Rejected Spawn

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

104 Excellent

About Rejected Spawn

  • Rank
    Unpaid Researcher

Profile Information

  • Location Marginally above floor level.

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Robotics

    This was almost the only thing left that could get my hype any higher, the air is getting thin here. \o/ Also who else saw this and immediately thought of the crazy possibilities of not just walking rovers but SPRINTING rovers? Traversing the jagged surface of a dead world in a velociraptor themed mech leaping 50m with each step has got to be the stuff of legend. Giga level protip for those unfamiliar with extremely unbalanced experimental rovers: set one control point to aim at what you need to be "up" on the craft, embed loads of reaction wheels in the craft and make sure they're set to SAS only (or you'll do involuntary backflips) then go to the location of your test drive and enable SAS in Surface mode and set it to Radial Out. Nearly impossible to topple over, makes motorbikes safe* to drive and you can even get around** on a single wheel. * Safer than trying to land when in orbit of Mun with 400dV left. ** Not gracefully.
  2. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Hinges

    Depends on fuel crossfeed. If they allow it I'll create a stunning tilt-wing, if they don't I'll create a tilt-wing with yellow tubes plastered on it. Attitude aside, these things look delicious and I'm really looking forward to playing around with them, would have preferred getting some specs on how strong they are but that's probably one of the things we'll have to find out on our own. My body is ready for even moar Loading!
  3. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground Robotics

    One thing I've been wondering ever since @GoldForest asked in another robot thread is about fuel crossfeed of robot parts, does anyone know more about that? I already have a substantial list of crazy contraptions to build, however many of them would have their fuel tanks and engines on separate sides of hinges... and I can't say a tilt wing looks quite as nice with fuel lines all over its exterior.
  4. I could probably have worded it significantly better than... that. The "immediate relationship" I meant was specifically that most players immediately place one of the items after the other, that I really don't see happening anywhere else since there's no need to decide the optimal engine immediately after selecting a fuel tank, you can stick any object you want on a decoupler and so on, there isn't a single "duo" in the entire parts catalog that happens so consistently you could claim these two parts belong together like that. There is however very likely no reason to wait before filling the storages with these deployables and (going out on a limb with a reasonable guess) I think most players don't build super mega multi purpose giant crafts (unlike me) but more "this ship needs to go There and do That One Thing" which means they'll often end up designing the entire ship around getting these deployables somewhere and have already decided what to deploy - so there's no delay before they chuck them in the containers they added from the same tab which makes it a massive inconvenience to have to jump around between other tabs to look for one or two items from each. Of course I don't have sufficient data to prove that this is how things will turn out, it just seems very likely based on standard human behaviour - which of course means there'll always be a smaller number of those who do things totally different and you could very well be one of them. Anyway that was just a final attempt at explaining my reasoning, hopefully no longer significantly up to interpretation. (I know, I probably need to work on that a bit.) Even without that entire factor though I'd still be completely for sorting "deployables" in their own place since - as stated - they are incompatible with everything except their containers. All other tabs go "on" my rocket, those things go "in" my rocket. And stick their containers with them because it makes enough sense putting that in the same category.
  5. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground Robotics

    Meanwhile my Kerbals are impatiently waiting.
  6. Well huge margin in my eyes, maybe not as burningly intense for everyone else. I can willingly agree that it would make sense from a logical standpoint to split it up based on the specifics of each component like you say but from a gameplay standpoint it would be a royal pain to scatter these things all over the place, now I'm gonna make an assumption that a LOT of players are going to add a container and then the contents of that container pretty much immediately following the addition of the container itself, and otherwise these things would do nothing more than clutter up their part list. Unlike everything else in the VAB and SPH these are immediately bound to each other by this relationship and like already stated the parts are otherwise incompatible with pretty much everything except possible storage slots in some pods if that's a thing which I don't know. When taking that into account, yes, I believe the already presented system wins by a huge margin.
  7. Are we already certain only this particular DLC will be using that inventory related tab? That aside, sure I'd have been okay with putting the science parts in the science tab but we also have the solar panel and that would not at all belong in the science parts tab, neither would any comm equipment and so on, I'd much rather go pick everything up in a tab only meant for inventory things rather than jump around various tabs with a mishmash of completely incompatible and almost entirely unrelated parts. +1 Very super strongly FOR this separate tab, it's the best option by a huge margin.
  8. On the list of things I didn't expect on my friday evening: Honestly getting a little bit excited about a box. The presentation was really nice too, showed it off in a quite informative way and that's something I really appreciate in "infomercials" like these. (Normally I'd be making a jab about something by now but this level of proper post totally threw me off, you guys will have to wait until I find something worth poking fun at.)
  9. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Suits

    I'm on the fence with the exact look of the suit but there is one thing about it that delights me greatly: Finally the strangling shackles of real life counterparts have begun to loosen their grip around the creative throats of KSP devs and players. Not gonna go on some super lengthy rant here, it just feels like this entire DLC is a gust of freedom with a sweet lingering scent of art blowing across the stale swamp that has been dragging everyone down to the waist for so long. Don't get me wrong I do in fact love the more realistic parts of the game and of course any game with the words "space program" in the title should absolutely have its firmest roots in what humanity has been doing in that department, but no matter how you twist and turn this you'll find that rockets in real life are soulless cylinders that spew fire in a curved line and deploy a payload without a single gram of fun aboard - because going to space is EXPENSIVE in the real world so nobody is doing it for fun unlike us. (Yeah I know there's a car out there, but Musk is the only one who gets that space shouldn't be allowed to be as dull and out of reach as it has been.) Do you honestly think for a moment that real world rockets would be anywhere near as boring and single purpose if they were cheap enough that someone other than the odd billionaire could afford to send them out there? What I've longed for is for KSP to not only represent what has been done but also what COULD be done, we are already free to send as many rockets as we want in KSP so why would we have to be limited to sending rockets entirely based on space programs that try to cut every aesthetic corner they possibly can because THEY can't afford sending a single rocket for fun? Thanks for your time, the next performance will be held whenever I think any audience will bother showing up. \o/
  10. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Robotics

