KSP Weekly: The flight of the Norge and forging missions

[regex]

7 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

Correct, with the appropriate amount of 'stuff' (along with colliders and the correct drag cube) appearing based on how you snap it into place.  

 

Why not simply have a PAW button the player can twiddle to get the desired look? This seems like it would be cumbersome with certain builds and potentially limit the player's options.

9 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

roadmap

*heavy breathing intensifies*

[RoverDude]

Just now, regex said:

Why not simply have a PAW button the player can twiddle to get the desired look? This seems like it would be cumbersome with certain builds and potentially limit the player's options.

And which node do you attach to initially before you can interact with that PAW?     It's not just a case of desired look - for this one at least, it also affects stack size and geometry.  Feel free to toss me a PM if you'd like to discuss in further detail.

7 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Maybe with all the staff turnover they forgot which assets are placeholders, or even that there are still placeholders!

We're very aware of our art asset inventory

[regex]

Just now, RoverDude said:

And which node do you attach to initially before you can interact with that PAW?

The single node you use to attach the engine what every other engine has. Give it a default shroud of the intended "form factor" and then let the player decide if they want it bigger, smaller, or nekkid.

Just now, RoverDude said:

It's not just a case of desired look - for this one at least, it also affects stack size and geometry.

Are you adjusting programatically? No reason that can't be done at player insistence.

Eh, whatever, it's not like someone isn't going to mod it to make it work better anyway.

[passinglurker]

15 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

We're very aware of our art asset inventory

So what's your excuse for modeling after inefficient placeholders that have long been slated for replacement since you are so "aware"

Edited May 13, 2017 by passinglurker

[StrandedonEarth]

20 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

We're very aware of our art asset inventory

Well, I didn't really mean just art assets. Sorry if asset is the wrong word to use as a catch-all for placeholder anything. I'm no programmer, and while I don't have any many complaints personally, as I don't pay too much attention to details and don't complain much, I've heard tales of mis-matched colliders and such. I'm sure others could provide examples; give me some time (tomorrow) and I could dig out and screenshot the example I found.

[RoverDude]

@StrandedonEarth - best place to put that would be the public tracker.

[PocketBrotector]

23 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

So what's your excuse for modeling after inefficient placeholders that have long been slated for replacement since you are so "aware"

You've made it abundantly clear that you're very frustrated with the various imperfections in KSP's development history. I doubt you're going to accomplish anything more by single-handedly trying to dominate the discussion every single time even a single part is previewed. In particular I don't think it's productive to harangue RoverDude, who is one of the most responsive, communicative, and tolerant devs at Squad.

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

19 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

almost 2000 posts as you say I'm not some troll who fell off the turnip wagon this is years of accumulated salt from my trust and optimism being spent.

I purchased the official 1.0 release, so I wasn't around for all of the early stuff that went on. Promises kept or broken, things that were or weren't done I've only read about so I can't speak to it. I know that a lot of the players who've been around awhile have been clamoring for an overhaul to both form and function, and I doubt there's anyone who wouldn't be happy to see these changes come to fruition. This has to put the devs in a tough position though, don't you think? These changes would be welcomed by current players, but it's not going to bring in new players or new money. And this is where I've seen people get angry and say that Squad is all about the money. To which I shrug and say "aren't we all?". Not to be callous or blase about it, but my kids don't eat promises or good vibes from the community. If my boss told me to keep showing up for work everyday cuz there's gonna be a big payday in 2 or 3 years, I would immediately look for another job. Rent doesn't wait. And the bills keep piling up. I don't know the company's financial situation, but I imagine if they put all of their resources into the overhauls that a lot of players would like to see, than next year we'll be toasting Squad and saying "man, before the company went out of business, they sure did make the game look pretty".

Maybe I'm wrong, though. Maybe the console deal was worth untold millions and they're laughing all the way to the bank. But I doubt it. I tried to buy the XBOX version for my kids (I'd really like them to get into the game), but you can't even get it at Gamestop. It was digital download only. Seriously, how many XBOX or Playstation players are passing on the next Call of Duty or whatever to buy KSP? Not nearly as many as pc I would bet.

