Jump to content

The KSP 1.0 Grand Discussion Thread: Conquering Space Was Never This Easy!


Recommended Posts

My rescue contracts are 9/10 female kerbals. Not that I mind, exactly, it's just weird. Is this a dig at their piloting or something? The ratio is really remarkably skewed.

Edit: Looks like it's all generated Kerbals, huh.

Edited by Dal
Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize this is going to make me as popular as a mosquito at a nudist colony, but it needs to be said: KSP is still in Alpha. Version 0.90 should have been 0.26, and version 1.0 should have been 0.27.

For most games, being in Alpha for four years would be considered "development hell". However, KSP is different. Squad allowed us to buy in during Alpha, like Tom Sawyer whitewashing a fence. It is a strategy that worked amazingly well, and I hope it makes HarvesteR a billionaire.

For some reason, however, this year things have been rushed through Beta and release. Except they really aren't beta and release versions. The game mechanics are still changing. That's Alpha. Beta is when the game mechanics do NOT change, you're just looking for and vanquishing bugs. The release version is the Beta version with as many bugs killed as is cost-effective, and again with NO changes to the basic game mechanics.

With the changes to Ore and the new flight model, both major changes, a whole host of new possible bugs have been introduced. This is always the case when one makes major (and in this case, saved-game breaking) changes.

I can understand wanting to give long-time players something new with the release version. IIRC Eeloo was introduced merely as a placeholder for what would eventually become the second gas giant planet in the system.

I propose that Squad take a step backwards. Admit the game is still in Alpha, and give yourselves a few more months. Bring in a few more of the top modders like Ferram and r4m0n, and in the final stages of Alpha modify the game mechanics for the final time. Then go back to Beta, no changes to game mechanics, just ferreting out bugs and balancing values. And then for the re-release, put in Gas Giant 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that releasing a final version with so many new things was not very smart. But they wanted the release to make a big splash, and you can't do that if the release version is identical to the game I was playing a week ago. So now they quickly release a few patches to round the edges a bit. Not the most elegant way to release a game but I'm totally ok with it, the release version is more than a fully working game, it's probably my favorite game of all time. The only sin they committed, in my humble opinion, is the lack of a decent information panel. I always relied on mods like engineers report to fill that gap and the fact that I still rely on it is inexcusable in my opinion. The bare minimum information a game about rocket science needs to provide is delta-v, and I still need a mod to give me that information.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I still need a mod to give me [dv values].

I'm guessing this will make it to stock before too long. You're right; while it's possible to eyeball your ship's abilities to some degree, it's so basic and necessary for a serious player I'm amazed the game has made it this far without.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it boils down to money. Not sure what Squads checking account looked like prior to 1.0. Guessing it was getting low by the tone of some of Squads questions/announcements. IFeed money theIf they needed money, they should have come to the community and asked what we'd be willing to spend money on. Not DLC like they asked.

Maybe a stand alone VAB/SPH app?

I'm sure there would be no shortage of suggestions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it boils down to money. Not sure what Squads checking account looked like prior to 1.0. Guessing it was getting low by the tone of some of Squads questions/announcements. IFeed money theIf they needed money, they should have come to the community and asked what we'd be willing to spend money on. Not DLC like they asked.

Maybe a stand alone VAB/SPH app?

I'm sure there would be no shortage of suggestions.

Squad actually responded directly to speculation that lack of funds were behind the rush to 1.0, and they denied it, for whatever that's worth (I don't remember where I saw that, otherwise I would give a link).

A more likely scenario in my mind is that they overcommitted themselves with various partnerships and merchandising deals (I got the impression that Maxmaps is a bit of a wheeler and dealer, in basically every devnote since 1.0 was announced he mentioned business deals) which resulted in the fixed deadline for 1.0. I've also heard rumors that Harvester was getting tired of this project (he's been working on it for over 4 years now) so it might be a combination of wanting to tie things off and various deals that resulted in the mad rush to 1.0.

