Foxster

Core things needed for KSP to be "finished"?

54 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

What do you think are the core outstanding features still waiting to be sorted out before you'd consider KSP "finished" and ready for expansions to be added? I'm not talking about what engines are missing or whether there ought to be other planets, I mean the core game physics-like things that mean the game is unrealistic.

One for me is aero-occlusion or slipstreaming.

This is still crude. With only connected, same-size parts being considered as occluding parts above or below. If parts aren't connected like this then wind blows straight through them.

This leads to odd things like air-brakes working on the back of a craft even though they are in the slipstream of wider parts in front and, to make it worse, they don't overheat because heat-occlusion does work more as you'd expect it to, with a cylinder of heat-occlusion from a wide front part like, say, a heatshield. 

Edited by Foxster
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing really, KSP is already far more than Felipe (HarvesteR) ever expected it to be, if you don't remember this was meant to be a 2D side view game, with no airplanes.

Other games provide more accurate physics or more thorough simulations, but that was not the goal with KSP.

Thankfully, Felipe knew from the start how much modding could bring to a game, he originally revealed KSP on the Orbiter forums where modding has greatly expanded on another game that some consider unfinished, sound is an optional install for example.

And he was right, we have a very strong modding community, able to bring to KSP anything from rusty rocket parts to MFD's and autopilots.

So players can tailor KSP to their wishes, or play stock, either works (and with sound included!).

So I consider KSP ready for Squad to think of new ways to expand it, above and beyond Felipe's vision, I wish him luck in all his future endeavors and I hope Squad can do right with the legacy he's left us.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Foxster said:

What do you think are the core outstanding features still waiting to be sorted out before you'd consider KSP "finished" and ready for expansions to be added? I'm not talking about what engines are missing or whether there ought to be other planets, I mean the core game physics-like things that mean the game is unrealistic.

One for me is aero-occlusion or slipstreaming.

This is still crude. With only connected, same-size parts being considered as occluding parts above or below. If parts aren't connected like this then wind blows straight through them.

This leads to odd things like air-brakes working on the back of a craft even though they are in the slipstream of wider parts in front and, to make it worse, they don't overheat because heat-occlusion does work more as you'd expect it to, with a cylinder of heat-occlusion from a wide front part like, say, a heatshield. 

There has already been a massive overhaul, and it is leagues better than the old souposphere we had to fly in.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, sal_vager said:

Nothing really, KSP is already far more than Felipe (HarvesteR) ever expected it to be, if you don't remember this was meant to be a 2D side view game, with no airplanes.

 
 

but it isn't. and it has a remarkable price tag already. I'm not complaining, I just expect further progress in the future.

Edited by Physics Student
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Physics Student said:

but it isn't. and it has a remarkable price tag already

Well with all due respect that is your opinion, and everyone has a different opinion on what they feel should be in KSP, not just KSP but you'll find the same sentiment from someone for virtually any other game.

Not everyone likes or installs the same mods for example, but modding makes KSP flexible, so even if you disagree that the base game is finished you're free to either add someone else's mod for the feature you want, or make your own.

KSP is finished as far as its creator is concerned, it's a finished release with 1.0 as far as Squad is concerned, as are many other games that saw early adoption feedback from players.

Feedback that Squad can accept or ignore, i'm sorry but players don't drive development as much as they think they do, and no matter the result of this thread or any of the many, many just like it that have come before, KSP's development is in the hands of Squad, to expand (as they have revealed they intend to, and have continued to patch regardless) or not as they see fit.

KSP has features that are acceptable to the majority, with modding available for anyone who wants to do so.

Squad does take note of things players want, but as you can imagine they are competing with the modders of their own game to bring anything new, and no matter what there will always be people with opinions :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Physics Student said:

but it isn't. and it has a remarkable price tag already. I'm not complaining, I just expect further progress in the future.

