KSP Weekly: The space pioneers and other adventures

[passinglurker]

1 minute ago, TheEpicSquared said:

So what's this "barn" people are talking about? Sorry, haven't been following along.  

ah sorry about that you can read up on and discuss the drama around it over here

[klesh]

26 minutes ago, TheEpicSquared said:

So what's this "barn" people are talking about? Sorry, haven't been following along.  

 

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by klesh

[regex]

6 hours ago, Frozen_Heart said:

There have been a lot more drastic craft breaking changes than moving a ladder before. Aka the Mk-3 spaceplanes parts stopped some craft even being loaded again.

Forget the Mk3 parts, what about 1.0 implementing a decent facsimile of an actual aerodynamic simulator?

[minepagan]

1 hour ago, regex said:

Forget the Mk3 parts, what about 1.0 implementing a decent facsimile of an actual aerodynamic simulator?

"It's not a bug it's a feature"

[regex]

27 minutes ago, minepagan said:

"It's not a bug it's a feature"

Well, it is a feature, the placeholder we had before was exactly that. Breaking craft was expected.

[basic.syntax]

Instead of "bring back the barn" I will ask: "please give us a Tier 0"  - and rebalance the upgrade expenses   (As I'm sure was intended, way back when "Tier 0" was sneak-previewed.)

Quote

What happened to the barn?
The barn tier of buildings were initially introduced to the community as the first tier of buildings that would be encountered in Beta Than Ever. However, both the community and the KSP team both agreed that more work needed to be done on them, so a decision was made to leave that tier out of this update. The status of the barn is currently unknown, but will be touched on internally once development on the next update has begun.

This picture from a  2015 post by SkyRender is fascinating: (source) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Albert_II_V2_launch.jpg  

Germany's V2 rocket Test Stand 7 is also a neat historical reference.
 

[DunaManiac]

I can't wait for the console update. Someday I'll read this thread and it'll say CONSOLE UPDATE RELEASED!

[razark]

1 hour ago, basic.syntax said:

This picture from a  2015 post by SkyRender is fascinating: (source) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Albert_II_V2_launch.jpg  

Germany's V2 rocket Test Stand 7 is also a neat historical reference.

Hey, those would be great.

Just a couple of questions:
-What's the crew capacity of those rockets?
-Why don't those look like they're made from big piles of trash?

[basic.syntax]

29 minutes ago, razark said:

Just a couple of questions:
-What's the crew capacity of those rockets?
-Why don't those look like they're made from big piles of trash?

1. KSP design puts Kerbals first, to create an immediate "I want to help this character succeed" connection for new players; uncrewed rockets first is obviously more realistic. For that, RoverDude made a neat Sounding Rockets addition that would fit well in a "Tier 0", if not for the Marketing department  

2. Obviously a matter of strong opinions, but the "repurposed oil drums" art style of certain parts doesn't bother me.

[regex]

1 hour ago, razark said:

Hey, those would be great.

They would, indeed, be great. The pile of tired, overused, and insulting tropes we were slated to get instead wouldn't be great. 

[HebaruSan]

15 hours ago, klesh said:

Thanks! That was before I joined the forums, and while I had been vaguely aware of The Barn Legacy™, I had not seen the discussions in detail. Since this is a somewhat notorious and divisive incident in which the community is alleged to have influenced SQUAD's decision to pull a feature, I was curious how the actual feedback broke down analytically, so I read the whole thing from start to finish and took notes, trying to put myself in the shoes of a hypothetical SQUAD employee tasked with deciding "Go or No-Go on The Barn." I decided to measure the tone by counting posts according to a simple categorization scheme:

• Negative: At least somewhat critical of the Tier 0 assets, either the concept or the execution or both, indicating they need at least some more work if not a total re-do, includes both verbose substantive criticisms and terse angry dismissals
• Neutral: Posts not addressing the models or textures directly or not expressing an opinion on them---side arguments about parts or the tech tree, rebutting an argument without actually saying the models or textures are good or bad, complaints about previous SQUAD models, requests for clarification, feature suggestions, attempts to tone-police others' criticisms, etc.
• Positive: "That looks great!" or otherwise approving the concept or specifics of the teased images, without negative caveats

It was a surprisingly close margin. Considering that many posts were mixed (positive on the concept but concerned about execution), which my definitions required me to put in the Negative category, you could argue it was close to a tie. However (and I should have quantified this but didn't), the Negative category had a noticeably higher proportion of repeat posts by the same person, probably because criticisms tend to provoke disputes more than praise. If you factor that in, an objective per-commenter headcount may have given an overall Positive assessment. An exercise for the next person to analyze this thread, perhaps.

