|
I don't have a problem with how they are doing it, but I think the decision to require maint on claims during this closed beta is dumb. There are probably a lot of people in my boat, not really wanting to check back in to the game since my claim expired. Maybe I will play again with a massive update, but it will require that to get me to rebuild everything. Instead of building on their testing base, they are probably just going to have to work at keeping a decent amount of people.
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
You don't have to rebuild anything. When your claim expires you get your resources back and a template for the entire claim.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Smoremaster posted:You don't have to rebuild anything. When your claim expires you get your resources back and a template for the entire claim. I found the problem with this is that if you used the natural terrain in your claim at all, when you remake the claim the odds that what you built up before is going to like up the same is very low since you'll never get your claim back in the exact same spot.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
Has there been any word at all on the EQNext game since the original announcement? Landmark is neat and all but i want a real mmo.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
I was really excited, I got a closed beta email. Downloaded and installed it a bit ago. The game runs like absolute rubbish. Lowest possible settings and it just chugs, eventually freezing and then crashing. I know it's a beta but I haven't run a game that I couldn't play on this computer before. Glad I didn't put down any money for it, because it looks like I'm not going to even be able to set down a claim because even just walking around makes the FPS vary wildly from 60 to 0 every few seconds. I was checking the thread to see if there was some .cfg files or something I could edit. Only other times I've had games run badly (but not this badly) is when I may need to disable vsync or some kind of anti-aliasing setting, neither of which were video options. Edit: It actually runs... okay if I don't move whatsoever. I can harvest materials but the moment I move my character it is molasses again. Comic fucked around with this message at 02:51 on May 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
malhavok posted:Has there been any word at all on the EQNext game since the original announcement? Landmark is neat and all but i want a real mmo. Not that I've seen. I'm tired of this minecraft poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Comic posted:I was really excited, I got a closed beta email. Downloaded and installed it a bit ago. The game runs like absolute rubbish. Lowest possible settings and it just chugs, eventually freezing and then crashing. I know it's a beta but I haven't run a game that I couldn't play on this computer before. Glad I didn't put down any money for it, because it looks like I'm not going to even be able to set down a claim because even just walking around makes the FPS vary wildly from 60 to 0 every few seconds. What kind of computer?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Trebuchet King posted:What kind of computer? I'm at work, can't pull up the specs (I don't know off the top of my head) 64bit and Win7. Granted, it's also a few years old and nowhere near cutting edge- I was able to run WildStar in the open beta just fine for recent comparison. If an earlier comment is true and what it has in the top left is what is bottlenecking it, it's apparently a CPU bottleneck when I'm moving and a GPU bottleneck when I'm standing still (when everything runs at 60fps). Maybe I need to disable the cached stuff? I know in task manager it uses up nearly 75% of my RAM while running (and alt tabbing absolutely messes the game up). So maybe I simply have the bare minimum of RAM? Comic fucked around with this message at 06:35 on May 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Sorry, should have made a small clarification--if it's a laptop, specifically with the auto-switching between integrated and dedicated video cards, I've found that the auto-detect setting for that tends to favor running Landmark on the integrated, and once you manually override that in your graphics settings it runs better. If you're on a desktop that is, of course, no help whatsoever.  But hey, probs worth just putting out there anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Yeah it's a desktop, but you know, the cpu might have an integrated gpu (I can't remember if I bought one that had it or not) so I'll have to check to be sure. I didn't see any settings in-game related to that though, so it might not be applicable. In googling I found a few things I can try (in 8 hours when I get home), I'll get back to the thread if they improve things. Honestly if I can just stabilize FPS I don't really care how pretty the game is, but it fluctuating is distracting at best and game ruining at worst. Comic fucked around with this message at 06:44 on May 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Oh, yeah, these would out-of-game settings. Like, for example, I can pull up my nVidia control panel/settings/whatever it's called and one of the tabs is for managing which software uses integrated and which uses dedicated. I select Landmark64.exe from a list (or add it via browsing) and tell windows which card to use when running that program.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