Still, I agree that Squad has been far too opaque on this whole process. Even the testers have said that they haven't been told what the reason for the rushed schedule was, only that there was one (and Squad hasn't even admitted that much).

Edited by Lord Aurelius
Link to post
Share on other sites
Squad actually responded directly to speculation that lack of funds were behind the rush to 1.0, and they denied it, for whatever that's worth (I don't remember where I saw that, otherwise I would give a link).

A more likely scenario in my mind is that they overcommitted themselves with various partnerships and merchandising deals (I got the impression that Maxmaps is a bit of a wheeler and dealer, in basically every devnote since 1.0 was announced he mentioned business deals) which resulted in the fixed deadline for 1.0. I've also heard rumors that Harvester was getting tired of this project (he's been working on it for over 4 years now) so it might be a combination of wanting to tie things off and various deals that resulted in the mad rush to 1.0.

Still, I agree that Squad has been far too opaque on this whole process. Even the testers have said that they haven't been told what the reason for the rushed schedule was, only that there was one (and Squad hasn't even admitted that much).

The partnerships are indicators of lack of funds. Squad asked what we thought of paying for DLC was an indicator. So is the 3d printed rockets.

If Harvester is that tired of the project he could have sold it off instead of these half baked partnerships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Partnerships aren't a bad idea. This game is absolutely ripe for marketing opportunities. I can easily see an animated series and a movie, followed by direct-to-Netflix movies. Now that there are 4 core Kerbals, you've got the four humors: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FourTemperamentEnsemble

Just imagine, every Saturday morning, the 4 main Kerbals blast off to an alien planet to save the day. There's already an evil, powerful bad guy: the Kraken. Much of it could be produced using the game itself. There's already a cast of supporting characters at mission control, too. Nassault has pointed the way; some of these stories could be pretty heroic. The plush toys are a nice idea, but tie them in with a marketing campaign like a TV show and watch sales explode. KSP the lunchbox, KSP the breakfast cereal, KSP the flamethrower...

And think of partnerships with schools. The game is already starting to creep into Physics classes. Randall Munro of XKCD was right, one's understanding of orbital mechanics goes through the roof by playing this game. (I'm a Physicist. Never had so much fun learning Physics.)

This game has easily been the greatest value for the dollar of any purchase I've made in my life. For the price of a movie ticket and popcorn I've had literally thousands of hours of enjoyment over the last three years. So, I want this whole endeavor to be a roaring success. KSP has the potential to earn billions of dollars.

And that's why I think Squad should take a step back. If you're still adding features, don't call it a release version. Don't damage the brand. Ubisoft took a huge hit with Assassin's Creed 3 by rushing out the PC version full of bugs (characters missing faces etc). Don't make the same mistake!

I cannot see financing being a problem. The game already had what, tens of thousands of customers? before the official release! Investors salivate at investments like that. And one of the biggest investors in the world, Elon Musk, has publicly stated that this is his favorite game.

The game has grown much bigger than HarvesteR. Squad needs more people. Good on them for bringing Roverdude in the fold, but they need a few more: Ferram, r4m0n, sarbian, and taniwha all come to mind. Get these guys to do the final alterations to gameplay mechanics, make module manager part of the core package and so forth. Squad has an army of Alpha and Beta testers who have paid for the privilege: USE US! Let us do a thorough search for bugs in Beta before going to re-release.

And then for the re-release, as a bone to the long time players, finish the solar system. Add Gas Giant 2 where the Eeloo placeholder is, give it some moons, and give us a couple of new planets even further out, maybe a comet or two, and maybe a planet closer to the sun than Moho on a high inclination. That would give us something new without changing gameplay mechanics.