The most remarkable thing about the price tag is how inexpensive KSP is. I'm probably in the realms of 1 cent per hour of entertainment---unless I'm already at the point that my hourly rate doesn't round up to a penny.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, 

       The aerodynamics and physics are reasonably well finished; minor tweaks and optimizations could probably be made, but all in all it's pretty good. I would like to see more development into the area of game modes, and or expansion of the career mode; maybe even an A.I. space program to compete against, e.i. space race KSP style. I have often thought how a more in-depth progression system would bring new life to career mode. It quickly gets pretty bland, take contract, build craft, complete contract, collect science, rinse repeat. Something more dynamic would be welcomed. The advent of a Kerbal population that needed to also be built-up and maintained might be one solution. IDK, I hardly have all the answers, I'm just thinking out loud. 

        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the game is kindof fine as it is, just some fixes and tweaks are need to make it  'operate better'.

5 minutes ago, sal_vager said:

 they are competing with the modders of their own game to bring anything new

Reminds me of bus wars.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Scientia1423 said:

I think the game is kindof fine as it is, just some fixes and tweaks are need to make it  'operate better'.

Reminds me of bus wars.

 

Lol I remember that, and yeah, in a way enabling plugins was perhaps the best thing Squad ever did for players, and the worst thing Squad ever did for themselves, as you're literally free to program new functionality for KSP.

You can mod KSP further than most other games that just allow asset swaps, sure there's core stuff that's hard to change, but the excellent ex Squaddies @NathanKell @sarbian @Mu. @Porkjet @Claw @Arsonide @taniwha did so much for us in the time they had, KSP can be nearly anything we want, if we're prepared to get stuck in with code.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@sal_vager

@tater

I really like the game how it is, I just fear to loose interest as soon as I've done everything. What's wrong with progression? Small changes here and there to improve the overall experience: more goals, better graphics and so on. Of corse, from a modders point of view, he doesn't want the game to be updated because he might have to work on his mod. 

 

stock game first!  The more mods become redundant, the better. That's my opinion.

Edited by Physics Student
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Physics Student

One, there are many mods to entirely change the experience, which are already free. 

Two, the expansion will cost similarly little money, I'm not sure what the problem is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@tater

@sal_vager

Expansion? *facepalm*

I've clearly been living under a rock, I didn't know there's an expansion coming.

Edit: Forget everything I said. That's exactly what I want.

Edited by Physics Student

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Physics Student said:

@tater

@sal_vager

Expansion? *facepalm*

I've clearly been living under a rock, I didn't know there's an expansion coming.

Edit: Forget everything I said. That's exactly what I want.

Enjoy :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2013, I paid $5.99 for KSP as an early release game. I'm approaching 2,700 hours of play time, not counting the time spent after downloading the .18 demo.

If we did a benefits in playtime to cost, that works out to about $0.0022 cost per hour... Yeah, well worth it. So, if I have to pay for some DLC, I'll do it.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

In 2013, I paid $5.99 for KSP as an early release game. I'm approaching 2,700 hours of play time, not counting the time spent after downloading the .18 demo.

If we did a benefits in playtime to cost, that works out to about $0.0022 cost per hour... Yeah, well worth it. So, if I have to pay for some DLC, I'll do it.

You do realize you have spent over 112 days of your life in KSP? Not that it is an entirely bad thing, but upon that realization I might spend a few days outside just to balance things out. I'm proud to say I don't use Steam so I can't quantify how much of my life has been wasted spent playing the game. Either way, the price was very reasonable and the return has been phenomenal. I must agree that I too would happily pay for any expansions, heck I'd probably pay for some of the mods I use and have through donation to many of those creators. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aaron Also said:

You do realize you have spent over 112 days of your life in KSP? Not that it is an entirely bad thing, but upon that realization I might spend a few days outside just to balance things out. I'm proud to say I don't use Steam so I can't quantify how much of my life has been wasted spent playing the game. Either way, the price was very reasonable and the return has been phenomenal. I must agree that I too would happily pay for any expansions, heck I'd probably pay for some of the mods I use and have through donation to many of those creators. 