Got in the 7 day beta access. Within an hour I had fallen into an inescapable mineshaft on someone's claim replete with half built guillotines and votives at the bottom.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
mythadile posted:Got in the 7 day beta access. Within an hour I had fallen into an inescapable mineshaft on someone's claim replete with half built guillotines and votives at the bottom. It rubs the lotion on its skin.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
Well, following this I managed to get the game to be playable. 20fps or so most of the time. It still chugs whenever I move to new areas but I was able to make a claim and start messing around with things. Heading back to the portal every time I need to craft things is a nightmare when moving around distances doesn't run well though. Once I get the crafting stations set up closer (or find a nearby claim with some) it will be pretty nice. The game is fun. I wouldn't throw money at it until it gets optimized more or I had a brand-spanking new computer though.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Comic posted:Well, following this I managed to get the game to be playable. 20fps or so most of the time. It still chugs whenever I move to new areas but I was able to make a claim and start messing around with things. Heading back to the portal every time I need to craft things is a nightmare when moving around distances doesn't run well though. Once I get the crafting stations set up closer (or find a nearby claim with some) it will be pretty nice. The game is fun. I wouldn't throw money at it until it gets optimized more or I had a brand-spanking new computer though. It may be caching the area. I know I was getting some FPS loss while it was doing so. I am not positive if it still keeps doing this, I know this was an issue for me for a short while, then it corrected itself.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 09:06
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:As cool as it is seeing what people have built, I'd like a private server version that allowed building anywhere, unrestricted. The claims are just too small. I would imagine if they released Landmark in the same way Minecraft Creative was released Sony would print money. There can't be a small amount of people who want Minecraft creative with more robust graphics and less blocky everything.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
There are several smooth voxel build games out there already. I doubt they will release any kind of stand alone client.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Would you mind naming some? I could google it, but I would prefer a recommendation.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
The Sphinxster posted:Would you mind naming some? I could google it, but I would prefer a recommendation. Rust is probably one of them, but that's just the same poo poo as Day Z by this point where it's more "Try and do interesting things while everyone else is on perma-deathmatch" mode.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Maybe I'll have to give it a try. I knew it had crafting, didn't know it had that kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Rust is not voxel-based.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
7 Days, to Die, and Planet Explorers are two that I can think of off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
LumberingTroll posted:7 Days, to Die, and Planet Explorers are two that I can think of off the top of my head. Both of those games have the same pitfall of putting linear progression in the way of creativity and/or the creation tools/interface featured in both aren't even close to Landmark. As long as there is money to be made from rubes who buy into games with linear progression cooperative voxel based creation will be relegated to Minecraft creative because it is currently the best option. I'm not going to grind to make fun things with friends in a video game after working all day and I'm shocked other people are willing to. As for single player experiences people can just go download Unity and make whatever they want but I'm focusing on online cooperative creative experiences. It's once again a shame to see a great creative gaming opportunity be squandered by greed and consumers' affinity for skinner boxes. There's nothing wrong about adding gameplay elements into something like Landmark but grinding is not a gameplay element. e: I have a little faith for Planet Explorers depending on how much power server administrators to have to allocate resources to players such that grinding would not be required to build and interact with the world so thank you for reminding me it exists. If PE goes the way of Minecraft where modding support is huge then despite being a little miffed because of how nice Landmark looks PE would fill the niche of no-grind online creative building experiences. puberty worked me over fucked around with this message at 01:20 on May 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Without progression linear or not, most games get boring, I personally dont want a game where all I do is make things, I can just fire up maya, mudbox, or zbrush if I want that.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DaveGeorgeson/status/471683409090060289quote:Even better news! THERE WILL BE NO CLAIM WIPE when CAVES debut. (Details today on Landmark Live.) Build freely, Landmarkians! It would be hilarious if landscape changes/improvements were ditched to placate the heavy amount of whining over losing your spot in the world.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
The first iteration of caves will still be part of an update some time prior to E3. It's just that now the only claims that'll be wiped will be the ones who have cave entrances randomly generate on top of them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
Sorry if this has been answered already but I had a couple questions: Are the founder packs just for early access and other dumb poo poo? I can't tell if Landmark will be free to play eventually or you'll have to subscribe to it or EQ:N, or SOE's All Access thing. Also on that note, would Landmark continue to be supported after EQ:N launches? Or is it like a beta just to get everything working for EQ:N then it will be ditched? They aren't making things very clear. 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
The game will be free to play. Founder packs just get you in the Beta and provide some bonus crap. Landmark is a completely separate game that will be developed alongside EQN.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 13:19
|
|
|
crabcakes66 posted:The game will be free to play. Founder packs just get you in the Beta and provide some bonus crap. Ah awesome, thanks! 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
Trebuchet King posted:It's been in testing for four months or so. Rome wasn't built in a day. Well, IIRC the game was "60% done" when alpha began. I don't know if we are at 61% or 90% now. SOE just makes up their own definitions.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
CupBoy posted:SOE just makes up their own definitions. All developers do this, even my little studio. What one dev calls beta another calls pre-alpha. We just say its either in development, or it's not. there is no hard definition on software development.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
I recently got an email from info@e-sonyonline.com about close beta access, is this actually a for real address or just some phishing attempt? I'd be interested in checking this thing out if this is a legit invite.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
SoUr posted:is this actually a for real address or just some phishing attempt? yes
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
The Landmark newsletter / update stuff I get in my inbox is from info@e-sonyonline.com as well, so the address seems legit to me. But you can also get a free beta key from: http://eu.alienwarearena.com/giveaways/landmark-closed-beta-key-giveaway
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
CupBoy posted:Well, IIRC the game was "60% done" when alpha began. I don't know if we are at 61% or 90% now. SOE just makes up their own definitions. It's worth pointing out, I think, that when alpha began the plan for the game was much less ambitious than it is now. Landmark is loving gorgeous on my new laptop, incidentally. I got so caught up in trying out different games I'd played on its predecessor I kinda forgot to pay my upkeep. Whoops. I think what I'm going to do is just find a convenient claim spot and practice building, see if I can get the hang of countering/preventing some of these voxel distortions. That reminds me, I'd been meaning to ask if anyone had a decent/coherent explanation of the old smooth tool. I read some how-tos a while back involving buffers, but I didn't end up actually getting the tool until after the new version had replaced it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
The biggest difference is that the old smooth tool didn't delete voxels while smoothing and it was a little more granular. You could basically smooth a single voxel and end up with something like 10 different sizes of micro voxel. With the new one you have something like 4 or 5 sizes of microvoxel before the voxel dissapears entirely. The thing about having to have a buffer around your selection was because it wouldn't properly smooth the sides of voxels if they were touching the selection box. I know there were a lot of complaints about the changes on the forums, but I like the new smooth tool better and am looking forward to seeing the new improvements they have coming up for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
The current smooth tool doesn't require a buffer but still affects voxels that border the selection, even if they're outside the selection. It sux.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
I see. Wonder how feasible it would be to have both, renaming one of them?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
IIRC Georgeson said that the upcoming smooth tool will have two modes. One of the modes is supposed to bring back some of the functionality of the old smooth tool. Although I don't really know what that means since he also said that it will still remove voxels as you keep smoothing, so maybe it refers to the granularity thing? We'll find out soon enough I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Hopefully they have some math fixes in there too. Whatever they did between the old & new was just godawful. The math changes were so bad it even hosed up the simple geometric shapes like wedges in the same patch. https://forums.station.sony.com/landmark/index.php?threads/smoothing-tool-then-and-now.23928/ That thread shows some of the subtle, but major differences between the underlying math on both tools.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:32
|
|