE:

        [Quote]When Space Engineers released in December of 2016, it was said by KSH that the rotors and pistons were fixed and optimized. They were right — sort of — they were disabled. That is the way in which this development studio approaches critical bugs: It is an at-will fiasco and if they don’t feel like working on it, they simply do not. [/quote]

        So you suggested this in the first place (to disable them – your magical prophecy) and then you complained about it? Gg. You should work on consistency

  4. Hey this is a great post. It really made me think about DU differently. However some of the comments were defending the game(s) yet dont fit into your supposed fanboy attitude. The psychology behind it is really interesting to me, I would love to talk to you more about this and fanboy attribute.

    1. I would like to remind you as counsel for this website and IGR Magazine that misrepresenting oneself is a violation of the Terms of Service which you agreed to and became binding upon your use of this website which a link to the above-stated Terms of Service is visible from every page on this website to include standard error pages.

      If you provide any information that is untrue, inaccurate, not current or incomplete, or the Company has reasonable grounds to suspect that such information is untrue, inaccurate, not current or incomplete, the Company has the right to suspend or terminate your account and refuse any and all current or future use of the Website (or any portion thereof).

      Being a sockpuppet merits execution of this provision.

        1. I am unable to specify without a privacy release, you can however offer up a privacy release, and I can further explain or you can use the contact form on our website to have a private conversation about it.

          1. Yes, it can also be an anonymous/temporary email that you can provide if you would like me to further explain. For privacy reasons I cannot go into detail about it.

  5. Hey,

    It was an interesting post. However, up until a last year about. EVE was not pay to win. I have played eve for nearly 14 years. So how wasnt it pay to win. Is that until Skill Injectors came out your couldnt win by paying. For two reasons:
    – Skills took time to train. So you cant win by paying more. You could replace your ships, get new items. But you couldnt gain any skill points from paying more.
    – Secondly its a sand box game. There is no way to “Win”. Well except that joke of leaving the game.

    Now for DU. I recently found the game (i havent been in the community for a month yet). But i can say this. You are an asshole. From your comments that is easy to see. Now Ive been on reddit for a long time. And there are so many shit-posts and other things like that. But your replies to comments really show how you act as a person. So im glad you left DU. Means i dont have to deal with you in game or on the forumns.

    Thanks
    Dark

    1. Certainly not the first or last time I’ve been called an ass hole. I’ve taken to wear it as a badge of honor every time I melt a snowflake.

      Far as “skills”, it is simply untrue. Again, have a look again at the litmus test. Two players, playing for the same length of time, will the one that just purchased 20 Plex to sell have an advantage over the one that did not? Well, unless your willing to deny the existence of officer and dark space fit modules, the answer is obviously, yes. I’m not saying that skill injectors are less pay to win, but Eve, by means of Plex was and is pay to win.

      Excuse misused words… I’m on my phone.

      1. They still need the skills to fitted and used. Anyway even if they do have an advantage that still isnt pay to win. As A. you cant win B. if you do have all the officer and deadspace modules you can and will still die. Also having a good faction/deadspace/officer fit ship wont Greentree that you will win. If you want to be a diplo, or a Webteam guy than buying 20 plex wont do anything to further that goal. Lastly you also have to factor in the market. Do people want to sell their modules (some would rather keep them), how much would you get from PLEX (has increased huge amounts since 2009).

        to sum it up
        – Buying plex will not help with some goals
        – Buying plex does not mean you can survive. Only that their are a chance that you could have better modules (on the other hand people will try to kill you more for your loot or to troll you and put on reddit.)
        -EVE IS A SANDBOX. THERE IS NO WAY TO WIN. THERE IS NO PAY – TO – WIN.

        1. They still need the skills to fitted and used.

          Not officer and dead space fit modules. Tech 2, yes, but in more cases than not, officer and dead space modules are better than tech 2, and require no extra skills to use over the normal modules.

          A. you cant win

          I wonder why there are Killboards and Warboards in EVE that say otherwise.

          if you do have all the officer and deadspace modules you can and will still die.

          Not against an equal-in-time player with a lesser wallet size unless you’re afk.

          Buying plex will not help with some goals

          Almost all goals including gaining the skill-books you were just arguing about

          Buying plex does not mean you can survive.

          Actually, it means you can die as much as you want, and simply rebuy your ship and insurance, if you have enough ISK.

          EVE IS A SANDBOX. THERE IS NO WAY TO WIN. THERE IS NO PAY – TO – WIN.

          If there is no way to win, then do explain how it is possible to lose. Because, as logic dictates, the term is boolean, which means in order to have a loser, you must also have a winner.

          1. “”EVE IS A SANDBOX. THERE IS NO WAY TO WIN. THERE IS NO PAY – TO – WIN.”
            If there is no way to win, then do explain how it is possible to lose. Because, as logic dictates, the term is boolean, which means in order to have a loser, you must also have a winner.”
            You lose if you hate the game or people make you hate it.

            Here are some articles about winning EVE: (note all of them talk about how an individual wins EVE rather than a distinct goal.
            https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1kxpdr/what_do_you_consider_as_winning_in_eve/?st=j1oo2kel&sh=4220f668
            https://imperium.news/winning-eve-life/

            Here is something about EVE being pay to win (before Skill Injectors came out)
            https://steamcommunity.com/app/8500/discussions/0/558755529536034080/?l=german

            Here are links to sandboxes so you can read up before replying:
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_video_game_terms#Sandbox_game

            “”A. you cant win”
            I wonder why there are Killboards and Warboards in EVE that say otherwise.”

            Killboards mean nothing. If you enjoy fighting and you die a bit you can still “Win” EVE because you still enjoy the game and how YOU play it. “Winning EVE” is about personal goals not about a set goal like Halo or WoWs. Here is a link to a blog that talks about it:
            http://nevillesmit.com/blog/2013/5/6/how-do-you-win-eve

            “”Buying plex will not help with some goals”
            Almost all goals including gaining the skill-books you were just arguing about”
            Some of them yes.

            “”i you do have all the officer and deadspace modules you can and will still die”.
            Not against an equal-in-time player with a lesser wallet size unless you’re afk.”
            Wrong. You can die from being out maneuvered (look at rooks and kings for great stuff like this). You can die from choosing the wrong ship type (Battleship wont be able to kill a frigate). You can even die from not making friends. If the other person can make friends they can call in people to help them.

            You Sir. Are amazing at taking selective quotes (or not replying to the correct thing). But when you look at it closely you are obsessed with DU. Could be a few reasons for that. Also your entire argument is flawed.

          2. Killboards mean nothing.

            Bullshit called.

            The most popular PVP corps in EVE require your kill-board stats to show significant superiority.

            https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4pmgm5/eves_killercorps_active_pvp_to_kill_ratio/

            That is how those corps have extremely high KD ratios.

            You can die from being out maneuvered

            I almost fell out of my chair laughing.. Out maneuvered in a fishbowl physics game.

            This, is the hilarity of fanboys.

            I was going to stop at that because I completely lost track of logic when I read that falling out of my chair, but I’ll just leave it at this:

            you are obsessed with DU

            I’ve made 2 posts concerning Dual Universe in the past year. How many is it you have made? Now, with that now fresh in your mind, let’s examine the definition of obsessed:

            `preoccupy or fill the mind of (someone) continually…`

        2. Bullshit.
          Killboard only mean stuff if you want them to mean stuff. Would a PVE person or a miner care about killboards?
          You are very restricted in your view. And you are completely obsessed with DU. Your entire argument is about pay to win but its not. Because paying to win requires a way to win. But that is in your mind. I have a titan, three supercarriers. I have never PLEXed and havent brought a subscription in years. Does that mean ive won the game. I dont think so. Its all about your view. If you view having a great KB and you have one. Then you have won. In your mind. Someone else might not give two shits about having a great KB but instead wants to own a super. There is no way to win the game. You can win in your head. But not the game itself.