    I'll have you all know I'm building elevators as soon as I get the time to play around with the robot parts. I don't even care if they're supposed to be possible with the new parts, I'm building them! [ScreamingKerbalWavingAWrench.jpg] (would provide actual pic but my photoshop skill is on the level of a cat chewing on a crayon)
  11. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: D3 Weather Analyzer

    Well you're referencing many games where this stuff mostly applies to the player character, NOT to general NPCs and there was good reason I said NPCs in the first place. Every game you listed is a first person shooter and none even feature any significant reliance on gameplay other than "go around and shoot things". Now I get that people tend to play similar games to ones they already like so it's no wonder if you've been on the fps track for a very long time (I loved them too until I damaged my wrist, can't play those for long these days) however your statistics are going to be massively skewed by not playing much of other stuff. I've only been a gamer for around 18 years but I have health issues and have been playing for several thousands of hours every single year due to unemplyed boredom, I've gone through a horrifying number of games in almost all genres except sports and keep going through new ones and I've learned enough programming, modeling and animation to not only notice when games cut corners on a ton of stuff but it's also very often obvious to me why they do so. The statistics from these hundreds of games pile up to say exactly what I said in the quote and stand by it completely. Doing anything more than what's done in the KSP preview is a MUCH bigger investment than people here seem to realise, it is nowhere near worth it for a studio to use a wildly unpredictably large span of development time to add an unimportant detail that's completely outside their area of expertise, it would have been one thing if Squad had a couple of Arma developers in their storage closet ready to jump out and whip up some code and stuff in an afternoon but this seems a little bit unlikely to be the case. Btw, just want to say that my post wasn't exclusively out to just sit here and disagree with You specifically, I just took a very rare opportunity to really share what was on my mind because someone actually bothered reading it for once which makes me happy regardless of our differing stances in the matter.
  12. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: D3 Weather Analyzer

    Most people here don't even stop scrolling when someone posts a serious long answer to something so I rarely bother doing it myself nowadays, you seem to be an exception and I appreciate your standpoint so I'll make good use of this occasion to give the full version instead of that cut down half hearted stuff I said earlier. Picking up and putting down things visibly is excruciatingly difficult to program and animate in a convincing way if the object in question can be located anywhere at a range of distances and heights, this is why most games don't bother with that part at all and you'll see a legion of games where things vanish from where they are and magically appear in the hands (or other holdy thing) of who or what ever is picking up the object. The development resources needed to implement this tiny detail into KSP are hard to estimate but I'm confident it would cost multiple times any increase in sales of the current game, the DLC and sales of future DLC and games based on the impression it made on people. Visibly carrying things in exact volume containers is a separate matter and Can be done easier, however Arma is one of very few games that makes me say "Most" games don't do that stuff instead of "All". While it would look more realistic it still is a thing that comes with development cost and doesn't pay off for more than a few niche games where this stuff is so present it's pretty much right up in your screen at all times - like Arma. Then we have the fact that Kerbals are anatomically hilarious rather than biologically plausible, some realism with the rockets is to be expected and I think the majority of us really appreciate it when that stuff is done quite well but the Kerbals themselves are the jokey part of the game that makes it NOT a realistic simulator to get you on the NASA hiring list but a game that can be casually played by millions and puts a smile on their face. Third point, this is also about the volume of their backpack being much smaller than the object inside it: Gameplay convenience. Now if they only ever pick up and drop off the gear on flat ground and all that, fine, something the size of their body stuck to their back isn't a problem. I'm betting it would be a huge problem getting that backpack through tight gaps however, not all of us drop a naked capsule right on the ground and step out of the door. There is also the jokey aesthetic and simplification to take into account here, several generally "detailed" parts are vastly exaggerated in size to make them interesting to look at rather than realistic, the new stuff would be horribly dull if it was shrunk to be movable realistically because we wouldn't even be able to see what we're deploying - plus we'd lose the Kerbal part and just be a Space Program if all the unrealistic stuff went away. This is all summed up when I say the short version: "Good as is, looks Kerbal."
  13. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Robotics

    That awkward moment when - for the first time in the recorded history of our planet - not even "those people" show up to whine. Rather epic proof this DLC is a boatload of dreams served on a silver plate... with a reasonable admission fee for a lifetime to frolic in the new section of our beloved amusement park called KSP.
  14. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Robotics

    FINALLY SOME ROBOTICS! All aboard, we must go, our planets need us!
  15. Rejected Spawn

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: D3 Weather Analyzer

    Funny how everyone likes picking on the kerbal personal inventory while nobody whines about their avatar in Minecraft stuffing a couple thousand tons of rock and a bucket of fresh lava in their 2D pocket and casually JUMPING around... Seriously though I find it ridiculous to go on and on about this topic when barely any game in history has solved "NPC carrying stuff visibly" in a satisfying way, because it's not anywhere near as easy to make it work as you seem to think. To make the gameplay experience smooth you can't really enforce realism at every single turn either, one would think long time gamers should be better at keeping this in mind. "+1 it's fine as is" from me.