Stabilization

[DocUrlaub]

At the risk of sounding dramatic, I see a big risk in a continuously ongoing development environment.

Much of the success of KSP can be attributed to the community, and specifically the modding community. My sense is that the "Golden Age" of KSP took off from around 0.90 through today. That recognized, with each new patch, the modding community face a setback and have to update their content for compatibility. It need not be said they these selfless individuals work for free and create passion within the community with their content.

Thereby it is understandably when modders burn-out from continuous updates and the demands for updates by the community who love their contributions. Alternatively new interests simply arise, and they move on in life.

My wish is that development focus only on final “Stabilization†(Unity 5, 64-bit support, and improved resource/asset management). If any "content" related updates occur, then it should only focus on integrating selected mods for long term support. This will cement the modding community relationship, as opposed to wear it out. The rest can be saved for KSP 2.

Perhaps it is overblow, however the have been cases recently where this occurred. (KW Rocketry comes to mind) I love KSP, and it's the first single game that I broke over 50 hours playtime within 20+ years of gaming. (currently 267 hours) My thanks goes out to the mod community, and to Squad!

Thanks for your thoughts & feedback.

[Vanamonde]

This suggestion for the game's development has been moved to Development Discussions.

As for my opinion, remember that some of us do not use mods, and would not want to see the game's development inhibited for a problem which doesn't affect me or my style of play. Also, some modders are going to lose interest and abandon their projects no matter what else is going on. That's just the nature of things.

[zekes]

I agree, we should focus at the very least with finishing stabilize KSP for PC on Unity 5, BEFORE going to PS4 and without altering it horribly to kill the mods. Modding is truly a huge part of KSP, and SQUAD must weigh that into account when making planning changes.

[Hobbes Novakoff]

No. No. A thousand times no. First off, doing this (basically stopping development after U5)... Do you really want that? Basically that's what you're saying. Also, I'd hardly say that modders are drained from continuous updates. When 1.0, easily the biggest update to KSP ever, half the modding community had updated within a few days, and 95% had updated within a week. Do you really want to sacrifice thee entire future of KSP, just so modders don't have to spend a couple hours updating their files once every two months?

[samhuk]

I agree somewhat with the OP. There really is little point on further work without updating the extremely outdated core systems of KSP (Unity 5, 64-bit, etc.). KSP has already somewhat reached a glass-ceiling in terms of quality, there is hardly any room for improvement without the actions advised by the OP.

Also...

No. No. A thousand times no. First off, doing this (basically stopping development after U5)... Do you really want that? Basically that's what you're saying.

Nope. That isn't what the OP said at all. That's dubious extension. The OP said there should be focus on stability and core-systems (U5, 64-bit, etc.), and there was nothing on

stopping development after U5

.

Also, you say that

95% had updated within a week

, but that is the case with only small and basic mods. Large and complex mods which "95%" of people actually download didn't and for some still hasn't.

[Hobbes Novakoff]

Nope. That isn't what the OP said at all. That's dubious extension. The OP said there should be focus on stability and core-systems (U5, 64-bit, etc.), and there was nothing on [stopping development after U5]

Yes there was. From the OP:

If any "content" related updates occur, then it should only focus on integrating selected mods for long term support. All the rest can be saved for KSP 2.

In other words, according to him, the devs should stop working on new features and just integrate mods. The problem with this is that many mods add their features in a bit of a hacky way, and it takes longer to integrate that into the base game source code then to just code the entire thing from scratch.

Also, you say that , but that is the case with only small and basic mods. Large and complex mods which "95%" of people actually download didn't and for some still hasn't.

I haven't heard of a single example of a large mod besides B9 that has not updated yet.

[Daveroski]

I bought into KSP not the modding community.

Modders do so for their own interests and share things that they have done for themselves.

While KSP is fresh and new, and with each update it's fresher and newer, modders have interest in the game for it's own sake and will make mods accordingly.

If the game became stagnant, many modders would lose interest in KSP and move onto the next big thing.

I say to the devs as I have done so before, Break my saves, Make me have to start all over. Make KSP better. Give me more options. I got fun from the things I built while I was building them. I enjoyed missions until they were over. My bases once built don''t get many visits. There is always something else to do. That is what I want. What I don't want to change. So break it and rebuild it. The modders will love it!

[jkool702]

I would tend to halfway agree with the OP. I think that most (all?) current development should focus on stability (bug fixes, U5, 64-bit), and for the near future let the game be expandable by using mods.

However, I do not agree that development should stop with that - once U5 and x64 are implemented I would hope that development of parts, features, etc. continues.

[Murph]

No, no, a thousand times no!

Keep going with development as-is. Stability of old, long established features will emerge naturally. There is absolutely no need to kill off the inertia of ongoing development. The action proposed here would be hugely harmful to the long term success of KSP; whereas continued significant feature development boosts the long term success and helps both to stretch the long tail of sales revenue as well as generating potential for more short term spikes in sales revenue, i.e. maximum commercial success.

Much as I like the wide selection of mods available for KSP, that should have absolutely zero influence on development decisions by Squad (other than to continue to make sure that there's a generous selection of hooks for mods to attach to, and avoiding coding in ways that make it difficult to later mod). If some modders can't handle the pace, so be it. Any mods of significant value which are under proper FOSS licenses will continue regardless of their original creator's feelings. Those with restrictive licenses will die off and be replaced by something else (hopefully something better, and with a properly open license).

[Hobbes Novakoff]

No, no, a thousand times no!

Hey, you quoted me

[pandaman]

I agree that the current focus should be on U5 etc. But squad are right IMO to take time to fix issues with the current version as they have done. Adding new features at the same time, if they are ready, is a bonus, they are done for 1.1 and we just get to play with them earlier and they get 'field tested' into the bargain.