          1. Would a PVE person or a miner care about killboards?

            Please do explain how one PVE’s in EVE Online. You’ve officially peeked my interest. Oh, please don’t tell me you attack NPC’s, because when the threat of another player attacking you is very real, it is PVP. So, please tell me about this magical safe-haven in EVE you found where PVP cannot happen.

        3. Erm, firstly if you want to shoot someone you can anywhere. But your ship will also be gone. Secondly if you go to any sites /belts you can rat (shoot NPCs). I never said you couldnt get away from PVP. I said that some people dont care about KBs. You are trying to justify a very loose and awful argument which keeps changing. Just admit ive won this one. Some of your others points still stand and i will admit your post did make me look more deeply into which sub i would want but on this argument you have lost.

          1. Also their isnt there wont be PVP 100% of the time. How do you think people make ISK? Is PLEX the only way for you? You can attack NPCs and people do. Would you kill your ship to shoot everyone mining or PVEing

          2. As you might guess, this will be my last reply to you on that matter because as I said, at this point you’re just being obvious and deliberate. I enjoy intelligent debate but when you at least pretend to be competent about a game and then entirely ignore the primary element of the game to forcefully bend the argument to your narrative all the while changing the goal posts each time you reply like a child begging their parent for a toy “but, but, but, but, but, but, but” is all I hear at this point. So, until you can speak with some willful intelligence, tootles!

          3. You obviously have never ganked in EVE. Let me tell you how you do it.. You get 2 or 3 people, outfit catalysts as cheaply as possible, have 2 people sitting backing watching, and then blow someone up that’s been mining for 8 hours and have the 2 watching pick up the loot and salvage while Concord settles your debt. That means PVP everywhere. But your cherry picking knickknacks here and there because it suits your narrative, and at this point I’m quite convinced it is absolutely deliberate.

  6. And the absolute irony of it is, most of my post was meant to be a sobering revelation to those very one’s that attack it. They are so blind by fandom they are incapable of construing as criticism meant to help the game.
    Sorry I’m on my phone and I don’t work well with autocorrect.

  7. Or you just want to give your opinion on clearly false statements?
    Or the author wants to discredit you too by finding some specific error?

    And as I said from the beginning: this fanboi argument doesn’t serve anyone. It’s just a killing argument for a discussion

    1. And as I said from the beginning: this fanboi argument doesn’t serve anyone. It’s just a killing argument for a discussion

      Negative! It doesn’t serve the fanboy and you have proven over and over again that the definition snags you at every turn, but not Matt who is a fan, not fanboy.

      1. I’ll answered your question up there, dunno why it doesn’t show up. I’ll leave you at this (yeah i know, I’m a small little pesky fanboi who doesn’t want to argue and who runs away now), in your own little world with your little haterbois and some website no one is using. HF writing stuff, wish you all the best

        1. You could have failed the CAPTCHA or something there, but it wasn’t deleted or moderated. Moderation queue shows 0 and the moderator actions show nothing on this page (it would have “1 deleted” if someone were to have deleted your comment).

          As for the rest of your reply, as I explained, Matt is your one advocate here (well to fans, not fanboys) and you seem to have even irked him which to anyone that knows Matt understands that one loss of an endorsement seals your fate.

          As far as my intent. Honestly, as I said below, the news post was meant to be a sobering wake-up call and to point out that the unicorns and rainbows from this “honeymoon” euphoria you have isn’t real, and if you don’t wake up from that and start engaging in critical feedback, you’re going to ruin the game you love, and it will be explicably your fault. Do I hate the game? No. I love the SciFi genre of games and I can’t name one that I genuinely hate. You can have a look at my steam library, I don’t show any interest in games I hate — zero (which is games like Battlefield, Counter-Strike — and Matt knows my reasons to why I dislike/hate these games [it’s related to my military service]) I do dislike some games in the SciFi genre (like Starforge) and I dislike what the developers are doing to those games (like Miner Wars), but more to the point, I don’t hate them and I will offer the facts as I know them and my most honest opinions in my reviews on those games.

          If that’s something you can’t deal with, then you need to follow Matt’s advice and do some self-reflection.

          You’re not going to want to hear this but I’m just going to put it out there anyway: If I do review this game, from what I’ve seen, I would give it a glowing review except for gameplay in which I would rate it down for Pay-To-Win, but even with a score of 4, the game’s rating would be in the 90th percentile. I’ll make that simple: I would give this game a great review. But I bet you don’t care about that, it doesn’t fit your narrative. But to your speculation, I likely will not ever review this game, because I simply won’t touch pay-to-win and I’ve saved a lot of money since I made that choice to blanketly boycott all pay-to-win games.

          And I’ll just leave this right here: If NQ removed DAC from their game, you could bet your bottom dollar I’d play it, and it would get a 10/10 from what I have followed to-date.

          Edited for clarity and context

        2. Actually, this website is connected with JetPack I just realized as I dug through trying to find if there was anyone who deleted the comment. The thing is, even if your comment is deleted, JetPack still saves it. I’m not sure how to give non-admins access to that but a comment from you that isn’t present here simply doesn’t exist on our website’s records or on JetPack’s records (WordPress).

  8. Absolutely correct. If you can’t accept criticism about your game, there is an inherent problem with the person’s reasoning. If you can’t accept criticism about your writings, same logic applies (which is why I’ll be editing another news post as the developer of that game made some suggestions about his interview I’m going to follow).

    Also just to go out on a limb I did join them in their fanboy circlejerk. It was fun, and as you might expect, I was immediately berated, hell even before I joined.

    The topic came up about me letting the developers know in a linked forum post that I was pulling my commitment because they changed the parameters and the description of the Kickstarter from a monthly payment model to a DAC payment model (and explained it), and I was told that was a “threat” even by those in that channel. Obviously, the English language does not allow for the past tense of a threat. Nother words, I can’t say I have beaten you up, and that be a threat. I can say that I have done it in the past and WILL do it in the future, and that becomes a threat.

    To say that I have pulled (past tense) my funding, that is called a cause of action and pointing that out met heavy resistance and trolling. I then proceeded to tell some of the calmer ones there about my experience with PLEX and mentioned that the last I remembered PLEX was “around 2b”. Immediately I was attacked and called a liar, with citations that plex hadn’t ever exceeded 1.2B in the past year. Well, I wasn’t talking about the last year and I did find posts that supported my argument that plex did exceed 1.5b in 2015 and 2016 at some of the major trade hubs. But the point being there is the double standard, as I wrote in my article that they will employ the use of lies and deception to change the negative narrative and that’s EXACTLY what happened. I’ll be posting logs and perhaps another news article about this tonight as a followup.

    1. “Absolutely correct. If you can’t accept criticism about your game, there is an inherent problem with the person’s reasoning. If you can’t accept criticism about your writings, same logic applies”
      Exactly – that’s why you were trolled because you cited the WRONG website (http://nosygamer.blogspot.co.at/2015/02/the-rabbit-hole-looking-at-snapshots-of.html) where they put the WHOLE VALUE in MILLION DOLLARS of plex sold in jita. You then claimed this as proof that plex were sold at 1,6 BILLION ISK (Million billion, Dollar ISK). Every community would’ve trolled you for that one. Then claiming “Lethys has proven over and over again this community is toxic” is just the most hilariously fail I’ve ever read (One guy whole community)

      I have no problem with critique – if facts are provided. You did nothing more than just throwing “alternate facts” at us and then complaining that we debunked them.
      Give us facts to believe in why PLEX are P2W.
      Give us reason to believe, that you know what you’re talking about (which you don’t atm)

      1. Give us facts to believe in why PLEX are P2W.

        I’ll make a deal with you. Answer my original litmus test for DU and explain how it must be false without any way to poke a hole in your logic, and I’ll DELETE this post. If you can’t or if I poke a hole in your logic, you must admit you are employing the use of defamation by a malicious means.

