ZooNamedGames

I don’t see the hate, merely some concerns after discussing the topic at hand.

We've finally reached 1.6.1. An achievement for KSP's development. As someone who's been around since 0.19 in 2013, it's been one hell of a ride. But as someone who's watched and observed the game's development over the years, I am confident in expecting a 1.7, and the unavoidable 1.7.1 that comes after it. With 1.8 and 1.8.1 to follow after it, but it forces a greater question in the end; what's coming after 1.9? The obvious answer would be 2.0, but with my experience of the 1.0 update, and more importantly, the likely future of KSP, could 2.0 be Squad's first release of Kerbal Space Program 2? Or will 2.0 just be another update and we continue past it without incident? Or, will we shift to 1.9.1, 1.9.2, 1.9.3, and so on? Though this seems like a rather minute issue, I'm merely curious as to the development plan for KSP. A question I know the KSP developer's have been hesistant to answer as to avoid having to make promises they can't uphold or will have to later break/fall short on due to changing circumstances, but at the same time, simply being aware of what's on the table, is a lot easier to prepare for as a player and more importantly, as a paying consumer. I've been on this ride for a long 6 years now. I'd like to know what the plan might be for year 7. I'm curious what everyone else thinks though. Also, sorry for posting two posts in the same section back to back, I just felt both were relevant and worthy of discussion. So please forgive me.

After many requests, and a long wait, Squad is finally replacing the old parts with more sleek and realistic looking rocket parts to much praise from the KSP community. The new parts do look great but as they move to completely overhaul all of the old parts, a new problem is emerging. The parts, as awesome as they appear, are becoming difficult to tell apart from the parts list. Which part goes with which size and which fuel tank is which, and so on. The old KSP parts, at least had the benefit of being unique and visually distinct from one another. Though that's one issue players had, that parts never meshed well with each other but that same problem was a benefit. Especially for new players. Having watched many YouTube videos of players trying to build rockets and trying to make sure they have the exact right part, whether to copy a rocket from another video, or to build their own; knowing what precise part you're using can mean the difference between a successful mission, or a RUD. So the best two suggestions are to make parts distinguishable enough in the parts list again; to provide more details on the parts list so that you can tell them apart; or to redesign the parts list UI to make identifying parts easier as a whole without any part changes (certainly the more difficult of the 3 suggestions). I admit I am an old player and I adapt slowly to changes, but I feel that this is an issue that old and new alike could end up experiencing, and am curious if anyone else has thought the same.

To be fair, last I checked, the bug tracker wasn’t efficient in setting up or reporting bug reports at all. Moreover someone has likely reported it.

Please. Please fix the eyes. Just shift them further inside their head. For those not in the know, Kerbals have (since like .90 or 1.0) have had their eyes slightly too far outside of their head and when viewed side on from IVA, you can view inside of the Kerbal's eye. Just enter the mk1-2 pod and look to the Kerbal on your right and you'll see it yourself. All the developers would have to is use Blender to slide it a tiny bit further in.

And yet that seems to be Squad’s entire goal for the time being. Revamping parts for the sake of content these last few updates but I’m in the minority who thinks that there’s better content to create.

Landing on water. Unheard of! Especially never heard of any ‘Sully’. In all seriousness, passenger aircraft are designed and built to be able to float so that those onboard can evacuate, so kerbal planes being able to float is actually more realistic than not.

What a shame. My curiosity lies in who will take her place? Though she was a great Community Manager, the next has the chance to leave the same impact and I merely wonder who that next person might be.

If you’re trying to infer that the last picture has glitched text, that’s the point. It’s intentionally written that way, to infer that water damage has caused... well damage. As is Squad’s intent. As to the first, that’s a recurring loading glitch where the orbital version of kerbin is loaded but with a chunk of the normal fully loaded one still present. Idk what causes it but it’s honestly small potatoes to real bugs.

Squad has taken the time to give standing Kerbals idle animations and bring Kerbals more to life than ever before; so a few other aspects they could add to further add to their liveliness, they could add- EVA Chair Animations; When Kerbals are sitting in EVA chairs, they could share some of the same animations as Kerbals in crew pods instead of being static statues that they are now. Maybe add some animations for them moving the little control parts on the arms of the chairs so it looks like they're controlling it? Just an idea. Kerbal Wander Mode; When this setting is enabled, Kerbals will be free to wander. Over time, they will change they're orientation to look around, and occasionally walk a small distance. This of course will only apply when on a surface (maybe when in water?). When disabled, Kerbals will remain stationary as is. Just another means of bringing Kerbals to life. What's your thoughts community?

time warp would be a good, if it actually worked efficiently. When I time warp with Kerbals on EVA, they always twitch, and get stuck walking in two different directions. They are running, but more at half speed because they're motion is always split between two directions. If Squad fixed this so that they ran in a single direction smoothly, then it'd be an improvement, but then there's a second problem. Kerbals still clip terrain and have a tendency to poof when running in time warp. Making it a risky decision if you decide to use it. Though not new to any game, a key toggle for walking forward has been used in many games before and could easily be applicable here with shift acting as a toggle in that mode between walking and running.

If only I was in Germany, I'd be willing to visit. Perhaps someone (cough like myself) could host something like this in FL for any east coast players who want to meet up. Hmm. Will have to ponder that. As to your event, I hope it goes well as it looks to be interesting and I wish I could visit.

I’ve always held the belief that players stop exploring past Minmus because the engineering challenge is too high. Most players make maneuver nodes in steps anyway and wouldn’t make direct launches to planets. Not to mention transfer windows are great when you’re in sandbox, but in career mode when you have a time limit, that doesn’t always work.

I get around decoupling issues right now by putting the actual staging icon at the very top (or very end) of the staging list so that it effectively never stages off, but I agree that this should be implemented.