KSP Weekly: Hallogreen is here!

[p1t1o]

24 minutes ago, Azimech said:

Just because most people just go to space and can't really imagine anything else to do with this wonderful product (and I've seen lots of comments of players who've landed everywhere and ask on facebook "what now?") ... doesn't mean others have the same self-imposed limitations. I see lots of non-violent applications for multiplayer. Economics race for example like EVE, mine until a certain goal is met, co-op or competition.

Use Extraplanetary Launchpads with accelerated building, all teams on the same moon, they transport new modules to orbit and build a station with a minimum of x parts, in the same orbit.

Hide and seek, with competing team vessel labels disabled but increased visual range, in orbit or on Gilly.

Space Pong, have two large windows floating in space and with your ship you're trying to use the blast of your rocket engines to fling a ball through the window of the other one ... while trying not to crash through your own window.

Racing is another one. Five teams racing a five minute race, after every race the driver/pilot and the constructor evaluate and have the possibility to adjust or rebuild a car/plane/spaceship for 15 minutes, then everyone races again.

Two teams build VTOL's then try to build a house of cards (or metal plates in this case).

Build robots or cars and play football.

Should I go on?

And if you use your imagination, you could set up a line-dancing club on a quake server, but that doesnt stop it from being a bit "reachy".

[Azimech]

4 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

And if you use your imagination, you could set up a line-dancing club on a quake server, but that doesnt stop it from being a bit "reachy".

What a great idea!

[0111narwhalz]

26 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

And if you use your imagination, you could set up a line-dancing club on a quake server, but that doesnt stop it from being a bit "reachy".

Let's see... What was my router password again? Ah, here we go.

Forwards port...

[Scientia1423]

On 10/29/2016 at 1:37 AM, Redneck said:

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Multiplayer or this

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Planned_features

The first link has outdated info and the second is under outdated references.

Most things on the wiki are outdated as the community can't be bothered to help with this issue.

[Tr1gg3r]

An MP robot war Arena.....with some new destructive parts.... Could be gd

[JayPee]

4 hours ago, Mervy said:

...

 

...have you ever heard of Artemis Starship Bridge Simulator?

 

http://artemis.eochu.com/

 

enjoy

[Curveball Anders]

11 minutes ago, JayPee said:

...have you ever heard of Artemis Starship Bridge Simulator?

no

[Azimech]

If Klingon Academy would've had the possibilities, I gladly would've been the engineer in a MP game. I think science & security are the least favourable positions. Scan this and that, transport goons to other planets or ships ...

Anyway ... KSP has the possibility for some insane micro-management if operating a capital ship. Writing the energy management isn't that hard either. You could be flying through a nebula and there's a repair crew running around trying to repair systems or hull plating while the nebula corrodes and wrecks them. Meanwhile the helm tries to find the best route out of it and the engineer is balancing between shields, life support, propulsion, medical station and damage control.

[Terwin]

On 10/29/2016 at 6:27 AM, StarfishLeader said:

The new form of dev notes makes people at squad seem so distant as barely any names are mentioned and no specific progress has been highlighted (e.g. Dev X just finished up with making the rockets less explody)

I figured that this was to lessen the community impact of normal turnover, since the last mention of developer turnover seems to have spawned at least one dooms-day cult.

There is also the possibility that it is related to developers still being in 'bug-fix' mode as opposed to 'new feature' mode.

Not a whole lot of point saying 'Tom and Harry have been play-testing 1.2.1 looking for regressions, none found yet; Dick spent the week trying to track down a bug that turned out to be caused by some read-only files that were not deleted while he was re-installing the latest build on his system, he was able to verify that the problem was gone when he did a clean install in a new folder.  Jessie and Marco were out sick for most of the week, but are expected back in the office next week'.

Especially if half those developers are only on 3 or 6 month contracts and will not be around all that long.(Developers often change jobs every few years, and from what I have heard, game developers burn out or change jobs even more often than that) 

 

[Racescort666]

11 minutes ago, Curveball Anders said:

no

I played it with a few friends and I was reminded of the parable about the blind men who were asked to describe an elephant. 