        Just in case you forgot:

        The question boils down to one simple boolean statement (true or false): Will the haves have any advantage over the have-nots? In other words, if Todd who has a game budget of $30/mo, and his twin brother Tedd (equal in skill and tactics) who has a game budget of $30,000/mo, were to start this game at the exact same time, would Todd have any advantage over Tedd? True: Pay-to-Win. False: Pay-to-Play.

        Edit: added the first quote for context.

        1. You can’t apply that logic here because money is not the only driving factor in a sandbox game, there are many more reasons for players to do something.
          A few problems with your example:
          – After some time both have the same amount of skills. They can’t change that fact in any way. Skills are the major driving force in a sandbox MMO like DU, because nothing is as valuable as a character who can fly every ship to it’s maximum. No advantage here for the rich guy
          – If Tedd dumps 30k USD per month into DU at the release – nothing will happen. No one will have enough money to buy DACs, as the game only started 1 month ago. There is just not enough currency in the game. No advantage here for the rich guy
          – DU is 5 years old. Tedd starts dumping 30k USD into DU per month (~1600 DACs/month). He will make a fortune with most of those DACs, getting huge amounts of Quanta (if we look at EVE’s plex market and take all serious Buy orders, one can sell about 1200 DACs making ~10^12 Quanta). Instantly, prices will fall, because huge amounts of DACs are thrown at the market, as we saw in a less huge manner in eve (https://crossingzebras.com/the-great-plex-crash-of-yc-118/). You can’t quite predict what’ll happen next but I think we can all agree on one thing: if he does that every month (possibly it’s enough if he does it for 1 or 2 months), prices of DACs will stay down. Because there are more DACs on the market than players in need of one. This also applies to a scenario where you throw less DACs at the market. Prices will drop – so you can’t go on like this forever.
          So whatever the case, Tedd now has more Quanta than Todd. What to do with it? Buy some nasty ship, which you can fly, with some nasty guns, which you can use! Seems like P2W, doesn’t it? I fully agree with you, that being able to buy ships/equipment for RL money would be P2W – if he would play this game alone or only against his brother. That’s the wrong assumption here, where your logic goes awry. Only in comparison with his brother it seems like it’s a P2W mechanic but then again only in comparison with my brother I’m always the smaller person.
          Your logic fails at this exact point because you can’t just isolate two solo players in a MMO. You can’t always compare laboratory results to the outside world because certain states/situations just never occur.
          DU is a first person and in order for you to fly a bigger ship, you need a crew. Even if you buy the most advanced ship there is, you can lose it to some junk fighter because your crew is shit. So your comparison really is about starfighters and because this game relies on massive interaction and rebuilding society, I expect starfighters to be relatively cheap so everyone could buy them with ease (but those are only my guesses). Even if you can’t buy them, it depends COMPLETELY on the skillset of the players themselves. If Todd is a master craftsman and can build a highly efficient ship but Tedd is bound to buy the most expensive (“best” ship so far) on the market – who will win? The one with new technology, new LUA scripts, new maneuvers, better/more efficient armor placing or the one just buying the most expensive ship?
          Does a rich player playing 24/7 have an advantage over others? Does a poor player playing 24/7 have an advantage? Does someone with better understanding of gamemechanics/LUA scripts/building/…. have an advantage? Does someone with better social skills have an advantage? Does some rich player have an advantage via selling DACs?

          I’d say yes to every single question but that doesn’t mean it’s P2W.
          It depends on so many factors in a sandbox MMO if you are better than anyone else (read: that you win, every time you see them), that you just can’t blame it on DACs. As we’ve seen in EVE with the whole MBC/IWI wars, ingame money can heavily influence the outcome of a battle (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyQOhZYRswc) but so can a group of determined players who pool their resources. It depends on the players to win a battle. Yes they’ll probably lose ground, their base and a lot of ships to another force relying on RL money and DACs to win. Does that mean they’ll always win (which would be P2W)? No, because players can counter them with more sophisticated scripts, better ships, better tactics and so on.

          To come back to your question:
          “In other words, if Todd who has a game budget of $30/mo, and his twin brother Tedd (equal in skill and tactics) who has a game budget of $30,000/mo, were to start this game at the exact same time, would Todd have any advantage over Tedd?”
          No, he wouldn’t because Todd clearly invests less money than Tedd and thus he can NEVER have an advantage (even a slight one) in your scenario with only two players with the same tactic/time/skill.

          Just in case you forgot:
          “Answer my original litmus test for DU and explain how it must be false without any way to poke a hole in your logic, and I’ll DELETE this post.”

        2. “There is a simple litmus test for pay-to-win that I’ve employed for years. In any society you have haves and have-nots, I’m sorry if it is offensive, but it is my experience. The question boils down to one simple boolean statement (true or false): Will the haves have any advantage over the have-nots? In other words, if Todd who has a game budget of $30/mo, and his twin brother Tedd (equal in skill and tactics) who has a game budget of $30,000/mo, were to start this game at the exact same time, would Todd have any advantage over Tedd? True: Pay-to-Win. False: Pay-to-Play.”

          So lets first establish the game. DU is a sandbox, you can do nearly whatever you want in it.

          So in answer to your test.
          No. and Yes.
          First lets say Tedd wants to be a fleet member/PVP person. The answer is yes. With that extra budget you might have the advantage of extra mods, better ships, etc. But remember two things. First you need people to crew those larger ships. Secondly they need to be built by players which could take months.

          Now lets say. Tedd wants to be a diplomat instead of a PVP person. Would having a 30,000 budget a month help that. No. Why not? Because you cant buy off everyone. You wont be able to use that 30,000 budget to help you in diplomacy. (Ive been a diplomat in EVE for 7 years so trust me on this one.)

          Now lets say Tedd wants to be a Web team guy. Yes it would help. Why? Because he can hire people to make an awesome website. He can pay for hosting. People to build the website.

          Lastly lets say Tedd wants to be a logistics guy it could help him buy a bigger ship. But todd could go to the org that they are in and they could provide him with a ship to use. Does it make him ahead. No.

          Your test is inconclusive for an MMO sandbox game because there is so many possibilities

        3. So let’s first establish the game. DU is a sandbox, you can do nearly whatever you want in it.

          A sandbox with PVP. What’s funny is the folks over at StarTrek use an eerily similar argument, that because there is no PVP there is no way to ‘win’. The point being every fanboi for their games tries to change the definition of something, ANYTHING, to change the narrative.

          This is a very flimsy argument, and changing the definition and spirit of a term is a far stretch. Since the term was first coined “win” has never meant literally, “win”. It has meant since I can remember, “by means of getting ahead of the competition”.

          Those in StarTrek use the same argument saying, “There is no PVP, so there is nothing to win”. By your logic, games can’t be pay-to-win, unless there is a “game over” screen.

          I would say that qualifies as poking a hole in your logic. Matt, what say you?

          First you need people to crew those larger ships.

          Say what? The ships only require one capsuleer.

          Secondly they need to be built by players which could take months.

          I don’t think I’ve ever seen a ship that wasn’t already at one of the major trade hubs – with the exception of caps.

          I’m sorry but your argument is leaking…

          Now lets say. Tedd wants to be a diplomat instead of a PVP person. Would having a 30,000 budget a month help that.

          Oh, really? And where do you suggest that Tedd starts his grinding in order to earn the first bit of money necessary to learn the diplomacy skill so it can actually be used in the game for a purpose other than blowing smoke up people’s asses? Oh that’s right, missions/PVP.