Anyway, I didn't mean to get into this kind of conversation. I'm over my head on business and financial stuff. And the artistic side as well. I know you have an eye for detail (I saw the sample of your modding work you put up), so details are what you look for. To me, the parts @RoverDude is letting us preview look awesome. The engines, the new command pod, that fantastic little LEM; I'm excited about it all. And I don't think this is the kind of company that's going to forget what get 'em here. After they pay the bills with the expansion, we're sure to get another update. Will it have everything everyone wants? Probably not. But I think there's a lot to look forward to. You seem to know a lot about artwork. Anyone who reads your posts would see this. But you frame your opinions in such a negative way that I think it turns people off. If you made your arguments framed as genuine suggestions rather than criticisms, I think they would be better received. By both the devs and the community as well. Just my opinion, though.

[Vanamonde]

47 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

So what's your excuse for modeling after inefficient placeholders that have long been slated for replacement since you are so "aware"

How about that a lot of us really don't care about these arcane trivialities and are just having fun playing the game because this stuff simply doesn't matter? 

(Player opinion. Not speaking on behalf of Squad.) 

[passinglurker]

3 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

This has to put the devs in a tough position though, don't you think? These changes would be welcomed by current players, but it's not going to bring in new players or new money.

Which is why the DLC is such an important opportunity. If they handled DLC like paradox does the overhaul could happen gradually DLC would be purchased in good faith knowing a portion would go to implementing the otherwise unprofitable overhaul, but when I see cut corners it's like a "where there's smoke there's fire" response so I can't just read between the lines and assume that's what they are doing. I've been down this road of between the lines assumptions and subsequent disappointment to many times. So yeah they are in a tough position but they've repeated this cycle so many times they've brought this upon themselves.

 

15 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

You seem to know a lot about artwork. Anyone who reads your posts would see this. But you frame your opinions in such a negative way that I think it turns people off.

Heh after my initial reaction I tried to backpedal and mellow out. frame my concerns objectively and all that jazz. 

It didn't do a lick of good.

I got publicly blown off and edited out in the cleanup because despite subjecting my arguments to peer review they still thought I was rude pointing out that you don't put bolts on a fuel tank pressure vessel. I tried to mellow it further but it was to late they weren't listening, or even if they were this is the post-1.2 dev team they don't communicate, and they don't acknowledge. Like roverdude said a few weeks ago I can't expect an answer all I can do now is rage against the machine until release and cross my fingers.
 

10 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

How about that a lot of us really don't care about these arcane trivialities and are just having fun playing the game because this stuff simply doesn't matter? 

(Player opinion. Not speaking on behalf of Squad.) 

apathy works both ways if you don't care then you also won't mind.

[regex]

26 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

How about that a lot of us really don't care about these arcane trivialities and are just having fun playing the game because this stuff simply doesn't matter? 

14 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

apathy works both ways if you don't care then you also won't mind.

Seriously. If you don't care about such things then why do you feel the need to comment about them? Just move on. At this point you're just interjecting yourself into the conversation to either be a jerk or to make some arcane point that no one is aware of.

[PocketBrotector]

16 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

I got publicly blown off and edited out in the cleanup because despite subjecting my arguments to peer review they still thought I was rude pointing out that you don't put bolts on a fuel tank pressure vessel. I tried to mellow it further but it was to late they weren't listening, or even if they were this is the post-1.2 dev team they don't communicate, and they don't acknowledge. 

I was there, I witnessed the discussion, and that's not what I saw. You made your points and you weren't "blown off" - you encountered some people who agreed with you, some people who disagreed with you, and some people who said they didn't really care one way or the other. This is extremely normal. 

It's nice when developers respond to users, and it's nice when they give us answers that we like. That doesn't mean that any of us are entitled to a response, and it doesn't mean that we're entitled to a situation that's exactly how we'd like it to be.