[Mako]

I'm not usually interested in multiplayer modes so I won't be upset if it never happens for KSP. That being said, I have used DMP with a friend and we had fun. We would probably use multiplayer a little if it was implemented and worked well.

3 hours ago, Redneck said:

Why dont squad use DMP? Really everything in DMP works it only starts messing up once you come into visual range of target.

As far as using DMP to integrate multiplayer as a stock feature, I think the only think you could make use of is the concept. Even if the code could be used while respecting copyright and permissions, I'm sure so much of it is outdated and would have to be completely rewritten. You're probably better off starting from scratch.

From what SQUAD has told us officially in now rather old Devnotes, it sounded like they had started from scratch and had made some amount of progress. They never gave any indication of how much progress, but I remember several Devnotes that mention a team member continuing to work specifically on multiplayer. It's great that they were making an effort towards it, but I imagine that has long since stopped. I would also aging that almost all of that work would have to be nearly rewritten from scratch as well as DMP, since both were from before the move to Unity 5 and the 1.2 update that cleaned up a lot of the code.

I agree with you're assessment that since we haven't heard anything about it in a long time, and I'll add that all the SQUAD staff who officially mentioned multiplayer being added have left the company, its unlikely that we'll see multiplayer. I don't recall any mentions of multiplayer since those team members left.

[Redneck]

3 minutes ago, Mako said:

I'm not usually interested in multiplayer modes so I won't be upset if it never happens for KSP. That being said, I have used DMP with a friend and we had fun. We would probably use multiplayer a little if it was implemented and worked well.

As far as using DMP to integrate multiplayer as a stock feature, I think the only think you could make use of is the concept. Even if the code could be used while respecting copyright and permissions, I'm sure so much of it is outdated and would have to be completely rewritten. You're probably better off starting from scratch.

From what SQUAD has told us officially in now rather old Devnotes, it sounded like they had started from scratch and had made some amount of progress. They never gave any indication of how much progress, but I remember several Devnotes that mention a team member continuing to work specifically on multiplayer. It's great that they were making an effort towards it, but I imagine that has long since stopped. I would also aging that almost all of that work would have to be nearly rewritten from scratch as well as DMP, since both were from before the move to Unity 5 and the 1.2 update that cleaned up a lot of the code.

I agree with you're assessment that since we haven't heard anything about it in a long time, and I'll add that all the SQUAD staff who officially mentioned multiplayer being added have left the company, its unlikely that we'll see multiplayer. I don't recall any mentions of multiplayer since those team members left.

all squad has to do is say "We are/arent doing it" Or "We are looking into it...no promises!" But that would make to much sense i guess! :shrug:

[0111narwhalz]

On 10/28/2016 at 5:37 PM, Redneck said:

Then what is this? 

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Multiplayer or this

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Planned_features

It is foolish to use the Wiki to imply obligation on the part of SQUAD in any way, particularly when the Wiki includes a disclaimer to this effect. The Wiki is community-generated, and likely out of date.

[Curveball Anders]

54 minutes ago, Racescort666 said:

I played it with a few friends and I was reminded of the parable about the blind men who were asked to describe an elephant. 

Except that I've played several MP games the last 30+ years.

Both massive and closed, online and table, the main problem with all of them are idiots.

[klgraham1013]

10 minutes ago, Redneck said:

"We are looking into it...no promises!"

They have said this.

[Superfluous J]

31 minutes ago, Redneck said:

all squad has to do is say "We are/arent doing it" Or "We are looking into it...no promises!" But that would make to much sense i guess! :shrug:

 

19 minutes ago, klgraham1013 said:

They have said this.

Pretty much this. What would make sense is assuming they're in the same state they've always been: An idea that they agreed to try for once it was proven to be logistically possible, and a very-end-game goal. Not end-of-career-mode type end-game, but end-of-development.

And if you look at it that way, the last thing you should want it Multiplayer, because it means development would be over

[Redneck]

30 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

 

Pretty much this. What would make sense is assuming they're in the same state they've always been: An idea that they agreed to try for once it was proven to be logistically possible, and a very-end-game goal. Not end-of-career-mode type end-game, but end-of-development.