          Lastly lets say Tedd wants to be a logistics guy

          Somehow I think you don’t know what logistics is about in EVE, I’ve actually done it. Modules, the better the merrier. Why? CODE/Gankers. If you don’t have armor rolls out the ass, you’ll be ganked and all profit and investment lost. So, if Tedd became a logistics guy and Todd became a ganker, Todd would most certainly have an advantage over Todd in this condition.

          Hole poked.

          Now lets say Tedd wants to be a Web team guy.

          Interesting. Because provision 7B of the gives us:

          7B. Selling Items and Objects

          You may not transfer, sell or auction, or buy or accept any offer to transfer, sell or auction (or offer to do any of the foregoing), any content appearing within the Game environment, including without limitation characters, character attributes, items, currency, and objects, other than via a permitted Character Transfer as described in section 3 above. You may not encourage or induce any other person to participate in such a prohibited transaction. You may not use, transfer or assign any game assets for games of chance operated by third parties. The buying, selling or auctioning (or any attempt at doing so) of characters, character attributes, items, currency, or objects, whether through online auctions, newsgroups, postings on message boards or any other means is prohibited by the EULA and a violation of CCP’s proprietary rights in the Game.

          And provision 3 gives us:

          You are not permitted to transfer your Account to another person. If you wish to discontinue your Account please refer to section 6. of this EULA. You may transfer a character from your Account to another account, either belonging to you or another person. This transfer option is available from the EVE Online Account Management web site https://secure.eveonline.com/ and is subject to fees and the following limitations: You may not offer to transfer characters except your own, or act as a “broker” or intermediary (for compensation or otherwise) for anyone wishing to transfer or obtain characters. The transferee will obtain all rights to your character in a single transaction, and you will retain absolutely no control or rights over the characters, items or attributes of that character. You may not transfer any characters whose attributes are, in whole or in part, developed, or which own items, objects or currency obtained or acquired, in violation of the EULA.

          Any character transfers or attempted transfers not in accordance with the foregoing terms is prohibited and void, and shall not be binding on CCP. A transfer or attempted transfer of a character is entirely at the risk of the parties to such transaction. CCP is not liable to any person (whether transferor, transferee or otherwise) for any acts, omissions, statements, representations, defaults or liabilities of the parties in connection with such a transaction.

          Legal translation: You cannot exchange in-game goods for real-world services. So your suggestion violates the Eve Online EULA, other words (and the intent and spirit is clarified in 6b of the “Ban Policy“, “b. Intentionally creates contracts that cannot be completed through normal game mechanics or abilities.”), if the transaction isn’t limited to strictly in-game items and services, you cannot receive in-game payment for that. The EULA’s provision also covered “items” which includes PLEX.

          Your test is inconclusive for an MMO sandbox game because there is so many possibilities

          No, you’re trying to change another narrative to include the spirit of “Pay-to-Win” which at its most strictest definition means to pay for an advantage.

        4. For some reason I can’t comment on your most recent post arguing my points. So ill do it here. I was talking about DU (and specified that) not eve. So you might want to write a new response.

        5. Are you suggesting that DU won’t have PVP? Because as I recall the developers said it would which means the game will have many parallels to EVE Online. Furthermore, there will be the possibility to lose your ship in pvp, which means you can “lose”, thereby and as dictated by logic, there must be a winner.

          You’ll have the comment on the lowest possible (in hierarchy) post to reply now as the site only supports 4 nested/threaded replies. That is because, under most logical debates, it only takes 4 replies to end the debate unless someone uses a fallacy or the argument becomes circular. I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions from that.

        6. Oh look what I found! Seems the link spam caused Askimet to flag it as spam and completely hid it from the site, hell I had to go login to Askimet and restore it.

          You can’t apply that logic here because money is not the only driving factor in a sandbox game, there are many more reasons for players to do something.

          No, no, don’t change the narrative, answer the question. The litmus test I provided is based on the experience of over 30 MMO’s and in each MMO it has never provided a false positive. The litmus test is testable and produces the same result upon each test.

          Applied to EVE Online: True
          – Buying Plex is an advantage
          – Skill injectors is an advantage (according to another user here)
          Applied to World of Warcraft: True
          – WOW Tokens is an advantage (according to another user here)
          Applied to Star Trek Online: True
          – Trading Dilithium for Z-Coins is an advantage
          – Cstore is an advantage
          – Lockbox keys is an advantage
          – Lifetime subscription is an advantage
          Applied to Defiance: True
          – Lockboxes are an advantage
          Mech Warrior: True
          – Premium Mechs are an advantage
          DDO: True
          – Pay for levels is an advantage
          Rapellz (2008): True
          – Pay for items is an advantage
          PlanetSide (2015): True
          – Pay for premium guns/armor is an advantage
          EverQuest (2004): False
          EverQuest (2016): True
          – Pay for experience potions is an advantage
          – Pay for max level (heroic) character is an advantage
          – Pay for platinum is an advantage
          EverQuestII (initial release): False (stopped playing the entire franchise when the $medCa$h store came out)
          Vanguard(2008): False
          Rift (2012): False
          Elder Scrolls Online (2014): False
          Elite Dangerous (2016): False
          – items are fluff only (though some space-camo paints are debatable)

          And applied to Dual Universe’s proposed DAC system: TRUE

          After some time both have the same amount of skills. They can’t change that fact in any way. Skills are the major driving force in a sandbox MMO like DU, because nothing is as valuable as a character who can fly every ship to it’s maximum. No advantage here for the rich guy

          Let’s make a wager. We’ll both create two new characters in EVE Online, you will use $0.00 for your account, and I will turn in all the plex I bought in-game on that account before I realized how unfair it was, and I’ll get about 10,000,000,000ISK to start out with for that character. You’ll have 1 hour to prepare and so will I. After which we will meet at a pre-determined location and have 3 rounds. The loser of 2 or more rounds comes here and admits they are wrong and apologizes to the other for spreading false information.

          DEAL? I bet you won’t accept that offer because a) you are well aware that ISK is the driving factor of diversity for equal time-investment, b) you know damn well you won’t be able to replace anything you earn in that 1 hour due to lack of plex including insurance if you buy something other than the rookie ship and c) you won’t be able to afford thermal paste or ammo which means you’re setup to fail as the game intends vs a plex player.

          If Tedd dumps 30k USD per month into DU at the release – nothing will happen. No one will have enough money to buy DACs, as the game only started 1 month ago.

          Is that supposed to be a valid argument? Becuase pay-to-win won’t be effective at first, it is therefore not pay-to-win? Because a running car in park clearly means it will never move again.

          There is just not enough currency in the game. No advantage here for the rich guy
          – DU is 5 years old. Tedd starts dumping 30k USD into DU per month (~1600 DACs/month). He will make a fortune with most of those DACs, getting huge amounts of Quanta (if we look at EVE’s plex market and take all serious Buy orders, one can sell about 1200 DACs making ~10^12 Quanta). Instantly, prices will fall, because huge amounts of DACs are thrown at the market, as we saw in a less huge manner in eve (https://crossingzebras.com/the-great-plex-crash-of-yc-118/). You can’t quite predict what’ll happen next but I think we can all agree on one thing: if he does that every month (possibly it’s enough if he does it for 1 or 2 months), prices of DACs will stay down. Because there are more DACs on the market than players in need of one. This also applies to a scenario where you throw less DACs at the market. Prices will drop – so you can’t go on like this forever.

          You’re assuming that someone that makes a six figure income is as ignorant as you are in playing the markets to get what they want. The likelihood of someone having a six figure income not knowing how to play the markets is about as likely as finding a Gray on Mars. But beyond all of that, the person that can buy enough DAC to dictate the market clearly has a crystal clear advantage over the ENTIRE GAME meaning they can manipulate that entire market as they see fit. Thanks for pointing that out.