The per-page trending was kind of interesting; Negative posts peaked at page 6, halfway through the thread, whereas Positive posts peaked on page 1 and declined steadily thereafter. It seemed that once Bac9's criticisms of the models and textures were posted, participants became more reluctant to offer unqualified praise. Neutrals just grew and grew, except briefly when Negatives crowded them out on page 6.

Conclusion: It's plausible that SQUAD saw this thread and decided to pull The Barn, but the community was not united against it.

Edited May 9, 2017 by HebaruSan

[passinglurker]

29 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

<snip>

good analysis but it should be noted that the majority of the negative criticism at the time came from the subreddit. I'd agree that the community wasn't united but I wouldn't call it close either, and it doesn't take everyone making a fuss to tip the scales into the "not worth it" territory.

Also this isn't the only incident where mass public shenanigans influenced squads decisions the "save the round 8" campaign from some time after is another example.

Edit: link to relevant reddit threads on the subject

Edited May 9, 2017 by passinglurker

[John FX]

1 hour ago, passinglurker said:

good analysis but it should be noted that the majority of the negative criticism at the time came from the subreddit. I'd agree that the community wasn't united but I wouldn't call it close either, and it doesn't take everyone making a fuss to tip the scales into the "not worth it" territory.

Also this isn't the only incident where mass public shenanigans influenced squads decisions the "save the round 8" campaign from some time after is another example.

Edit: link to relevant reddit threads on the subject

Interesting to see a chart of the positive/negative balance. Of course this just reinforces to me that the choice is between keeping (round8) or losing (barn) the part, redesigning the part seems to get lip service but no actual results.

So, would you rather have the part as presented or not have the part at all?

[RoverDude]

I wouldn't exactly be putting these new parts in the same bucket as the barn either, thank you

[Streetwind]

But can we bribe you to also make a barn, @RoverDude?  

And when I say "a barn", I mean more in the general sense of a fourth building tier. I've long thought that the career progression could greatly benefit from it, and my recent experiments with Custom Barn Kit have only made me more convinced.

I wouldn't even care if it was an expansion-only feature. I'm buying that anyway

[basic.syntax]

14 minutes ago, Streetwind said:

And when I say "a barn", I mean more in the general sense of a fourth building tier. I've long thought that the career progression could greatly benefit from it...

+1.  The WIP art assets were in process of being reworked, they must exist somewhere in the "when we have time" folders on the server. I understand what the priority is right now, but I remain hopeful.

[passinglurker]

2 hours ago, basic.syntax said:

+1.  The Placeholder art assets were in process of being replaced, they must exist somewhere in the "when we have time" folders on the server. I understand what the priority is right now, but I remain hopeful.

ftfy

EDIT: if the DLC development results in cracking open the building art assets to be moddable finally then that'd an example of a base game development I'd buy a DLC to support.

Edited May 9, 2017 by passinglurker

[Tidus Klein]

4 hours ago, RoverDude said:

I wouldn't exactly be putting these new parts in the same bucket as the barn either, thank you

Hey roverdude would you ever be so inclined to say if "ALL" the teased "parts"  will only be in the expansion or will some of the pre existing ones be revamped with the next update

[RoverDude]

29 minutes ago, Tidus Klein said:

Hey roverdude would you ever be so inclined to say if "ALL" the teased "parts"  will only be in the expansion or will some of the pre existing ones be revamped with the next update

NDA

[Tidus Klein]

 im dumb can someone explain what NDA is...my first guess is that you are obligated not to reveal that information

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

8 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

 the Negative category had a noticeably higher proportion of repeat posts by the same person

That sounds strangely familiar. Que the Twilight Zone music.

[RoverDude]

10 minutes ago, Tidus Klein said:

 im dumb can someone explain what NDA is...my first guess is that you are obligated not to reveal that information

Non-Disclosure Agreement.  Means I can't discuss stuff not already covered by the PR folks, and also means I can neither confirm nor deny speculation / rumors / assumptions (both correct and incorrect), etc.

[klesh]

8 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

-snip-

 

Wow. See, this is why I like you, mang.

[minepagan]

Hey everyone, speaking of a building revamp/expansion....

What about the modular Space Center project that @bac9 had? (or something like it)

THIS is something I would immediately buy if it was a DLC. I mean, heck, it effectively adds a whole new dynamic to the gameplay, and so much more depth. I would without hesitation shell out upwards of $30 dollars for a DLC that contained this.

I would like to ask @RoverDude about the posibility of this ever coming fruition, even in a somewhat simplified form.

 

Just imagine, guys, being able to have multiple launchpads or VABs....or being able to move buildings around, so you could have another runway....or anything else!

Edited May 9, 2017 by minepagan

[RoverDude]

@minepagan - NDA, you guys should know better by now