SQUAD

KSP Weekly: Fixing projects and making contact

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Alshain said:

I think it's more likely they will move onto KSP 2 than re-do the parts at this point.

If they make a KSP 2 in the next 10 years I'll eat my hat and you can call me bob..your long lost uncle 

(none sarcastic edit:) 

if squad did ever make a KSP2 I would want them to put more into it then what we have now, the current state of the game IMO has reached a point where there is simply not a whole lot to add, a KSP2 (again IMO) would feel like a 40-60 dollar DLC..you will get all the same physics, parts and graphics, with maybe a slight boost in performance, a few more parts and vamped current assists, with maybe a few new features.

the reason I don't like the idea of a KSP2 is the same reason I dident like Armored Core Verdict day...

From marketed it as a whole new game when in reality all it did was add a few parts, territory wars, and more story....heck it removed some features as well, so you ended up with more or less what felt like a expenseive rip off DLC and not a whole new game.

If squad thinks they have enough ideas to make a KSP2 feel fresh, I'm all for it but I can't see a KSP2 offering enough "meat" to be worth a new price tag when you could put up with the KSP you have now and do mostly the same thing:

edit edit:

what would be funny if squad went downs Keen software house's path and made Kerbal naval program, or kerbal Kastle sim...or even kerbnautica....*chuckles*

Edited by Tidus Klein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, KSK said:

Not aiming this at you directly - and yes I am generalising here - but gamers as a community are notoriously self centred in this regard and have very little appreciation of the realities of implementing their 'best interests' and even less appreciation for other people's time and effort. 

No offense perceived and no offense taken here. In fact, I mostly agree with you. I say mostly because in my experience those traits are hardly limited to gamers: people in general share these traits regardless of interests and hobbies. It only seems more prevalent amongst gamers when you are observing Internet forums. I see it on the internet, and also every time I drive my car on the 495 Beltway around Washington, D.C. I won't claim drivers are worse here than anywhere else, but I witness a lot of self-centered, self-important, inconsiderate driving almost every time I get in my car.

Still, I'd rather have the roads even when people act this way, even when I have to deal with traffic that is often a result of inconsiderate or inattentive driving, than have no roads and be unable to go anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Tidus Klein said:

if squad did ever make a KSP2 I would want them to put more into it then what we have now, the current state of the game IMO has reached a point where there is simply not a whole lot to add

...

If squad thinks they have enough ideas to make a KSP2 feel fresh, I'm all for it but I can't see a KSP2 offering enough "meat" to be worth a new price tag when you could put up with the KSP you have now and do mostly the same thing

The nice thing is if Squad did make a full priced KSP 2, and you didn't think it was worth the price tag, you wouldn't have to buy it. You would still own KSP 1 in whatever state they left it (or whatever state you have backups for) and it would still work and play just as it always has because Squad was reasonable and chose to release it with no DRM.

Since, as you think there is not much to add to KSP, you wouldn't really lose out on potential updates to KSP 1 if Squad started KSP 2, and the people who are interested in whatever improvements might come with a KSP 2 would be looking forward to the opportunity to buy it. So it seems like a win-win situation to me. Win-win-win if you consider Squad making money to be a good thing.

It's just a thought. I do understand what you mean, though. I do feel like there's not much that can be done to KSP at this point. There's been some design choices during the development of KSP that have put limits on what can actually be done without a lot of work undoing things. At the same time, the concepts and plenty of the implementation have a lot of potential. I see in a hypothetical KSP 2 the possibility of reaching some, maybe even most, of that potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tidus Klein said:

-snip-

You're making the assumption that companies make sequels for artistic merit and not potential monetary gain.

Edited by klgraham1013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, klgraham1013 said:

You're making the assumption that companies make sequels for artistic merit and not potential monetary gain.

Is he?  I really didn't get that from Tidus's post, I think he put the finger on the soar spot with the botom quote here

7 hours ago, Tidus Klein said:

If squad thinks they have enough ideas to make a KSP2 feel fresh, I'm all for it but I can't see a KSP2 offering enough "meat" to be worth a new price tag when you could put up with the KSP you have now and do mostly the same thing

I read that as the monetary question. I don't think it will sell as much as KSP 1 and tend to agree that IF there will be a KSP2, it would be at least a decade away.

Off course there will be people that would instantly buy a KSP2 right now because they think KSP1 is lacking in some way, but I also think that there is a much larger group that is perfectly fine where 'they are at' and enjoy what KSP has to offer right now. There has to be added value for a sequel to sell.  Fixing bugs, a few QOL fixes, more realistic atmosphere, getting a better burn indicator, etc. may attract some, but will it sell in hugre numbers again?  It sounds a bit corny, but 'there's a mod for that'  (mostly)

I tend to think it wouldn't, the mods we have now do a lot of 'fixing', a lot of 'making KSP great'. Not to mention that a new KSP would probably would need a MOD scene to be rebuilt from the ground up. I also see a lot of reluctance by players to even update to new versions of KSP, even if it has major updates and bug fixes. Because they are fine where they are at, with the mods they play, and updating breaks that. 