          Your logic fails at this exact point

          Clearly it is my logic that is flawed /sarcasm.

          Actually, by your own admission, you put together a prima facie case that proved a huge purchase of DAC can manipulate the market for the entire game. Here is what is so painful though, you cannot even see what you did and I bet your next rebuttal will be to try and change that narrative by any means necessary, which proves, beyond any doubt that you are a bonafide fanboy. I don’t know what else to say, I’ve tried over and over again to “wake you up”, “to bring it to your attention”, but I can only explain it, I can’t understand it for you.

          That one statement you made, and what I just pointed out, nullifies the entirety of your argument which makes it futile to keep replying to your argument beyond this point.

        7. “No, no, don’t change the narrative, answer the question.”
          It’s because this is your definition, I could also say that your hatred (same argument as fanboi) doesn’t allow you to accept other opinions on that matter. You’re completly right: You won’t change my mind, and I can’t change yours. You are biased in your own way and completly ignore what I (and the DU community) already did (including arguments with NQ about certain topics – because, you know we too have a critical opinion about DU – which you can’t see because you only go for “YOU ARE FANBOIS, YOU ARE WRONG!”)

          “Let’s make a wager. We’ll both create two new characters in EVE Online… (blabla)”
          This is DU, read again

          To the other points you made
          As i wrote in that answer: there are a few problems with your argument because DU will actually START at some point and for that time your logic fails. This was never an argument anti/pro P2W but merely a fact – in the beginning noone will sell DACs. It’s a logical chain which you clearly didn’t see.

          “You’ll have the comment on the lowest possible (in hierarchy) post to reply now as the site only supports 4 nested/threaded replies. That is because, under most logical debates, it only takes 4 replies to end the debate unless someone uses a fallacy or the argument becomes circular. I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions from that.”
          If some stubborn people clash, that’s obviously NOT enough. Only because you live in your own world and think that you can debunk anything within 4 replies (which you can’t and neither can I) doesn’t mean that’s anywhere near practical or realistic

          And I just copy paste what you said because it fits right to you too:
          Here is what is so painful though, you cannot even see what you did and I bet your next rebuttal will be to try and change that narrative by any means necessary, which proves, beyond any doubt that you are a bonafide haterboy. I don’t know what else to say, I’ve tried over and over again to “wake you up”, “to bring it to your attention”, but I can only explain it, I can’t understand it for you.

        8. “So let’s first establish the game. DU is a sandbox, you can do nearly whatever you want in it.
          A sandbox with PVP. What’s funny is the folks over at StarTrek use an eerily similar argument, that because there is no PVP there is no way to ‘win’. The point being every fanboi for their games tries to change the definition of something, ANYTHING, to change the narrative.
          This is a very flimsy argument, and changing the definition and spirit of a term is a far stretch. Since the term was first coined “win” has never meant literally, “win”. It has meant since I can remember, “by means of getting ahead of the competition”.
          Those in StarTrek use the same argument saying, “There is no PVP, so there is nothing to win”. By your logic, games can’t be pay-to-win, unless there is a “game over” screen.
          I would say that qualifies as poking a hole in your logic. Matt, what say you?
          First you need people to crew those larger ships.
          Say what? The ships only require one capsuleer.
          Secondly they need to be built by players which could take months.
          I don’t think I’ve ever seen a ship that wasn’t already at one of the major trade hubs – with the exception of caps.
          I’m sorry but your argument is leaking…
          Now lets say. Tedd wants to be a diplomat instead of a PVP person. Would having a 30,000 budget a month help that.
          Oh, really? And where do you suggest that Tedd starts his grinding in order to earn the first bit of money necessary to learn the diplomacy skill so it can actually be used in the game for a purpose other than blowing smoke up people’s asses? Oh that’s right, missions/PVP.
          Lastly lets say Tedd wants to be a logistics guy
          Somehow I think you don’t know what logistics is about in EVE, I’ve actually done it. Modules, the better the merrier. Why? CODE/Gankers. If you don’t have armor rolls out the ass, you’ll be ganked and all profit and investment lost. So, if Tedd became a logistics guy and Todd became a ganker, Todd would most certainly have an advantage over Todd in this condition.
          Hole poked.
          Now lets say Tedd wants to be a Web team guy.
          Interesting. Because provision 7B of the gives us:
          7B. Selling Items and Objects
          You may not transfer, sell or auction, or buy or accept any offer to transfer, sell or auction (or offer to do any of the foregoing), any content appearing within the Game environment, including without limitation characters, character attributes, items, currency, and objects, other than via a permitted Character Transfer as described in section 3 above. You may not encourage or induce any other person to participate in such a prohibited transaction. You may not use, transfer or assign any game assets for games of chance operated by third parties. The buying, selling or auctioning (or any attempt at doing so) of characters, character attributes, items, currency, or objects, whether through online auctions, newsgroups, postings on message boards or any other means is prohibited by the EULA and a violation of CCP’s proprietary rights in the Game.
          And provision 3 gives us:
          You are not permitted to transfer your Account to another person. If you wish to discontinue your Account please refer to section 6. of this EULA. You may transfer a character from your Account to another account, either belonging to you or another person. This transfer option is available from the EVE Online Account Management web site https://secure.eveonline.com/ and is subject to fees and the following limitations: You may not offer to transfer characters except your own, or act as a “broker” or intermediary (for compensation or otherwise) for anyone wishing to transfer or obtain characters. The transferee will obtain all rights to your character in a single transaction, and you will retain absolutely no control or rights over the characters, items or attributes of that character. You may not transfer any characters whose attributes are, in whole or in part, developed, or which own items, objects or currency obtained or acquired, in violation of the EULA.
          Any character transfers or attempted transfers not in accordance with the foregoing terms is prohibited and void, and shall not be binding on CCP. A transfer or attempted transfer of a character is entirely at the risk of the parties to such transaction. CCP is not liable to any person (whether transferor, transferee or otherwise) for any acts, omissions, statements, representations, defaults or liabilities of the parties in connection with such a transaction.
          Legal translation: You cannot exchange in-game goods for real-world services. So your suggestion violates the Eve Online EULA, other words (and the intent and spirit is clarified in 6b of the “Ban Policy“, “b. Intentionally creates contracts that cannot be completed through normal game mechanics or abilities.”), if the transaction isn’t limited to strictly in-game items and services, you cannot receive in-game payment for that. The EULA’s provision also covered “items” which includes PLEX.
          Your test is inconclusive for an MMO sandbox game because there is so many possibilities
          No, you’re trying to change another narrative to include the spirit of “Pay-to-Win” which at its most strictest definition means to pay for an advantage.”

          This is what you said in reply to me answering your test. IT IS WRONG. BECAUSE I DID THE TEST FOR DU. STOP BEING AN IDIOT AND ACTUALLY ANSWER MY ANSWER WITH LOOK AT THE RIGHT GAME. I told you this already you didnt change it. So that thing you posted should be about DU not EVE.

          Also you might want to fix you site.

  9. I remember when you announced you were leaving the Dual Universe community. Honestly, I was happy to see you go. I don’t know what your personal vendetta is against DU but your attempts to damage it are flimsy at best. You can call me a fan boy all you want (as Lethys mentioned, you set yourself up for that blanket rebuttal), but at the end of the day that is not an argument. The game is yet to come out, and I will make my judgments then, bad or good. Personally, I’ve seen the game (a pre-alpha build) and played around with it, met JC and talked with him. I’m optimistic about the game but we will see when it actually launches (in 1 to 2 years). Now, with that being said you may expect me to come and preach why they game is fantastic, but I’m not going to do that. I’m going to explain why you are the very opposite of fantastic. Much more than that, you are inaccurate and irrelevant (just for grins, I tried to see if I could find this page by googling the article, but even by using the exact title and date of publishing, nothing pops up). You want to sling insults and mud? Fine by me. Let’s get started. You have several statements in this “article” (that’s a generous description) that are plainly false.

