Jump to content

what partnerships would you like KSP/SQUAD to make?


Dimetime35c

Recommended Posts

I think the most interesting patnerships would result in similar situations like the ARM, where the functionality of a real Space Mission is translated into ingame mechanics.

Asteroids and Grabber are amazing additions, and they are usefull for much more things than their original purpose. I also ike the nasa styled parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If KSP ever does get handed over to EA.. I don't have any idea what economically brutal things they'll do to the game.

They'll just probably get every planet to become DLC for a cheap price of $250.

But I think they should partner up with Boeing or something similar. Who knows what plane related things they'll add together?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*glares at Regex for not knowing that people would completely miss his sarcasm*.
You thought I was ignorant of that? How little you know...

For serious, I want to see a deal with POCKOCMOC or Khrunichev, get some Russian-alikes into the game. All this Western stuff kind of bores me; I grew up with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a Mars One partnership, in addition to the ones previously suggested, with the exception of EA/publisher partnerships.

I guess this makes sense as many players apparently kill off kerbals with alacrity. That, and like Mars One, kerbals aren't actually real. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think EA or another publisher would be a good partner for Squad.

You got a very dark sense of humor. It's like joking about your dead relative.

- - - Updated - - -

Shot down with them facts.

- - - Updated - - -

In that case, I'd like them to partner with an experienced tycoon game designer. ;)

Personally, I don't need tycoon game. There is a hundreds of them.

I'd like to see more realistic science and engineering in KSP. And far more game content. I do not mean parts, although I do not object against adding few new parts, I mean a lot more places and things to explore.

Anyone else wants the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I say try and make partnerships with as many different space agencies as possible, then add some parts/missions themed around what those agencies have done for those that accept, if its a smaller one like the CSA, then you have sounding rockets (black brant) and some other contributions, or a whole pack if its big like ROSCOSMOS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google. If I could launch and fly craft around the Earth, Moon, and Mars models in Google Earth with their streaming textures and 3D building/landmark models I would be an incredibly happy camper.
Oooooooh! Best idea yet, by far!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't need tycoon game. There is a hundreds of them.

I'd like to see more realistic science and engineering in KSP. And far more game content. I do not mean parts, although I do not object against adding few new parts, I mean a lot more places and things to explore.

Since there already is a career mode in KSP, it might as well be good. If you're only playing sandbox I can understand your point of view... I solely play sandbox because career is so boring atm. I agree that interactive planetary surface exploration should be top priority, and integrating this with career/science mode is in principle the basis of a good tycoon-style gameplay.

Google. If I could launch and fly craft around the Earth, Moon, and Mars models in Google Earth with their streaming textures and 3D building/landmark models I would be an incredibly happy camper.

This would be fantastic, +1!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google. If I could launch and fly craft around the Earth, Moon, and Mars models in Google Earth with their streaming textures and 3D building/landmark models I would be an incredibly happy camper.

Why bother with Google? Google just takes the data from NASA anyways. Putting it into a model, in contrast, is zero work and shouldn't be rewarded. Give more money to NASA, restore hope for our future!

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/lro-topo.html

Hmm, sounds more like NASA made the model to try and get space awareness... all the more reason to parter with them!

http://ti.arc.nasa.gov/tech/asr/intelligent-robotics/planetary/mars/

Edited by Fel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why bother with Google? Google just takes the data from NASA anyways. Putting it into a model, in contrast, is zero work and shouldn't be rewarded. Give more money to NASA, restore hope for our future!

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/lro-topo.html

Install Google Earth and zoom in on any major city with "3D buildings" enabled and you'll see why. :)

(They've already partnered with NASA for the 0.23.5 ARM update, anyway.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still ask why; 3d view is just a matter of topographical data, including human structures. Nothing really extraordinary on their part.

NASA, of course, wishes it could get the funding to do the extraordinary every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or even what about going all the way and partnering with model rocket companies! How awesome would it be to see your favorite rocket design go up... for real!?

Think about it...

Yes! A partnership with the Estes model rocket company would be an excellent idea. All it would really need is a decal pack and some new nose cones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still ask why; 3d view is just a matter of topographical data, including human structures. Nothing really extraordinary on their part.

NASA, of course, wishes it could get the funding to do the extraordinary every day.

Point me to another application that does the same thing. It's "zero work", so there should be a lot of them, right?

The NASA funding thing is unrelated. AFAIK, no money changed hands between Squad and NASA for the ARM collaboration; I would expect any other partnership to be the same sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Partnerships with real space agencies would work just fine. I love the new NASA parts, I'd love to see what else NASA, and maybe SpaceX could come up with.

Also, how about the guy who develops SpaceEngine? It could lead to procedural terrain for existing planets, and entirely random new ones. It would be amazing, but it may not fit KSP that well. It would be perfect for an expansion pack, which would hopefully be free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zero work "in comparison." The second quote is just explaining that you're putting too much "wow" on something that isn't that "wow." Develop an initial rough sketch with high precision topographical data over cities (I'd guess you'd have to call JPL to request it, too many would just DDoS downloading half of it and not caring afterwards), and use a "photo" pass to present the visible data. You just create the model from the topographical data, and the texture from the visible data, and run it through a few programs to remove "issues".

There are hand corrections, of course, but they aren't making cities model by model... in fact they're asking people to send in "better models" if they can make them.

The point is that any reward, be it name brand recognition or funding, shouldn't go to middle men like Google. It should go to the people doing the work; not profiting from it.

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...