How big would the demand for a KSP2 be?

Edited by LoSBoL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LoSBoL said:

How big would the demand for a KSP2 be?

That's the big question. I think there's plenty of scope for a KSP2 and a number of ways that it could go, ranging from 'more of the same but with better graphics' (hey it works for first person shooters. <snark>) to an overhauled and expanded career mode to a near future KSP, to 'KSP2 - Colonisation.' Sure there's a mod for most of that but I also think there's a place for an 'official' version with everything nicely integrated and playing well together.

Whether there's enough demand for that 'official version' to justify the development costs is another matter. It also depends very much on whether Squad intend to release any further expansions and what those expansions might hold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

You're making the assumption that companies make sequels for artistic merit and not potential monetary gain.

A squeal normally is for monetary gain. But let's say this, you buy a orange for 10 bucks, you walk around and find a orange that's slightly more orange then the one you have, are you going to spend another 10 bucks for something that's only slightly improved?, now lets say the orange you find is bigger juicer and all together more orangy you would have no problem slapping down some extra dough for the improvements. There is a old saying, "the price is what you pay,Value is what you get. I would want KSP2 to have more value to it, then something that feels like a expensive DLC. It would helps squads PR, Finaces and all together keep the community happy...because people start Getting PO'ed when they feel like they dident get what they payed for/ promised....*COUGH COUGH "no mans sky" COUGH*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tidus Klein said:

if squad did ever make a KSP2 I would want them to put more into it then what we have now, the current state of the game IMO has reached a point where there is simply not a whole lot to add, a KSP2 (again IMO) would feel like a 40-60 dollar DLC..you will get all the same physics, parts and graphics, with maybe a slight boost in performance, a few more parts and vamped current assists, with maybe a few new features.

There are things they could do that would enhance the overall gameplay that could likely only be done as a sequel.  People clamor for an overhauled career game with more fore thought, but that isn't likely to happen in this game, that is likely to be the biggest selling point of the next game.  It happens a lot, the first game is usually the learning experience, mistakes are made but overall the game is good, and the second one improves upon that making things better.  KSP is not going to keep making money for Squad for 10 years and if they are smart they won't abandon the franchise. It's just business. 

It's how it works.  Another thing they can't do in KSP is raise the minimum system specs to allow the use of more of Unity 5's abilities.  Once you start selling a game with a minimum system spec, it is set is stone because people who bought it with computers at that spec expect it to continue working.  You can't suddenly patch the game and tell them they can't play what they bought anymore.  Those minimum specs were set 5 years ago and a lot happens in half a decade of computer technology.

 

Quote

the reason I don't like the idea of a KSP2 is the same reason I dident like Armored Core Verdict day...

From marketed it as a whole new game when in reality all it did was add a few parts, territory wars, and more story....heck it removed some features as well, so you ended up with more or less what felt like a expenseive rip off DLC and not a whole new game.

But from a business perspective, that works.  Activision makes CoD, the same game over and over again with slight improvements.  EA makes Madden NFL, again same game over and over.  More to the indie front, take a look at the incredibly popular Farming Simulator 17.  They took FS15, added a few small things, and voila.. the same game but it sells like hotcakes.  You may not like it, I really don't either, but our opinions are obviously the minority and you can't really blame game companies like Squad from wanting to make money with what works at the least amount of cost to them.  It's the gamers fault for buying it.

 

Quote

what would be funny if squad went downs Keen software house's path and made Kerbal naval program, or kerbal Kastle sim...or even kerbnautica....*chuckles*

I said they should do that even before Harvester left.  My first suggestion was Kerbal Flight Program, like KSP but but no solar system and a much bigger and more detailed planet, and many more plane parts that would be centered around other non-space purposes... like VTOL, Prop/turbo props, and so forth. (By the way, I would say it is more of Maxis' path that Keen Software went down... SimCity, SimLife, SimAnt, SimTower, SimCopter, SimEarth, and on and on and on)

Edited by Alshain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alshain said:

I said they should do that even before Harvester left.  My first suggestion was Kerbal Flight Program, like KSP but but no solar system and a much bigger and more detailed planet, and many more plane parts that would be centered around other non-space purposes... like VTOL, Prop/turbo props, and so forth. (By the way, I would say it is more of Maxis' path that Keen Software went down... SimCity, SimLife, SimAnt, SimTower, SimCopter, SimEarth, and on and on and on)

One thing that @Kuzzter suggested, which I really liked the idea of, was a Kerbal Sail Program. Kerbals setting out to properly explore their world for the first time, lots of potential for interesting physics led boat designs, possibilities for trading based career mode, land-grab competitions with AI factions (if we're wishing we may as well wish big :) ). Many of the elements that made KSP so compelling just moved to a different technological setting.