    First of all: “After a severe backlash from Dual Universe’s announcement on Kickstarter, showing the funding level drop nearly $200,000.00 USD in twenty-four hours” Really? They lost $200K in 24 hours? I don’t remember that, mainly because it never happened. http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/1949863330/dual-universe-civilization-building-sci-fi-mmorpg/ As you can see from the graph, the level of funding increased steadily and never experienced any major drops.

    Second: “EVE Online is the first and last, until Dual Universe to ever employ the use or plan the use of tradable game-time.” You mean first and last, other than some minor game like World of Warcraft https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/news/18141101/introducing-the-wow-token but come on, that game only has 5+ million subscribers. It’s barely worth mentioning. Now, whether it is a good system or not is up for debate and personal opinion, but it only takes a simple google search to see that such a system is par for the course when it comes to modern MMOs.

    Now that we have gotten past some of the blatant false statements. Let’s get on to the ones that are more dumb than factually incorrect.

    “Other things seem to rub the wrong way such as the primary storyline in-game is being sourced by fans in competitions held by this developer. ‘ I do hope you understand that DU is a sandbox game, right? As in, there is no central story in the game. The only “story” that exists is the premise, the set up, which was written by the company and can be summarized in one sentence: The Earth was going to blow up so a bunch of people built giant space ships and flew away to restart human civilization in a different part of the galaxy. Bam. There is the storyline. It explains how the player got where they are. Everything else is up to the players themselves. Hence the competition, which allowed players to add more fluff to their own backstories but would not affect anything in game.

    “The game’s achievements seem to be centered solely on how big they can grow their community and how well they can hype their game.” I hope you realize they are still developing the game, right? And that they want to sell their game, and to do that they need to advertise and have a community that wants to play it? That is how businesses work: you make a product -> you advertise it -> you sell it. I would think that with you “being a small business owner [yourself]” you would grasp this, but the fact that you don’t definitely goes a long way in explaining why your business has remained in the “small” category.

    “It is very obvious that the Novaquark team is very defensive about DAC, likely, over-defensive.” Actually, from the sounds of it, they were very receptive to see if you had any substantial basis to your claims, and when you failed to provide any evidence they dismissed you as the loud (yet empty) voice that you are. In trying to prove that they are listening to the wrong voices, you are showing that they are doing a good job of ignoring the wrong ones. I expect you to respond that “but DACs are P2W!!1!!1″, but don’t you find it funny that everyone you bring that up with is unfazed by your ‘logic” and insists you are wrong? At what point do you begin to suspect that your argument is the wrong one? Or are you so arrogant to think that you are right and the rest of the world is wrong?

    “But what this boils down to, is you are buying a promise when you buy DAC or PLEX that, however much you buy, the game will be there for you to redeem it (or for your friends or trade partners to redeem), but it is just a promise, and judging by the way the Terms of Services are written, there are no plans or accounting to ever ensure that the receipts for DAC or PLEX sales will or could ever be rendered through service.” So let me get this straight, they are a promise, but they aren’t a promise? Which line are you going with here? It’s one or the other here. Really, they are a promise but they are a bit more specific. They are a promise that they are redeemable for a month of free play if the game is still running. If I buy a gift card for a free smoothie from a smoothie shop and that shop goes out of business, I can’t come back three years later and demand that they make me a smoothie. Not all transactions are two ways: you can’t sell your burger back to the burger shop. If you buy $30k worth of DACs and the company happens to go out of business, congratulations, you are an idiot who is out $30k. Let me give you a piece of advice: don’t buy $30k worth of DACs.

    I could go on for a long time, but it’s late and you aren’t worth it.

    1. I remember when you announced you were leaving the Dual Universe community. Honestly, I was happy to see you go.

      I understand; I was the strongest critic of the game, and you didn’t like that.

      I don’t know what your personal vendetta is against DU but your attempts to damage it are flimsy at best.

      Damage? I think you misinterpret people’s actions quite a bit. The reason for this is to inform, not harm. I even included some positive in the article. That is called being objective. Obviously, you’re incapable of that but I bet you could be with a game like StarForge, but then again, I would be curious to know how much you fanboyed that before CodeHatch abandoned the project.

      You can call me a fan boy all you want (as Lethys mentioned, you set yourself up for that blanket rebuttal), but at the end of the day that is not an argument.

      Already there has been one here to somewhat disagree with me but also agreed that offering critique is important, that’s not a fanboy. When you’re incapable of allowing analysis “to stand,” you’re most certainly a textbook “fanboy”.

      The game is yet to come out, and I will make my judgments then, bad or good.

      Correct. I reserve my opinions (reviews) until it comes out and I play it (which I doubt I will, as I haven’t played EVE except to turn over my Corp and such since I understood the damage of PLEX).

      Personally, I’ve seen the game (a pre-alpha build) and played around with it, met JC and talked with him. I’m optimistic about the game but we will see when it launches (in 1 to 2 years).

      That’s great; I just hope you can find the game to be a fair and level playing field with those of us who make six figure incomes.

      Now, with that being said you may expect me to come and preach why they game is fantastic, but I’m not going to do that. I’m going to explain why you are the very opposite of fantastic.

      Correct, you must change the narrative.

      Much more than that, you are inaccurate and irrelevant (just for grins, I tried to see if I could find this page by googling the article, but even by using the exact title and date of publishing, nothing pops up). You want to sling insults and mud? Fine by me. Let’s get started. You have several statements in this “article” (that’s a generous description) that are plainly false.

      Yes, this article was just posted today. And when it updates very often the Google Bot must crawl a few times before it shows up in the caches (Plus I think our sitemap doesn’t update, but every 4 hours, so it is possible that Google has only now been alerted that this post is here).

      But, once my content has time to fraternize with the search engines a bit, it looks like this:

      Interstellar Rift Review

      Uh oh, that looks like the #1 result beating RPS.

      First of all: “After a severe backlash from Dual Universe’s announcement on Kickstarter, showing the funding level drop nearly $200,000.00 USD in twenty-four hours” Really? They lost $200K in 24 hours? I don’t remember that, mainly because it never happened. http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/1949863330/dual-universe-civilization-building-sci-fi-mmorpg/ As you can see from the graph, the level of funding increased steadily and never experienced any major drops.

      And you have linked aggregated data. MANY, and I suspect including yourself, saw the funding level take a huge drop in the month of or around October when DAC was finally explained.

      Second: “EVE Online is the first and last, until Dual Universe to ever employ the use or plan the use of tradable game-time.” You mean first and last, other than some minor game like World of Warcraft https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/news/18141101/introducing-the-wow-token but come on, that game only has 5+ million subscribers. It’s barely worth mentioning. Now, whether it is a good system or not is up for debate and personal opinion, but it only takes a simple google search to see that such a system is par for the course when it comes to modern MMOs.

      I do appreciate that; I don’t follow WOW, so I did not know that WOW had gone to this model. However, after a tiny bit of research, WOW seems to have been delt a massive blow in both PR and popularity since the WOW Tokens:

      https://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/05/world-of-warcraft-designer-gets-real-about-complaint-that-blizzard-doesnt-listen/

      Now that we have gotten past some of the blatant false statements. Let’s get on to the ones that are more dumb than factually incorrect.

      I must congratulate you; you found one error! But I’m not sure that entitles you to make the statement plural yet. Being that the context of the declaration was the dialogue between myself and NovaQuark, it remains spiritually right because not only did EVE have problems with PLEX but as it seems, I now have another reference to yet another game, that has the same model, that has the same issues. As I said above, I REALLY DO appreciate that!

