Stop the hatred!

General
41

No, you need one per custom cursor you have. Cursor interactions in Unity are fixed. They can’t be changed. That means that any one object (or layer) can only have one cursor.
If you have ObjectA with CursorA, ObjectA will ALWAYS have CursorA. That can’t be changed.

So if you want to have 10 custom cursors, you need 10 different objects/layers where you place the one that has the cursor you want at the top.
And Unity doesn’t even let you use more than 16 layers. And almost certainly LE is already using a lot of them, if not all of them.

So you’d have to actually create a screen wide transparent object for each cursor to interact with, then move the one that has your cursor to the top, above the general background layer but below other object layers (so you’d still have a different cursor when interacting with chests and stuff).

1 Like
42

Wait wait wait wait…

You wanna tell me they don’t allow you a simple ‘if’ statement for the trigger in their setup?

Ok, well… then Unity is even more of a shitshow then I already knew it was.

43

Yes. Everything is set up on the initial build and can’t be changed afterwards. You can have as many cursors as you want (maybe there’s a limit, I haven’t checked, but you can have a lot), but for each object only one cursor can interact with it.

It’s an embedded asset that gets created on build (and there are other assets that also can’t be changed in runtime). This is done to improve performance, since those are already pre-compiled and don’t need extra processing to render.

The issue isn’t that this exists (as said, it does improve performance). The issue is that there isn’t any alternative to optionally make it work differently. Which is what plenty of people asked for in the past and they have yet to deliver (though I doubt they ever will).

Mike once said (somewhere before 1.2, I believe, when they were doing the Unity updates) that knowing what he knows now, he would still have chosen Unity.
Personally I don’t think Unity is tailored for such a big game. It’s mostly for smaller indie games with less action or need for customization.
But he said that and I’d expect it’s mostly due to licensing costs, as I’d expect something like Unreal engine to be much more expensive (and not as easy to learn off the bat) and it would have made starting off and early access more complicated financially.

1 Like
44

So… instead of the option to pre-compile or not they simply enforce it?

That’s not saving performance, that’s just shit design :stuck_out_tongue:

45

:man_shrugging:

There are still ways around it, but those come at a cost, which is why we call it a “dirty” method. It’s not how the engine is supposed to interact with those systems and you’re just kinda trying to bend the engine, which isn’t ideal.

I think the only real alternative they have that doesn’t impact the game itself is creating their own version of Yolomouse bundled with LE.
Which, as stated, will only work for windows anyway and will take some time to develop. And there are higher priorities for that time for now.

1 Like
46

Expansions should never cost anything. This has become the norm over the years, and we’ve been conditioned to it. That’s why people like you are now saying, “I’ll pay for the expansion, but not for a class.”

What can be implemented without limiting the gameplay experience? Use this question as a starting point for suggestions regarding purchasable content.

How much content are you missing out on if you can’t afford the class or don’t want it? How much content are you missing out on if the expansion is too expensive? And the expansion would be significantly more expensive than a class.

Would you still play the game with the new content even if you didn’t have the new class?
Would you still play the game even if you didn’t have the new content?

I still don’t see a pay-to-win aspect to the class because we don’t know enough yet. Speculation is a nice pastime, but it doesn’t contribute anything meaningful.

1 Like
47

the problem is that theres worry that this gonna be another destiny 2 case where free content is hampered and every new major release has to be paid. whats to say that were not gonna get the destiny 2 treatment where were gonna get baited to buy a battlepass for a dungeon just to realize that dungeon has a key thats sold separately. they’re already losing numbers and this kind of practice just drive players away.

destiny 2 got away with it for a long time is because they started with massive numbers that got whittled down to the whales that were willing to shill out for the game because they’re willing to forgive greedy practices because either others do it or that the content is good enough.

if they’re gonna do the same thing atleast make sure to have good enough content first. they still haven’t bounce back properly from the messy release, its why karftons already taking control.

48

That’s… actually factually wrong.

Expansions in F2P games don’t cost anything. But older-school MMO’s like FF14, WoW, GW2 and so on still uphold the ‘expansions cost’ part.

Though the good ones - like FF14 - do consolidate more and more of the older expansions into the base access, so it doesn’t get to a outrageous price.
Which plainly spoken would be the only possible saving grace for EHG long-term to sustain the system as well. But paid expansions are not an issue.

Paid classes? They definitely are, always were, a major turnoff for many people.

Also a lack of completion from the base game currently holds it all back.

The foremost: More MTX. The store feels darn empty. They didn’t even consolidate duplicate sales with different colors as those would make it feel even emptier then.

The next thing is private Cycles for smaller player groups. With custom changes to your liking… like for example the event mobs from between Season 1 and 2 being able to be activated, and a ton of modifiers.