That's less than 2 hours a day on average. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Aaron Also said:

You do realize you have spent over 112 days of your life in KSP?

I regret nothing. :cool:

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

5 hours ago, tater said:

@Physics Student

One, there are many mods to entirely change the experience, which are already free. 

Two, the expansion will cost similarly little money, I'm not sure what the problem is.

Realism Overhaul for example , many times i yell out in excitement and say "HEY EVERYONE LOOK THIS IS JUST LIKE SPACEX WOOHO" and then get lost in the beauty of RSSVE .

then i happen to miscalculate a little thing and yell in anger "I'm done with realism , JEEEB!"

Edited by Alpha_Mike_741
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say if 1.3 comes out as I think it will, Squad can stick a fork in it and call it done.  Sure.  There are things I wish Squad had done differently, but that's irrelevant to whether or not the game is finished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Physics Student said:

but it isn't. and it has a remarkable price tag already. I'm not complaining, I just expect further progress in the future.

I don't. I'm not paying a monthly fee to play KSP, I've paid once for the product. As far as Squad is concerned, KSP is finished. They could very well stop development of the core game (ie, not the expansion) for good.

 

With that said, I think KSP still needs an art pass on the old rocket parts, dV readouts and a tool to see interplanetary transfers windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it needs orbital mechanics, a variety of planetary bodies, a decent atmosphere simulation, a bunch of parts, a simple but powerful craft editor, a similarly simple but powerful map view, and a way to advance time through the boring part of interplanetary transfers. What's that you say, it has those plus maneuver planning, docking, cross-feed, fuel transfers, asteroids, mining, a communications network, reentry heating, and nearly infinite moddability?! Sold!!

It's important to be honest about the distinction between "things that I would like to have" and "things that are needed." To argue that something is "needed," you should be able to point out important pieces of the intended experience that are missing without it. 95% of the time that's not what I see people putting in this category. E.g., the current drag occlusion model is easy to explain and learn, and mostly rewards aerodynamic designs and punishes non-aerodynamic ones. It's what I'd put in stock if KSP was mine to create from scratch with unlimited resources. More or prettier tank and engine parts would be great to have, but they don't enable new gameplay. For all its imperfections, career mode does provide more resource-constrained gameplay than sandbox with goals and rewards. And so on and so forth.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Isn't it nice when you can say "We promised nothing" and then call one of the updates "1.0" and call it a released product that costs the full price? Ah, the wonders of early access games...

KSP is a great game as a concept and a modding platform. However, it still is lacking things that were promised (unless I don't know the actual defitnition of the word "promiss") which include:

-Procedural craters on more bodies than one (the Mun)

-"Shmelta Vee"

-Part overhaul

We can argue over what each of us considers "a promised feature" but I clearly remember these three things being announced by SQUAD as something that will 100% happen.

Edited by Veeltch
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@Veeltch to be fair, I dont think proc craters is too important. I have a base on ike and if an update puts my craft underground and I lose it because the new proc craters changed the terrain, i'd be salty.  

But yes, the arbitrary jump to 1.0 was not something I was a fan of.

Edited by r4pt0r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, r4pt0r said:

@Veeltch to be fair, I dont think proc craters is too important. I have a base on ike and if an update puts my craft underground and I lose it because the new proc craters changed the terrain, i'd be salty.

They have a way to deal with this. The Mun already has procedural craters, but it doesn't mean they are random. When they added it they also made sure all the landed vessels would end up on the surface. And they did. Most of them at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Veeltch is right about the craters, for sure. That was stated to unambiguously be applied to other bodies in the dev blog about how it was done. Rocket part upgrades have been promised for a long time as well. As ugly as many of the engines are, the PJ stuff that was left to be modded in was attacking the hard problem. Many rocket people would have been perfectly happy with simple retextures of the extant tanks so they don't look, you know, _awful_.

That;s not as important to me at this point because the rocket parts are so awful, I actually delete them from my install, and exclusively use parts that are not ugly.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now