      I do hope you understand that DU is a sandbox game, right? As in, there is no central story in the game. The only “story” that exists is the premise, the set up, which was written by the company and can be summarized in one sentence: The Earth was going to blow up so a bunch of people built giant space ships and flew away to restart human civilization in a different part of the galaxy. Bam. There is the storyline. It explains how the player got where they are. Everything else is up to the players themselves. Hence the competition, which allowed players to add more fluff to their own backstories but would not affect anything in game.

      Funny, there were some mentions of stories, quests, story competitions, and a cannon. Oh, it’s on NQ’s their Twitter feed.

      I hope you realize they are still developing the game, right? And that they want to sell their game, and to do that they need to advertise and have a community that wants to play it? That is how businesses work: you make a product -> you advertise it -> you sell it. I would think that with you “being a small business owner [yourself]” you would grasp this, but the fact that you don’t definitely goes a long way in explaining why your business has remained in the “small” category.

      Then, riddle me this: Why are their accomplishments not centered around their developmental achievements?

      “you make the product” — And, where is that product? You just enumerated an ethical business model, yourself, of “make the product”, then “advertise it”, then “sell it”. YOU Said it, not me. However, THIS COMPANY is in TOTAL REVERSE.

      Oh yes, I’m a small business owner of a software development firm, and before my ‘accountant’ wife would let me run my own business, I had to go and study business and contract law first. Technically, I could go down and take the NCBAR and become a lawyer, but I hate to disappoint you in the fact that I just can’t lie enough to be a lawyer. I would enjoy a lot more debate on this subject, indeed!

      they were very receptive to see if you had any substantial basis to your claims, and when you failed to provide any evidence they dismissed you as the loud (yet empty) voice that you are.

      I hate to break it to you but there has been a colossal group of people that’s been complaining about DAC, and they do so with good reason, historical reason, and your attempts to dismiss that fact; well, read the news article again.

      In trying to prove that they are listening to the wrong voices, you are showing that they are doing a good job of ignoring the wrong ones.

      And here is where the fanboyism comes to a head — what you just said is your opinion, just like it is the view of others that DAC is evil, but you dismiss that and declare your opinion is fact. Here is the difference between your statement and my statement of DAC: I used references to show how historically and traditionally DAC-like systems are pay-to-win, and I then said I disliked pay-to-win and carried on making it very obvious that my very pejorative statement was indeed an opinion.

      but don’t you find it funny that everyone you bring that up with is unfazed by your ‘logic” and insists you are wrong? At what point do you begin to suspect that your argument is the wrong one? Or are you so arrogant to think that you are right and the rest of the world is wrong?

      Actually, I do find it funny — because the same folks that supported PLEX when CCP was kicking the idea around started to loathe it as soon as they figured out someone else had a bigger wallet than they did. So yes, it was hilarious. The forum posts on EVE’s forums are still very evident. And as soon as you to figure this out and become a victim of it, I’m willing to bet that either you will crawl back into your hole or begin to speak against it. I’ll be sure to be here to remind you of your comments. Now, it is entirely possible that you make a six figure income too, and that you make much more than I do, in which if that is true, I fully expect that you’ll not complain. Instead, you’ll use that income to troll the poor folks that can barely afford their internet.

      So let me get this straight, they are a promise, but they aren’t a promise? Which line are you going with here? It’s one or the other here. They are a promise, but they are a bit more specific. They are a promise that they are redeemable for a month of free play if the game is still running. If I buy a gift card for a free smoothie from a smoothie shop and that shop goes out of business, I can’t come back three years later and demand that they make me a smoothie. Not all transactions are two ways: you can’t sell your burger back to the burger shop. If you buy $30k worth of DACs and the company happens to go out of business, congratulations, you are an idiot who is out $30k. Let me give you a piece of advice: don’t buy $30k worth of DACs.

      You are now transversing my domain, the `legal domain`. Yes, promise but not a promise. I promise you $1,000,000, but without a legal contract to bind me to that, I don’t owe you $1,000,000. Does that make any sense?

      You should have a look: http://massivelyop.com/2016/02/15/eve-player-uses-28000-of-skill-injectors-to-create-max-character/, $7,000 that player dumped into EVE Online in one go.

      I could go on for a long time, but it’s late and you aren’t worth it.

      I believe with the amount of time you spent writing this threadnaught if you had anything else to add, you very well would have. But, once again, “you aren’t worth it” is exactly what I have described in my news article: Change the narrative, by any means necessary.

  10. Stop editing your comments while I answer them – this is just rude and confusing. If you’re interested in a constructive discussion, join us on discord: https://discord.gg/YcHVYGZ

    Funny side note about this reply you edited:
    “But as I continue to read your feedback, it becomes more apparent that you indeed did respond to this thread because it seems to have called you out. While I was in the US Army and downrange in Afghanistan, I remember my First Seargent firing at a waddie and later we heard screams. His comment was, “If you toss a brick in a pack of dogs, the one it hits barks the loudest.” I don’t rightly know why we all found that funny as hell, maybe it was just combat stress at the time, but today it seems to be a proveb that beautifully describes your motivation for posting.”
    You wrote this AFTER you visited my profile on the DU forums (I have a screenshot) and saw, that I’m a very active member there…..
    Such comments and rude behaviour (like editing posts and deleting them) doesn’t add anything to a constructive discussion. You complain about fanbois doing everything they can to harass and call out on others – while you do the exact same thing.

    1. Actually, I edited that after I re-read the post you linked as I said in that post as I made that apparent here:

      But as I continue to read your feedback, it becomes more apparent that you indeed did respond to this thread because it seems to have called you out.

      which was edited very shortly after it was posted, before you replied, but just before.

      But, talking about being a fanboy about it, I could have brought up a lot of stuff that I refrained from doing. I can, if you would like.

    2. To be honest, the developers have already said, clearly that DAC was “in stone”. Therefore any discussion on the matter cannot be constructive, only destructive.

  11. You’re concept of “review” is flawed. You don’t need to play anything to give a review of anything. A review consists of this;

    “a formal assessment or examination of something with the possibility or intention of instituting change if necessary”
    or
    “examine or assess (something) formally with the possibility or intention of instituting change if necessary.”

    Whether you think you’re giving a “report” about the giving facts, you have already made up you’re mind about Dual Universe and have proceeded to make it available to your readers. This is essentially what a review is.

    1. You’re concept of “review” is flawed. You don’t need to play anything to give a review of anything. A review consists of this;

      And yet our website requires our authors to first play a game before reviewing it just like IGN and RPS.

      This is essentially what a review is.

      I was waiting for your next reply to actually be a breakdown of factual errors, but being as you have failed on your second admonishing comment, I’m going to assume that you’re just going to keep subscribing to the burden of proof fallacy.

      1. Back to you’re initially question of trying to change the narrative…
        Oh, not at all, I’m actually seeing past all the fancy BS to cover up what is essentially a review of something that has yet to be released.

        Giving key facts -if the can even be proved right- that Dual Universe is just a victim of fanboy hype is already putting a bad review on Dual Universe, whether it’d be positive or negative. You could have easily chosen not to do this article, but you did, why?

        Another flaw in this “review” is that you have essentially blocked all those responding to this article, challenging your opinion and marked them fanboys of the game.

        1. Giving key facts -if the can even be proved right- that Dual Universe is just a victim of fanboy hype is already putting a bad review on Dual Universe, whether it’d be positive or negative. You could have easily chosen not to do this article, but you did, why?

          Did you intentionally leave out the point you were replying to or are you that daft? If you say nothing, fanboys ruin the game. If you speak up, at least you might be able to jar a few awake and start pointing the developers in the right direction. That’s the point. But I know, it is a criticism of your beloved game so it is therefore wrong and evil regardless of the motivation which is the summary of what you just said.