Edited by edrobotguy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Partnerships aren't a bad idea. This game is absolutely ripe for marketing opportunities. I can easily see an animated series and a movie, followed by direct-to-Netflix movies. Now that there are 4 core Kerbals, you've got the four humors: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FourTemperamentEnsemble

Just imagine, every Saturday morning, the 4 main Kerbals blast off to an alien planet to save the day. There's already an evil, powerful bad guy: the Kraken. Much of it could be produced using the game itself. There's already a cast of supporting characters at mission control, too. Nassault has pointed the way; some of these stories could be pretty heroic. The plush toys are a nice idea, but tie them in with a marketing campaign like a TV show and watch sales explode. KSP the lunchbox, KSP the breakfast cereal, KSP the flamethrower...

And think of partnerships with schools. The game is already starting to creep into Physics classes. Randall Munro of XKCD was right, one's understanding of orbital mechanics goes through the roof by playing this game. (I'm a Physicist. Never had so much fun learning Physics.)

This game has easily been the greatest value for the dollar of any purchase I've made in my life. For the price of a movie ticket and popcorn I've had literally thousands of hours of enjoyment over the last three years. So, I want this whole endeavor to be a roaring success. KSP has the potential to earn billions of dollars.

And that's why I think Squad should take a step back. If you're still adding features, don't call it a release version. Don't damage the brand. Ubisoft took a huge hit with Assassin's Creed 3 by rushing out the PC version full of bugs (characters missing faces etc). Don't make the same mistake!

I cannot see financing being a problem. The game already had what, tens of thousands of customers? before the official release! Investors salivate at investments like that. And one of the biggest investors in the world, Elon Musk, has publicly stated that this is his favorite game.

The game has grown much bigger than HarvesteR. Squad needs more people. Good on them for bringing Roverdude in the fold, but they need a few more: Ferram, r4m0n, sarbian, and taniwha all come to mind. Get these guys to do the final alterations to gameplay mechanics, make module manager part of the core package and so forth. Squad has an army of Alpha and Beta testers who have paid for the privilege: USE US! Let us do a thorough search for bugs in Beta before going to re-release.

And then for the re-release, as a bone to the long time players, finish the solar system. Add Gas Giant 2 where the Eeloo placeholder is, give it some moons, and give us a couple of new planets even further out, maybe a comet or two, and maybe a planet closer to the sun than Moho on a high inclination. That would give us something new without changing gameplay mechanics.

As I said, the partnerships I've seen to date seem like people were high when they made those decisions.

If you take all of the posts in this thread and sum them up, people are thankful but bewildered by Squads actions. People are bewildered becauae what they're doing makes poor business sense. If they didn't need the money.

A cartoon would be awesome if they could pull it off but what they've done so far is nothing close to something that big.

I speculate that they were running out of money because squads actions are consistent with a company running low on money. If they don't have a cashflow problem they need to hire someone that is not a gamer that understands how to grow a business properly. Not MaxMaps and his craigslist style of wheeling and dealing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the University of Phoenix Online selling MBAs now? :huh:

Squad's actions are consistent with a company looking to monetize and expand their KSP brand while going through the growing pains typical of a successful company. If Squad wasn't financially solvent they would have either: 1) sold KSP to a publisher; 2) formed a strategic alliance with another developer; or, 3) opened Squad up to investors. Since none of those scenarios has appeared, it is safe to assume that when Squad says they have enough capital to finish KSP - along with financing a film (allegedly) and whatever other projects they have going at the moment - that they mean it.

Likewise it is amusing that the assumption is that Squad initiated the partnerships, whereas it is just as likely that Squad was the one approached. The fact that those speculating that generating multiple revenue streams and/or embracing cobranding efforts (fancy term for "makin' swag") is an indication of financial instability must then be convinced that the partnership between Thrustmaster and Ferrari on their steering wheels is a sign that one of those companies has "run out of money" and is making "crazy decisions" because if a business "doesn't need the money" then they wouldn't be trying to "make money" because "making money" is "bad business sense."

