Jump to content

Thoughts on adding mods to stock


Recommended Posts

There are frequently requests or suggestions (demands even) that particular mods should be stock, and this isn't one.

All mods offer enhancements to the stock game in some way.  Some (however good) are clearly never going to be 'in scope' for stock integration (weaponisation for example) whilst some like, parts or information and planning aids may well be.

On the face of it a good solution to a given issue that is addressed or fixed, or otherwise dealt with, by a mod is to simply integrate that mod into stock.  But I don't think that is the right approach.

As I understand it mods are essentially extra bits of code that are 'strutted' to the core game.  Which means they often have to apply work arounds and extra calculations to function, and this can cause bugs and conflicts both with the stock code and other mods.  From what little I understand it would be ultimately far more efficient to take the 'essence' of any given mod and integrate it properly into the stock code.

Surely,  rather than requesting for - mod 'X' to be stock - we should be requesting for - features like those in mod 'X' - to be added to stock because the end result will be better and more efficient, less likely to cause bugs (and more fixable when it does) and much better integrated into the UI and game play than would be possible with mods.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, pandaman said:

Well, OK 'better' is subjective. :cool:

Historically speaking that hasn't been the case.  The mods they added outright have been excellent for the game, while the features they added similar to mods have been pretty bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Alshain said:

Historically speaking that hasn't been the case.  The mods they added outright have been excellent for the game, while the features they added similar to mods have been pretty bad.

Which mods were added outright?

OK, would you or would you not agree that taking a mod and integrating it's code into the stock code carefully, and adjusting as needed to make it fit 'stock' better, (UI, graphic styles etc) gives more efficient (and therefore smoother running) code overall than taking the mod as it is and just adding it on top of the stock code, then tweaking stuff to work around resulting conflicts and bugs rather than fix them properly at source?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember them all but SpacePlane Plus and Fine Print were two.  SPP did get a slight shape redesign, but otherwise the same.

On the other hand, their Enhanced NavBall implementation sucks.  That stupid blue arrow is not very helpful, and it doesn't help find the other points at all.  The ISRU and fairings are more examples of 'copied' features that don't quite live up to the mod.

7 minutes ago, pandaman said:

OK, would you or would you not agree that taking a mod and integrating it's code into the stock code carefully, and adjusting as needed to make it fit 'stock' better, (UI, graphic styles etc) gives more efficient (and therefore smoother running) code overall than taking the mod as it is and just adding it on top of the stock code, then tweaking stuff to work around resulting conflicts and bugs rather than fix them properly at source?

I would agree and disagree.  It depends on the mod, some of those mods are better written than KSP.

Edited by Alshain
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Alshain thanks.  Yes, no doubt some mods are better coded than KSP,  but that wouldn't mean that they could be just 'bolted on' without issues.  And yes some mods would be a 'better fit' and/or less prone to causing issues too, depending on what they do and need to access (presumably part mods like SPP are one type that can be imported directly fairly well).

Though, as you said, SPP was changed graphically to make it fit, it wasn't just pulled in and used as it was.  So we didn't get SPP, we got an 'adjusted for stock' version of it.

I don't really want to start a list, or debate, of mods that should or should not be integrated, but I will use KER as an example as it is commonly requested, and I use it so I am at least a little familiar with it (I understand that there may also be licensing issues, but that's not relevant to this example).  As it is KER works well, but if it were to be brought into stock, and assuming the bulk of it's code would be compatible, it's UI could probably be streamlined to fit in better with gameplay, so what my original post was essentially saying "don't just ask for KER as it is, ask for the features and tools it provides, because then we 'should' end up with a slicker, more efficient and bug free product"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I expect changes of that nature, but the UI is so little of KER's code.  Things in SPP and Fine Print were changed to make it fit.  A lot of the code in KER is in fact better than stock.  Take the burn time calculation for example.

Edited by Alshain
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, pandaman said:

@Alshain.  I don't disagree with you, but I think you may have missed my point a bit.

I think you missed the point of the people asking for mods to be stock.  They don't expect it to be verbatim in most cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious about the performance hit of a *well made* mod versus a stock implementation- my gut tells me that Unity has a pretty decent mod infrastructure, compared to simply using an external language like Python or Lua. I imagine the devs who also create heavier mods, eg Nathan or Bob, would have some pretty good insight into this.

Edited by Waxing_Kibbous
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alshain said:

I think you missed the point of the people asking for mods to be stock.  They don't expect it to be verbatim in most cases.

Fair point, I may well have, but In many cases it certainly has felt (to me at least) that's exactly what they were asking for.

 

 

 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...