When someone responds to you by saying "this stuff doesn't matter," [this has happened multiple times in different threads and is not specific to any one user] they're not inviting you to bite back by saying "if it doesn't matter, then you shouldn't care if I criticize it!" [which has also happened multiple times in different threads.] They're obliquely telling you that your insistence on these details is out of proportion to the rest of the discussion.

I would take it one step further and say that you should be polite, make your points clearly and concisely, and move on with your day. Your habit of responding to every single comment in a discussion is a form of sealioning, and it's insensitive to others in the community who are trying to have a conversation.

Edited May 13, 2017 by PocketBrotector

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

Sooooo... Anyone else dig the new engine? And the fact that it fits to three different size fuselages seamlessly? Tasty stuff.

[regex]

4 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

Sooooo... Anyone else dig the new engine? And the fact that it fits to three different size fuselages seamlessly? Tasty stuff.

I think it looks very good. I'm not entirely convinced the method of butte-switching is going to be user-friendly, but whatever.

Edited May 13, 2017 by regex

[passinglurker]

22 minutes ago, PocketBrotector said:

I was there, I witnessed the discussion, and that's not what I saw. You made your points and you weren't "blown off" - you encountered some people who agreed with you, some people who disagreed with you, and some people who said they didn't really care one way or the other. This is extremely normal. 

No you missed it I linked the critique thread to roverdude in a weekly thread. He answered that he stopped reading after I apparently started with a "cheap shot" much to the confusion of myself and others who saw no intended cheap shots until regex finally pointed it out, but by then a fight had started between RD and some bystanders.

So yeah like I said I tried I failed and positivity is apparently for suckers. This life lesson was brought to you by squad.
 

18 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

Sooooo... Anyone else dig the new engine? And the fact that it fits to three different size fuselages seamlessly? Tasty stuff.

Like a lot of what the team has been putting out lately it is honestly a good start, I just wish they'd pay more attention to the details I mean look at baked ao shadows on vector and then compare to the F1 they are sooooo close seriously just push a little more is that really too much?

Edited May 13, 2017 by Dman979
Removed references to moderator action.

[Dman979]

Let's keep this on topic and not start to attack each other, OK?

 

On that note- I am looking forward to this expansion, and the upcoming update. The parts I've seen so far have got me really excited to play again, after an extended break to refresh myself. Keep up the good work, Devs and Co.!

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

16 minutes ago, regex said:

I think it looks very good. I'm not entirely convinced the method of butte-switching is going to be user-friendly, but whatever.

I usually feel a lot of that stuff gets worked out once they let people test drive the parts and features. And if not, like you said earlier, modders will certainly be on top of it. They probably can't wait to get their hands on it.

13 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

Like a lot of what the team has been putting out lately it is honestly a good start, I just wish they'd pay more attention to the details I mean look at baked ao shadows on vector and then compare to the F1 they are sooooo close seriously just push a little more is that really too much?

I honestly think they'll get there. We're not at launch date yet. I figure the things we're shown are previews of what's to come, and that nothing's carved in stone yet. I'm certainly no programmer, though. I don't really know the complexities that go into the final product.

 

 

And apologies to all for my own semi-rants earlier. I was getting way off-topic.

 

A bit further off-topic; how awesome is this game? Never been on a game forum in my life. And never thought I would. And here I am. Huge laptop on my lap, mouse in hand, playing the game; with my phone in the other hand, talking about the game. Everyone asleep, and I've gotta be up for work in six hours. Kerbals are killin' me. 

Edited May 13, 2017 by Cpt Kerbalkrunch

[Dman979]

2 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

Kerbals are killin' me.

Only one solution- kill them back!

 

As for your other points- that's why I'm looking forward to this expansion. More to talk about here, more challenges to do, more parts, more development of KSP!

[passinglurker]

11 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

I honestly think they'll get there. We're not at launch date yet. I figure the things we're shown are previews of what's to come, and that nothing's carved in stone yet. I'm certainly no programmer, though. I don't really know the complexities that go into the final product.