How about we leave the speculation and second-guessing about Squad's financial and marketing decisions to someone that is not a gamer and who understands how to grow a business properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loving v1.0. Brilliant work Squad, this is the game so many of us have dreamed of for years!!

I really like the "surprise" changes to aerodynamics and heating. These changes eliminated two of the major areas of unrealism I had noticed (and generally turned a blind eye to). It makes the game a lot more challenging...I've already lost multiple Kerbals during reentry, something I haven't done in years.

Quick story for you: I, along with two other "grown ups," are using KSP to teach spaceflight to a bunch of high school students. I had my curriculum written, and it was about 80% good, based on 0.9 (beta). Then, before the class actually happened, out came 1.0 and some hasty KSP playing / editing of the curriculum ensued.

But then we had a pre-class meeting last week, where I learned that rather than 1.0, the students would instead be using the (free) demo version based on a much older build of KSP. Older, in fact, than any version of KSP I had ever played. (I started in Oct 2013). So...back to the drawing board again!

We will be purchasing a few copies of KSP for contest winners. Already some copies have been purchased including at least one Kerbal EDU. (Would be nice if Kerbal EDU and the demo version were brought either to 1.0 or close to it...)

Of course, as you'd expect, there are a few students "ringers" participating in the class who already play KSP. All good news!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the University of Phoenix Online selling MBAs now? :huh:

Squad's actions are consistent with a company looking to monetize and expand their KSP brand while going through the growing pains typical of a successful company. If Squad wasn't financially solvent they would have either: 1) sold KSP to a publisher; 2) formed a strategic alliance with another developer; or, 3) opened Squad up to investors. Since none of those scenarios has appeared, it is safe to assume that when Squad says they have enough capital to finish KSP - along with financing a film (allegedly) and whatever other projects they have going at the moment - that they mean it.

Likewise it is amusing that the assumption is that Squad initiated the partnerships, whereas it is just as likely that Squad was the one approached. The fact that those speculating that generating multiple revenue streams and/or embracing cobranding efforts (fancy term for "makin' swag") is an indication of financial instability must then be convinced that the partnership between Thrustmaster and Ferrari on their steering wheels is a sign that one of those companies has "run out of money" and is making "crazy decisions" because if a business "doesn't need the money" then they wouldn't be trying to "make money" because "making money" is "bad business sense."

How about we leave the speculation and second-guessing about Squad's financial and marketing decisions to someone that is not a gamer and who understands how to grow a business properly.

They don't even charge for them now. You just print them from their website. BAHAHAHA!!!!

I always say actions speak louder than words. Boy does Squads actions speak volumes.

I'm typically a very positive poster on this forum and feel bad for pointing at what I see on the surface.

Half baked marketing partnerships and a rushed release. Fill in the infinite possibilities why here. Lol!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone have the problem with the 1x6 and 2x3 solar panels not giving the option to retract?

That's by design, you have to use the shielded versions of them if you want the option to retract them now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome to Kerbal Space Program. After Four years in development, hopefully it will have been worth the wait.

Worth the wait? It was a brillant game in 0.18, when i first tried it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ This.

Also, a request to SQUAD: Please add some kind of flavor text in the next patch that indicates that if we decline a rescue mission, some other agency will take care of it. Unless of course I'm correct in assuming that nobody else is going to do anything and when the mission expires the Kerbal dies o_O

Link to post
Share on other sites
^ This.

Also, a request to SQUAD: Please add some kind of flavor text in the next patch that indicates that if we decline a rescue mission, some other agency will take care of it. Unless of course I'm correct in assuming that nobody else is going to do anything and when the mission expires the Kerbal dies o_O

I was worried about the same thing last time I declined a rescue contract because I didn't have the claw D:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. I never really considered the water a harder place to land anyway, but with the new parachute mechanics preventing rockets from exploding when they tip over, water is nice and friendly (ish) now.

See my signature for more information ;)

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