Jump to content

James M

Members
  • Posts

    420
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

219 Excellent

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I love how heartfelt and compassionate this dev blog was! And how funny this was Its nice to meet you Jim, and thank you for working on KSP!
  2. How did I not see this on the Announcements? Maybe I missed it?... Anyway, Welcome!! Hope you learn a lot here and while you're working on the best game ever
  3. This makes a lot of sense! Thanks for the detailed explanation. So in the context of the original topic, it's important to define not only what "rules" the game mode HAS to have to function (The Immutable ones), but also the one's that make it fun (The dynamic ones)? Fun is a relative term though... What one person might view as a definitive staple in creative mode could be seen as something negative or unnecessary to another. I don't think it's possible to have a serious discussion about what dynamic rules should be in place before the immutable ones have 100% been agreed upon first. What do you think?
  4. This part keeps confusing my brain. I had to read it like 20 times, but I understand
  5. Considering you’re referring to Creative mode, then the intentions were to creatively solve the astrodynamic problems (Explore Kerbol System) presented to the player without restrictions. The problem arises when we try to separate what makes KSP a sandbox game in addition to all of its other designations. It’s a sandbox game and a flight simulator with elements of RPGs with respect to the Kerbals themselves and the stories we make for them. Removing the latter two designations leaves us on the ground without Kerbals doing what? Using the tools, toys, and resources available in the VAB to make all manner of contraptions and utilizing the game’s physics simulator to play with them. This is what I was trying to boil it all down to.
  6. Give me a game you define as a non sandbox game and I will break down how it is by your definition. Because I’m impatient and I’m going to bed soon, I’ll just be blunt. Your definition is a logical fallacy. Composition/Division: You assumed that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts. Often when something is true for the part it does also apply to the whole, or vice versa, but the crucial difference is whether there exists good evidence to show that this is the case. Because we observe consistencies in things, our thinking can become biased so that we presume consistency to exist where it does not. Example: Daniel was a precocious child and had a liking for logic. He reasoned that atoms are invisible, and that he was made of atoms and therefore invisible too. Unfortunately, despite his thinky skills, he lost the game of hide and go seek.
  7. Ugly? I think the design is awesome!
  8. Oooh Okay yes or no question here then. Is Job Simulator a Sandbox Game? Why or why not? If we can agree on this, then I think we can start talking about the necessities of KSP 2's Sandbox stuffs
  9. Excluding Fallout 4's base construction, what problems in GTA, RDR, WoW, Everquest, Ultima, Eve, etc are you trying to solve? How best to murder something? The Box is the world. The tool is my weapon. I am the child. The resource is the... npcs? The creation is what? A pile of bodies? No. And if your argument also extends to "customization", then by definition, Fortnite could be a sandbox game. What with it's building of towers and different skins. But it's not. MMO's just like the others have a story to tell. That is what the game is built on. (Also if designing an interior of a house in an MMO is an aspect, then it still falls in line with my Skyrim example.) All of these example you gave are just Open World RPGs. Not Sandboxes.
  10. Would you call Skyrim a Sandbox game? What about Scribblenaughts? By your definition both games are. But I think most people would agree Skyrim is not a sandbox game. While you're free to do as you wish, it's truly more of an open world game as creativity is often not involved. The extent of Sandbox there is how I build my houses. If you really want to talk about the sandbox genre, then all you need to do is compare what you're doing to a kid in an actual sandbox. Is Flight Simulator a Sandbox game? No, right? I fly planes where I want, how I want, when I want. But I don't design anything. When's the last time a kid played with their model plane in a sandbox? What about building a sand castle? I think this really gets to the heart of the argument here. Sandbox gives the player tools, toys, and resources and lets them decide what to do with them. A goal MAY be involved, but is always optional. As are the use or constrictions of said toys, tools, and resources. Anything should go in a sandbox game/mode so long as it keeps to the game's physics/rules. Beyond that.. You're hardly playing the same game I'd say. (God modes excluded as that alters the physics/rules involved) Too add, the only reason KSP NEEDS a Creative mode, is due to save files. I don't want what's unlocked in my creative mode to be unlocked or available in my adventure mode.
  11. That was not my whole argument. I just said it was an example. Options are good. Anything that adds to the ability to be creative and test creations is good. Subtracting options is bad. Creative mode removed the ability to mess with the tech tree in my own way. That's all I was saying. This feels like a step in the right direction.
  12. Id like to see some crushable parts. Used of course as a one time absorption object.
  13. Remember to point your draggy side forward when you want to slow down faster and your less draggy side when you want to slow down less. Sometimes just changing the orientation of your ship's entry profile during an aerobrake can be the difference between achieving orbit and landing unexpectedly. (Or flying back into deep space..)
×
×
  • Create New...