And if you look at it that way, the last thing you should want it Multiplayer, because it means development would be over

a long time ago in 2014 maybe but alot has changed and devs have left since then. A quick "its still on the table" or "its not on the table" is really easy to do is it not? But what do I know. 

[Mako]

59 minutes ago, Redneck said:

all squad has to do is say "We are/arent doing it" Or "We are looking into it...no promises!" But that would make to much sense i guess! :shrug:

You're asking them to give you something (an answer) that doesn't exist. They remaining staff, with recently appointed project lead, probably haven't devoted much time to thinking about multiplayer. If SQUAD is serious about continuing development of KSP, they're probably focused on getting all development staff, especially the new hires, up to speed with the current code. If there's fixes to do they'll focus on that first. Then they can talk future development. If I were in charge, I would give you a non-committal answer of "we're going to look into it and we won't give you any word about it until we have a final answer." I wouldn't say yes until I was sure it was working. I wouldn't say no unless I knew it would be too expensive to make. I guess that would be some communication about it, but you still wouldn't have a real answer.

1 hour ago, Azimech said:

Anyway ... KSP has the possibility for some insane micro-management if operating a capital ship. Writing the energy management isn't that hard either. You could be flying through a nebula and there's a repair crew running around trying to repair systems or hull plating while the nebula corrodes and wrecks them. Meanwhile the helm tries to find the best route out of it and the engineer is balancing between shields, life support, propulsion, medical station and damage control.

I think this sounds interesting. I also think this sounds like a completely different game. It kind of sounds like what I've experienced of Star Citizen. If that ever actually becomes a real game, I think you'd like it.

[Redneck]

1 minute ago, Mako said:

You're asking them to give you something (an answer) that doesn't exist. They remaining staff, with recently appointed project lead, probably haven't devoted much time to thinking about multiplayer. If SQUAD is serious about continuing development of KSP, they're probably focused on getting all development staff, especially the new hires, up to speed with the current code. If there's fixes to do they'll focus on that first. Then they can talk future development. If I were in charge, I would give you a non-committal answer of "we're going to look into it and we won't give you any word about it until we have a final answer." I wouldn't say yes until I was sure it was working. I wouldn't say no unless I knew it would be too expensive to make. I guess that would be some communication about it, but you still wouldn't have a real answer.

So see you just did it...see how easy that was? Now if they would say something that would be great!

[Mako]

@Redneck It was very easy for me to say it; I never have to deliver anything and if i make promises here that I don't keep no one will really think twice about it. If all they say is "we'll give it some thought sometime, when we have time, and then we'll give you an answer," you'll be satisfied with that?

I'm sure that since they know people want it, and since they have said they are still planning on further developing KSP, you can simply infer that they'll talk amongst themselves about he idea of multiplayer. They'll probably even share that idea with us when they have reached a concensus. Until then, I don't expect you'll get anything beyond "we'll think about it sometime, but you won't hear about it until we know for sure."

Like I said, I guess a non-answer is still official communication regarding multiplayer, but it's still not an answer.

Edited October 31, 2016 by Mako
Clarification.

[Redneck]

Again its all assumptions. Only squad has the power. We can go around and around all day long but unless squad says anything we are right back where we started. Not me...not you...not the community...but squad is the only people that can settle this

[Superfluous J]

38 minutes ago, Redneck said:

So see you just did it...see how easy that was? Now if they would say something that would be great!

If I was running Squad I'd reply here with this:

"we're going to look into it and we won't give you any word about it until we have a final answer."

(which incidentally is why I don't run Squad or any other company. I've not got the correct filters to deal with the public in anything resembling a constructive way)

Edited October 31, 2016 by 5thHorseman

[Redneck]

20 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

If I was running Squad I'd reply here with this:

"we're going to look into it and we won't give you any word about it until we have a final answer."

(which incidentally is why I don't run Squad or any other company. I've not got the correct filters to deal with the public in anything resembling a constructive way)

No way man...there are 5 dots  o7

[Wallygator]

5 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

, the last thing you should want it Multiplayer, because it means development would be over

Ouch! 

But well stated. 

[JayPee]

@Racescort666@Curveball Anders I used to play it a lot at a Hackerspace I was a member of and we had a lot of fun with it.

Plugging again for good measure: http://artemis.eochu.com/