I'm afraid I can't share your optimism here sorry. In my experience following kerbal development a part you see in a preview is what you will see in game if anything isn't done when they preview a part its the testing and balancing they talk about in the subsequent weeks. Naturally I'd love to be proven wrong come time for release I do want to believe kerbal is worth supporting further I just need a sign to counter the accumulated mistrust.

As for complexities depending on how the part is UV mapped the fix could be as simple as photoshopping a few layers. Like I said the previews we've seen are genuinely good starts at the very least.

Edited May 13, 2017 by passinglurker

[HebaruSan]

7 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

I usually feel a lot of that stuff gets worked out once they let people test drive the parts and features.

I honestly think they'll get there. We're not at launch date yet. I figure the things we're shown are previews of what's to come, and that nothing's carved in stone yet.

Do we have an example of SQUAD's models/textures being revised after being shared as "work in progress" and critiqued? The admin building was used as-is, and the barn was dropped. I get the sense that they want to make the best impression they can, so they essentially show off "finished" assets, and if it doesn't go over well, there isn't actually any model refinement time still left on the calendar.

7 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

A bit further off-topic; how awesome is this game? Never been on a game forum in my life. And never thought I would. And here I am. Huge laptop on my lap, mouse in hand, playing the game; with my phone in the other hand, talking about the game. Everyone asleep, and I've gotta be up for work in six hours. Kerbals are killin' me. 

Go to bed. Kerbals will still be there in the morning. Or, if that doesn't help, they'll also still be there when your kids start college. 

[SchwinnTropius]

Beautiful engine @RoverDude, can't wait to fly with it and the other parts in the expansion.

Also, despite being only a budding modder, I'm excited for updated PartTools, especially since it's compiled against the version of Unity I've been using.

[Vanamonde]

I'm not apathetic about the parts. I think they look fine. I'm tired of a few unpleaseable critics inundating every announcement thread with endless niggling complaints about visual details which are either barely noticeable or entirely invisible, the self-righteous demands that Squad should abide by their subjective aesthetic preferences, and their abusive attitude toward Squad people. 

Again, speaking as a player and neither as a moderator or Squad representative. 

[Enceos]

27 minutes ago, regex said:

I think it looks very good. I'm not entirely convinced the method of butte-switching is going to be user-friendly, but whatever.

This method of butt switching was introduced with the heatshields. Remember, they have two nodes, one makes a shroud and another doesn't. Also the Interstage nodes of the fairings generate the truss structure this way.

This type of geometry switching has been used successfully for more than a year in the MKS mod, I've seen no complaint about the method of choosing  shapes of the ends of station parts of this mod. We can safely assume that this was publicly tested and all nuances noted 

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

2 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

I'm afraid I can't share your optimism here sorry.

I send rockets around the solar system without knowing my Delta v. I'm an optimistic guy. 

Seriously, though, I think there's a lot here to look forward to. They'll keep putting out bits and pieces to keep us excited while we wait for the release, but there's sure to be a lot they're going to save for the big reveal of the expansion itself. And lets not forget about the new content as well. I'm excited about the mission builder and genuinely curious about the "Making History" portion itself, cuz let's be honest here; compared to what we do in KSP, human space travel has been pretty mundane (not that I'm comparing the two in any way; just saying in terms of the game). We've done most of our travel with probes and rovers, so I wonder what wrinkles they're throwing in to make things both challenging and interesting, and how closely it follows actual "history". Kerbal space travel history could certainly be entirely different from our own. Or will they follow intended programs like colonizing the moon and Mars (Duna)? Can't wait to see.

[passinglurker]

14 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

endless niggling complaints about visual details which are either barely noticeable or entirely invisible

Small details add up to make a big difference. Especially when you are trying to follow the lead like porkjet's. Is it really wrong to hope the artists at squad would show similar passion?

(before anyone asks it's a pork-alike mk16 parachute replacer imagined as if it was manufactured by kerlington instead of just found by the side of the road)

Edited May 13, 2017 by passinglurker