Then we got community and convenience spaces. Guild Halls, personal areas.
Those having direct easy access to the strewn about content in the game. Portals directly to the dungeons and the Arena. MG/CoF full access directly there. return space for Monoliths. Counting as a town.
Then we can add decoration elements to those spaces on top.

Next up we can adjust the supporter packs to provide the full point count related to the price. So they’re simply ‘stocking up and saving for the future’ and hence provide a better value then simply buying points rather then having to provide that value from MTX. The MTX should just be a ‘freebie bonus’ on top.

Then we can also move into player-driven events. The ability to create those custom Cycles with conditions for winning. Speedruns, competition based gameplay. You can then provide MTX for it from the company… or you can even say that everyone accessing has to pay a specific amount for it and it goes into a price-pool. Also with the ability to directly contact the devs with larger organized events and allow pooling of resources together to provide custom prizes like GPUs, whole PCs, merch… whatever.

Irrelevant if the promised content isn’t even delivered yet. You don’t have 100% of the base… why pay for more before the initial ask is provided?

Finishing the campaign before providing a expansion or extra classes as well as providing a grand swooping balance pass is mandatory still. Not to speak of providing the missing skills for the classes and repairing the broken items/skill nodes. That’s baseline and first.

Yes.
And yes.

But it depends on the provided value.

It’s a P2W element. If it’s actually superior or not doesn’t matter.

It’s either a waste or a P2W element. There is only a extremely fine line in-between… and that one even shifts with every change of the game.

I don’t know any company able to uphold the tightrope walk for that steadily and reliably… and what EHG showed us they have no chance to even think about doing that.

49

And you, like many others, missed the point that they also said “our (payment) planned model” etc, in the kickstarter and in the official FAQ here in the forum. In the kickstarter, under risks, they also listed a lack of buy-in from customers into cosmetics.

That’s not promisses, that’s aspiration.

Any reasonable person has come to the conclusion that if not enough money comes in, EHG needs to adapt.

2 Likes
50

And they didn’t revert that ever until they had to buy out.

They also didn’t do absolute jack to solve any deficit in income.

Neither did they use EA for testing of their monetization as it’s supposed to be done. They did jack once more.

Also they didn’t inform people before release about the changes but blindly stormed forward.

They also didn’t act on direct asks for more monetization from the community. I mean what the actual fuck? The damn community said ‘please let us pay you more!’ and they ignore it? How absolutely insane is that?

So with all due respect… the technicality there is worth absolutely nothing which you provided. There were a myriad of solutions and a dozen ways to handle it… and not a single one was taken. So they can go and fuck right off with that technicality. There were more then enough ways to safe face and instead they rammed their head right into a bed of nails personally after ordering it.

51

What I found when I did a little research: software-cursor workarounds in Unity have the problem of software rendering, e.g. lagging cursors if the game lags, input delay, or OOS cursor positions.

1 Like
52

They then proceeded to do almost nothing with that supposed model. The game released with the MRX store almost empty.

This game is horribly mismanaged and people have every right to criticize them for it.

2 Likes
53

I’m going to assume you either don’t understand the situation and what people are asking for which is a surprise given this has been requested for years. It’s either that or you’re just deliberately trolling.

None of what you provided actually do what people are asking for. As I believe you well know because you’re not a complete idiot.

Yes, that’s what I said earlier, that they would need to replicate what Yolomouse does. Thanks for just skimming this particular topic for the past few years and not understanding what the issue is.

Probably, he knows moŕ than most businessmen, execs, c-suite afterall & his prescient knowledge about how to run a company & a software development project is staggering. I’m pretty sure Jobs & Wozniak named him as the foremost software designer & project manager on the planet last month (too far?).

Dude, it’s baseline windows functionality. That’s like calling copy & paste an exploit because it can be used to backup save files.

Yeah, that’s fair, I’m not particularly into armour mtx either. Skill & portal mtx us an entirely different kettle of fish.

It’s been mentioned as the reason why people need to use Yolomouse for their custom cursors on this forum for years but apparently Kulze has just discovered the issue so I’m sure he’ll have the code sorted out for EHG in a jiffy.

Fair point, well made.

He is though, adding autocast would absolutely improve some skills. You don’t get to use that argument 'cause you give people shit when they use it.

Well done, you’ve finally caught up with the rest of the world vis-a-vis Unity & custom cursors. It’s only taken you a few years, probably because you think you know better than everybody else. Is there a description for that?

Grim Dawn, D2/3/4, all arpgs with a box price that also charge for their expansions. There aren’t any arpgs with a box price that don’t also charge for their expansions as far as I’m aware. PoE doesn’t have a box price so can’t charge for expansions.

