Sign in to follow this  
jarmund

Simplicity vs Complexity

Should KSP be made less complex/complicated?  

156 members have voted

  1. 1. Should KSP be made less complex/complicated?

    • It should be more complex
    • It should be simplified more
    • It's just right


Recommended Posts

I think vanilla KSP is very good for the default product. However, I wish that "realistic mode" (think Realism Overhaul with most of the trimmings) could also come a vanilla option so I don't have to deal with installing 3 dozen mods and dealing with stability issues if that's what I wish in my game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's fine where it is.

The joy of KSP is puzzle-solving with the parts that you have. Balancing resources other than fuel and electricity is a game that can be played and lost on the ground, since the antagonist is not the skill of the user, just time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Larry Wall once wrote they should "keep the easy things easy, and the hard things possible."

The trick though is in deciding which things should be easy and which things should be hard. On the whole, it's a trick Squad performs pretty well with some exceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion ksp should be more complex at the "endgame". It is really complex for new players. But when you have learnd how to go anywhere it is not very hard.

like deep space refueling. It is a great feature, but why should it be so easy, that every new player can mine on the mun after he/she has learnd how to land there.

This seem to be not very long term motivating.

Edit: Okay, i play it since 2 years.:P

Edited by Xaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like Larry Wall once wrote they should "keep the easy things easy, and the hard things possible."

Heh, I actually thought about that quote when writing an earlier reply

-JAPH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to go with "just right." Personally, I would like some more details and "good complexity," but I think it would hurt KSP's wider success if it got too complex or too technical.

PC Gamer declared the biggest enemy (problem to solve) in KSP is... gravity. (Click link and check out #21. Click the < back arrow at the top, less clicking to go in that direction.) That is where the majority of KSP players sit. Getting into orbit, then landing somewhere, is challenge enough to the largest part of KSP's audience. Squad has resisted adding detail for the sake of having detail, or even "too much" realism. KSP intentionally just takes us "close" to an air and space flight experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd prefer a greater level of complexity, and to accommodate all parties, such complexity should be optional!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More complex' date=' but as others have stated, in one particular area. Science.

The gathering and processing of science should, I think, require a bit more effort than simply clicking buttons in X location. For instance, something along the lines of the geology mod that was in development for a bit, where you actually had to search for surface samples and they'd have certain levels of quality .

...[/quote']

Science is the same - planting flags & putting a finger in the ground to take a sample is not really entertaining, especially when you've made the effort to get to somewhere. Having experiments that actually *need* a base because they're complicated/multistage and time consuming would drive so much gameplay it'd be another game on top, almost;..

.

I agree with both these posts. Science should be more complex and experiential, and not just be there to unlock things.

I'd like to see it split into three systems:

Knowledge- building up a picture of the solar system.

Research- Ongoing testing and monitoring.

Experiment contracts- for other, special experiments that must take place at stations or bases, or using multiple probes.

Make science something rated on levels of ongoing activity, not just a tally of points, and you'll have something to work on beyond the tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any poll on the forums here is going to suffer severely from selection bias. Most of the people posting here have played lots and got to grips with the basic game, so adding complexity is something that can breathe life into the game again for them. Most people who have tried the game, found it too complex and given up, are unlikely to be hanging around the forums here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaning towards "it could be more complex" ...

after all that´s why I prefer to play the game with Reentry Heat, more realistic aerodynamics, more life support needs as well as more complex telecommunication

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people make playing KSP more complex than it needs to be. Like using way too many stages and therefore having extra mass (engines) lowering their delta-v.

Most of the steep learning curve comes from not knowing what you can actually do. Simple stuff like pressing alt while building ships stops stuff sticking to walls and instead grabs the node. A lot of the stuff you have to do yourself accidentally or see someone else doing so you know them. Hopefully tutorials will tell new players a lot more than they used. Of course there will still be people who skip the tutorials and whine how hard everything is but you can't help those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think KSP in its current form is similar to Lego in its appeal. It's very individual in how you enjoy it- some people like to build architectural masterpieces, others like to build complex mechanical models (and some may want to build an indestructible monolith they can lob from a great height.) At the same time, the individual component parts are common to everyone, so you should be able to replicate someone else's design and play with that too. I think some of this appeal would be lost if complexity was greatly increased, and it would become more about project management than building and flying spacecraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for "more complex" because for the sort of person who would consider spending time on this added complexity is just added challenge.

Though I strongly agree that most of the complexity should be endgame material.

Unfortunately there seems to be a lot of things you're forced to learn before you can even take baby steps. You need a good understanding on how to build a rocket before you can fly it, and you need to fly in through the air before flying it through space, even though flying things through space is ostensibly the meat of the game. Of course this isn't the only game accused of replacing the difficulty curve with a cliff

Fortunately Squad fully recognizes the need for more tutorials. I hope they do more than simply a Duna tutorial though. A tutorial where you not only launch a rocket, but have to get it into orbit and then back down is important. A tutorial on flying planes, a separate tutorial on flying space planes. A tutorial or scenario where you can build a ship in the VAB, and when you click launch it appears in orbit around the Mun. A tutorial where you are shown various stock designs with descriptions about their features and what they're meant to be used for. In addition a button that opens a PDF that describes with text and pictures all of the features and little things you can do that weren't in the tutorials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to have more technical details. More detailed and demanding electricity systems, life support things, aging and wearing, different propellants with different properties. I like complicated technical things but do not like economic or politic restrictions. Fortunately we have many good mods for these. Now KSP is very easy game when you learn basic things of orbital mechanics and rocket building. It is easy to plan and build huge stations and supply ships and make complicated manned missions to everywhere in Kerbol's system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though I strongly agree that most of the complexity should be endgame material.

Perhaps it could take the form of scanners and advanced science instruments to let you explore places in detail. There's a lot of things going on in the building stage, and the flying stage, but so little in the actually-got-to-the-planet stage.

I'd like to see more complexity there, perhaps they could take a leaf out of Take On Mars's book, and give us some more things to poke around with.

along the lines of the geology mod that was in development for a bit' date=' [/quote']

I had a look at that, and with the simple basic idea, and further discussion in the thread, it definitely had potential. Pity they couldn't find a coder to do the hard bit, spawning the rocks.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80322-VERY-WIP-Syndic-s-GeologyRocks-Mod?p=1165660#post1165660

It would be great with KIS.

Edited by Tw1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is too broad a question for me with too specific of answers, but I answered "It's just right" because I think it's closer to right than wrong.

Busy work should be more simple. Fun stuff should be more complex.

^ couldn't have said it better myself. This is exactly how I feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never really liked the conservative way people have about things. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that all it takes is one "feature" to turn an enjoyable game experience into a total nightmare. But this is more risk venture analysis than anything.

Basically, if squad adds in a "complex feature" and does so EXTREMELY WELL, a large portion of the "It's just right" crowd will change their tune and say "It's just right... NOW" with only a few stragglers looking for ways to disable the feature with plugins.

If Squad adds in a "complex feature" and does so EXTREMELY POORLY, a large portion of the "It needs to be more complex" crowd will change their tune and say it needs to be simplified, or it "WAS Just right"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this