  12. “The acceptance of this behavior by the fans of Dual Universe is called the fanboy’s paradox”
    With this statement (and the following ones) you kill every kind of communication and discussion. Everyone defending DU will end up being a fanboy, true or not. You just stigmatize players and call them out because they like something you don’t – that’s not a healthy basis for a discussion.

    “The game’s achievements seem to be centered solely on how big they can grow their community and how well they can hype their game”
    Ofc, they want to spread the word and they want to earn money – every company wants to earn money.

    “They seem to be more thrill seekers for attention than actually producing a video game.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUTyiMjjf7w&t=54s

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yG5DtZcdd8
    You can cleary see the progress – so this renders your statement untrue and false

    Every player can and should think for himself if DACs/PLEX are P2W. To me, such a mechanic isn’t.
    – After 1 Year, both of your examples have the exact same amount of skills. No money whatsoever could change that (unlike in EVE)
    – They won’t be able to buy new ships and fly them instantly (because of skills)
    – If I’m rich and don’t need to go to work, I can play 24/7. Also an advantage because of money…but not P2W.

    And for all the readers here who aren’t familiar with the forums:
    https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php/topic/9854-my-community-has-withdrawn-our-pledges/
    This is his original thread. Read it

    1. Everyone defending DU will end up being a fanboy, true or not.

      You seem to be defending DU, however, you’re not yet fitting the mold of a fanboy in the sense it was used in the fanboy’s paradox Why? Because you’re engaging and not just resorting to methods to simply change the narrative by ignoring factual context. If you would have read a little further down in what you quoted, you would have seen this very clearly.

      But as I continue to read your feedback, it becomes more apparent that you indeed did respond to this thread because it seems to have called you out. While I was in the US Army and downrange in Afghanistan, I remember my First Seargent firing at a waddie and later we heard screams. His comment was, “If you toss a brick in a pack of dogs, the one it hits barks the loudest.” I don’t rightly know why we all found that funny as hell, maybe it was just combat stress at the time, but today it seems to be a proveb that beautifully describes your motivation for posting.

      Ofc, they want to spread the word and they want to earn money – every company wants to earn money.

      They have already earned quite a bit of money. Their first objective at this point is to deliver on their liabilities. So I fundamentally disagree with you there being a small business owner myself.

      And for all the readers here who aren’t familiar with the forums

      Indeed. Read it! Everyone really should give it a thorough read.

      1. They have already earned quite a bit of money. Their first objective at this point is to deliver on their liabilities. So I fundamentally disagree with you there being a small business owner myself.
        They already do deliver monthly videos – which is more than you get from certain other devs at this stage of development. So yes, nothing bad there to let crowdfunding continue – which creeps up every day by only a few € btw, nothing like SC

        How so? Because they are making promises regardless of failed commitments?
        Watch the videos and you’ll see the progress. They deleted the last stretch goal (which you complained about) to avoid feature creep – which happend to SC.

        You have not read their statements on DAC then, it will be exactly like EVE – buy with real money and trade for in-game currency. And what about the rare modules like in EVE?
        Nope – there are no Skill injectors in DU – THAT mechanic is P2W. Because you can buy skills with money.
        Rare modules are a thing, I have to agree here, and I would be glad if you shared that source you have there. I’m not aware of any “upgrades” or “rare modules” you could buy with RL money.

        1. They already do deliver monthly videos

          They were not paid to deliver videos. They were paid to deliver a game in Q1 2017 which passed in March 2017. Not unless they are going to tell us their fiscal year ends in April and Q1 begins in July which is ridiculous.

          Nope – there are no Skill injectors in DU – THAT mechanic is P2W

          Skill injectors are still rather new in EVE, the problem I have isn’t with that (because I haven’t evaluated it and can’t fairly critique it), but PLEX and anything like it, I can — especially after seeing how corporations were able to start up and dominate in EVE purely on PLEX and bought characters (with PLEX).

          1. Skill injectors are still rather new in EVE, the problem I have isn’t with that (because I haven’t evaluated it and can’t fairly critique it), but PLEX and anything like it, I can — especially after seeing how corporations were able to start up and dominate in EVE purely on PLEX and bought characters (with PLEX).

            Well the thing is: EVERYONE can dominate eve….. EVERYONE can buy characters….WITHOUT PLEX. It’s just based on in-game money. If you earn enough ingame money, you can do that stuff too. It doesn’t neccessarily HAVE to come from PLEX (RL-money). It’s not something you get to do exclusivly because of RL money. If it would – THAT would be P2W.
            While people with more money have an advantage (and I fully agree there), it doesn’t mean it’s pay to win.

          2. Well the thing is: EVERYONE can dominate eve….. EVERYONE can buy characters….WITHOUT PLEX. It’s just based on in-game money. If you earn enough ingame money, you can do that stuff too. It doesn’t neccessarily HAVE to come from PLEX (RL-money). It’s not something you get to do exclusivly because of RL money. If it would – THAT would be P2W.
            While people with more money have an advantage (and I fully agree there), it doesn’t mean it’s pay to win.

            Hang on now. Are you saying that you don’t believe this game will have the ability to buy characters with plex or you know for a fact it will not?

          3. Hang on now. Are you saying that you don’t believe this game will have the ability to buy characters with plex or you know for a fact it will not?
            You were talking about EVE – so I gave you my opinion on EVE (as I played it for 8 years)

            Fact about DU: each account can have 3 characters. NQ hasn’t yet released the EULA so we DON’T KNOW for sure if
            – you are allowed to have multiple accounts
            – selling your character will be allowed

          4. NQ hasn’t yet released the EULA so we DON’T KNOW for sure if
            – you are allowed to have multiple accounts
            – selling your character will be allowed

            You’re right, they have not, but they have said they were following EVE’s PLEX model, which does allow for those terms in the EULA.

          5. “You’re right, they have not, but they have said they were following EVE’s PLEX model, which does allow for those terms in the EULA.”
            Which doesn’t mean they follow their EULA – those are COMPLETELY different things and only your assumptions – not facts

        2. In the spirit of clarity and hopefully, this will be received more as illuminating rather than insulting, I’ll explain in some better detail the difference between a destructive fanboy and a fan. As I said, fanboys go beyond traditional fandom to employ the use of lies, factual omissions, and even defamation and ad hominem to silence any critique of their beloved game. A fan can still look at a game objectively and agree with critical feedback and even advocate for a critic of the game in that things may need to change in order to ensure the majority of the players are happy and their game remains healthy. A fanboy cannot do this because they’re inherently already psychologically programmed to attack the critic calling their claims false even without a lick of research.

          If you were to have said, “DAC could very well be a huge problem but I don’t think it would be as bad as you say”, I’d most definitely say you’re not a fanboy. When you can accept a fact even though it doesn’t matter because your opinion overrides it, the mere fact that you accept that fact means that you’ll be more than able to be objectionable and fuse empathy in finding how that the problems affect others.

          Honestly, I’m a fan of Interstellar Rift, but I’ve criticized them hard when they’ve had talks about placing automation items in the game to make it easier. I’ve also, on more than one occasion, have advocated for a change in which I was already happy with the game as-is because friends and a vast majority of others just did not like how it was. I’m very careful about this and intentionally keep myself in check in not crossing that line to fanboyism.

    1. Though I entirely disagree with what the author is writing here, he makes fair points. So what @Striker should have said was this “Pathetic attempt at shooting down the game because it looks to much like a space sim, and every space sim is the same as No Mans Sky, which was bad, which makes this game bad”
      He should not have written what you put because you are skeptical I see, but some of us are ready to open our minds to a new type of space game again since NMS. Go rain on your own parade instead of pissing all over ours. pls k thx

Leave a Reply