Thus far, every new mastery that EHG have added has been significantly more powerful (ignoring bugs like Profane Veil) than the other masteries. So if those masteries were paid for that would meet a reasonable definition of P2W IMO.

54

You do realize that @DJSamhein showed me the issue with it which I wasn’t aware of and it’s been talked out, right?

So not going into it as the alternative method is not possible because of the pure incompetence on Unity’s side.

Just gonna mention that pulling a finished conversation up again to bash on it afterwards earns you solely a little donation in the ‘box of the pitifuls’.

55

I’m loosing faith in you. Those official ‘disclaimers’ were in there from the beginning, in forum posts years old.

They always kept the door open to changes in their monetization.

Yes, the management is quite bad, and they majorly messed-up their MTX pipeline.

Skill MTX with better visibility than the default one could be considered P2W. Most times I die I do so because I don’t see shit under all the effects. Just wanted to throw this out at some point.

1 Like
56

You were though as it’s been talked about here for years, let alone (I’m sure) on the Unity forums, therefore it’s very well known publicly.

You do realise that I was replying to an earlier post? I did quote it, you can even click on it to be taken to it…

Or inexplicable unwillingness to add it, yes.

Cool story bro. :sunglasses:

57

As I stated already. Just because mildly vague terminology is used doesn’t mean that people will even remotely accept it and state ‘Ah yes… sure, it could be interpreted that way, my bad!’

That’s just not how it goes, and especially as a business you have a responsibility to provide information as clear-cut as possible. And if you have to do something which was upheld for years without any mention of issues… then provide the respective timeframe, respective respect and proper actions to dampen the blow and make it understandable.

Imagine sorting with someone out that you’re paying a bit less rent… but if need arises they can ask for the full one and a advancement for the next month.
And now you talk to that person a day before sending your share over to ensure all is alright… just for that person to come 5 minutes before you wanna send it the next day to ask for the full one and half the next month’s out of the blue.

Same feeling there.

It’s simply ‘the sound makes the music’ there. It’s not that it happened… but how it happened… and why no actions where taken to avoid it happening in the first place even here.

I’m not reading every topic without fail. I do read a lot but I don’t have that sort of time. So no, I wasn’t aware about the absolutely specific little point it went down to which by the way was not in a single of the topics mentioned which I read but instead solely ‘that the Unity engine cannot do it’.

58

Ignorance of the law threads is not an excuse. Especially when it’s a frequent complaint.

Excuses excuses… Even when DJ explained it you spent an aweful lot of time telling him why he was wrong despite not knowing the situation (Dunning Kruger FTW!!). “Unity doesn’t allow it” isn’t a particularly small point, you, allegedly, read through a bunch of posts about it & argued with DJ several times when he corrected you on your misunderstanding*.

It gets mentioned on this forum every single time the topic comes up.

Yes, this is why it’s not a thing, because Unity doesn’t allow it. You not being willing to accept the reason doesn’t make it less true. But you do now, which is good.

59

Yes, because I didn’t know that the damn objects are runtime loaded and allow no choice for the texture even (which is a baseline for any other engine after all to have as a choice) which is one insanely inept decision from Unity.

DJ mentioned it’s likely for performance reasons… and it causes a shitload of situations where it has the exact opposite effect since you would need to duplicate objects (layers) with their positions instead to allow texture changes even rather then simply loading it from a selector.

Which was my argument that that should commonly be possible since the objects allow a inherent cursor texture for hovering over as a native implementation… hence why that’s not a ‘open’ one but a fixed unchangable state is just nonsensical decision. Opt-out for that would’ve been the common way to handle it after all.

The exact point I mentioned just above does not.

Go ahead, quote it wherever it is.
The reasoning of ‘Unity cannot do it’. In the Forum. Because not even the damn documentation mentions it, you have to dig further to even find that shit out. Which is even more baffling. And which is where the error came from even as it should’ve been naturally possible since the runtime loading enforcement of the object-based textures rather then a understandable runtime loaded fixated custom cursor is quite a different topic.

But as mentioned… you just basically necroed a finished convo to argue again. So what the heck’s still wrong with you today? Staying on that instead.

60

Which, at the risk of saying it again comes up in every single discussion of this subject. What did you say about bugs & exploits? Something along the lines of that they should be widely published so that everyone knows about it?

Absolutely. But that’s just how Unity have done it & are bizarrely resistant to changing it.

It does, you’ve just not read any of the threads, which as you’ve said before is no excuse. If it were a niche thing that’s only ever come up once then you’d have a point, but this is a common complaint.

Ok.

I quite like this one because it’s a post almost directly below yours:

Possibly this one: