Jump to content

Harv's 'Long Overdue' Feature?


Recommended Posts

I'm not exactly sure how this qualifies as a "long overdue feature". I doubt new players would have noticed it missing, and if they did, they'll certainly notice clouds missing. The hype for this feature wasn't justified IMO, however it is a nice effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not exactly sure how this qualifies as a "long overdue feature". I doubt new players would have noticed it missing, and if they did, they'll certainly notice clouds missing. The hype for this feature wasn't justified IMO, however it is a nice effect.

Quit your whining, the launch is just one of the first things you do. Complaining someone didn't completely add another graphical system for the planet-presentation in two days...

Link to post
Share on other sites

the thing I sometimes wished: a door, maybe at the astronaut complex.

imagine, you've been landing your shiny new SSTO spaceplane on the runway. first, a nice feature would be refuel that thing, it's on the runway at KSC.

next thing, get the kerbal out and recover him, in order to send the science data to the research facility.

and then send the kerbal through the door out and walk over to the spaceplane, hop in and launch back into space.

but I doubt that such a thing would take 2 days to implement.

another thing he could have added: something like the guys from kerbtown do. real kerbal cities. because everyone wonders why the planet is so damn empty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

another thing he could have added: .... real kerbal cities. because everyone wonders why the planet is so damn empty.

Everyone knows all the cities are underground. Having them on the surface is too dangerous with all those asteroids falling.

1.0 is supposed to be feature complete. Destructible buildings is the framework feature to add cities of destructible buildings in the future, with loss of reputation for buildings damaged by falling objects. If they added cities that couldn't be damaged first then people would have complained about that.

Just like multiplayer... "LaterTm"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quit your whining, the launch is just one of the first things you do. Complaining someone didn't completely add another graphical system for the planet-presentation in two days...

I'm sorry my opinion offends you, but I stand by my opinion. I'm not complaining about it, but am simply pointing out that anyone who thought this was missing would also think clouds are missing. I had no expectation of clouds being introduced in 2 days (though I was hopeful).

I do however have a problem with the way somethings are polished so well, while other things are very raw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We all have things we'd like to see in the game, and things we'd prefer the devs did not devote their time to. This is not a reason to treat each other like enemies. Please don't make the discussion personal.

Edited by Vanamonde
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hum, not sure what you mean with this. The x64 issue with windows vs linux is something completely outside of SQUAD ability to solve due to politics of two decades ago. Not seeing what that has to do with smoke particles vs clouds ... is it not that the clouds we're seeing are animated gifs that can't be scaled up ... right ? ;)

The problem is when you "scale things up." Having one does not equate the other; especially when we're talking about something designed to fade away fairly quickly. It's also a question of if we're using animated sprites or particle effects; and how the end result gets constructed.

It's akin to saying that since you wrote something in portable code, it should work on any platform flawlessly. You know WHY having x64 in linux doesn't equate x64 in windows, but without that knowledge people would make the same argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 9 months later...
On 27/04/2015 at 1:07 AM, StrandedonEarth said:

Everyone knows all the cities are underground. Having them on the surface is too dangerous with all those asteroids falling.

1.0 is supposed to be feature complete. Destructible buildings is the framework feature to add cities of destructible buildings in the future, with loss of reputation for buildings damaged by falling objects. If they added cities that couldn't be damaged first then people would have complained about that.

Just like multiplayer... "LaterTm"

Despite the oldness, I love this idea!  I've never accidentally destroyed a building, so I think the destructible buildings were a waste of time.  But if we had cities, landings would be a bit more hazardous, and those low-tech suborbital part tests could get interesting...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...