Edited by KSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, KSK said:

One thing that @Kuzzter suggested, which I really liked the idea of, was a Kerbal Sail Program. Kerbals setting out to properly explore their world for the first time, lots of potential for interesting physics led boat designs, possibilities for trading based career mode, land-grab competitions with AI factions (if we're wishing we may as well wish big :) ). Many of the elements that made KSP so compelling just moved to a different technological setting.

Exactly.  You might think KSP is about space, and it is... but other games explore space concepts.  None of them, however, allow you to build your own craft.  That is the core tenant of the Kerbal franchise in my opinion... build, then explore.  So you can explore space, the skies, the seas, under the seas, the open road, the possibilities are endless as long as you get to choose how it is done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alshain said:

Exactly.  You might think KSP is about space, and it is... but other games explore space concepts.  None of them, however, allow you to build your own craft.

 

BUILD YOUR OWN CRAFT....

O-o umm lets see....we got Empyrion galactic survival, Space Engineers, Avorion(the building in this game is amazing) Star made and several others I can't remember the name of. 

KSP's building system I think is a little more unique as it gives you set parts and not just blocks but the concept is the same 

Edited by Tidus Klein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tidus Klein said:

O-o umm lets see....we got Empyrion Galalagic survival, Space Engineers, Avorion(the building in this game is amazing) Star made and several others I can't remember the name of. 

KSP's building system I think is a little more unique as it gives you set parts and not just blocks but the concept is the same 

I meant in a pseudo-realistic sense.  Minecraft in space is not exploring space.

Share this post


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

I meant in a pseudo-realistic sense.  Minecraft in space is not exploring space.

I kinda figured that what you ment

edit...huu in thought I think it would be nice to have a Space engineers or such that was more based in reality to mess with, maybe squad should jump on that band wagon and make a block style building game but with more down to earth physics....maybe, I'm just throwing crap at the wall here

Edited by Tidus Klein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, KSK said:

That's the big question.

 

Which is why I ended with that question :wink:

Quote

Whether there's enough demand for that 'official version' to justify the development costs is another matter. It also depends very much on whether Squad intend to release any further expansions and what those expansions might hold.

Career overhaul, Graphical overhaul with higher minimum specs, near future, colonisation. They all sound like niches within a niche game like KSP. I might be thinking to simple here, but not all KSP players yearn for this stuff, instead of widening the target audiences, you could actually be narrowing it here. These all sound like they could be sold far better to existing players as a DLC/expansion then it would be to sell them the same game again, but just as little better on a front that may, or may not apeal to the players.
I might be relating it to much for myself here, but I'd rather spend money on expanding a game with these things, than to buy a new game that just tackles one of these suggestions.
 

14 hours ago, Alshain said:

Another thing they can't do in KSP is raise the minimum system specs to allow the use of more of Unity 5's abilities.  Once you start selling a game with a minimum system spec, it is set is stone because people who bought it with computers at that spec expect it to continue working.  You can't suddenly patch the game and tell them they can't play what they bought anymore.  Those minimum specs were set 5 years ago and a lot happens in half a decade of computer technology.

You can't patch the game, you can however expand it for though, expansions with higher minimum specs are not uncommon. As for half a decade might be long in general in computer technology, it doesn't really seem to matter much for a physics sim like KSP, it was fairly easy to bring KSP to it's knees 5 years ago, but it still is today.

14 hours ago, Alshain said:
Quote

 

But from a business perspective, that works.  Activision makes CoD, the same game over and over again with slight improvements.  EA makes Madden NFL, again same game over and over.  More to the indie front, take a look at the incredibly popular Farming Simulator 17.  They took FS15, added a few small things, and voila.. the same game but it sells like hotcakes. 

A competition based mutiplayer?, players just have to buy that if they want to continue competing. (you don't really have to, but you won't want to fall behind, or at least, feel like you fall behind)
Sports games like NFL, NHL, F1, FIFA, PES? They all have there origin from millions of sportsfans, teams change each year, and you just can't play with old team compositions. Off course they sell like hotcakes.
And If you think about it, FS, truck simulators, car simulators, train simulators or any simulator of real life for that matter tries to 'get better at realism' would apeal to their enthusiasts. Again millions of people who are dreaming to get the best realism experiences are buying.

Quote

You may not like it, I really don't either, but our opinions are obviously the minority and you can't really blame game companies like Squad from wanting to make money with what works at the least amount of cost to them.  It's the gamers fault for buying it.

Are our opinions really in the minority? The mentioned games have a completely different targeted audience, KSP is a completely different beast for a completely different breed of gamers, I don't think they get warm for an yearly updated game like FPS'ses, Sports games or realism simulators do. Even though for some KSP is a space sim, it indeed really isn't. We steer our rockets which isn't even done in reality. For most it really is Dream, Build, Fly I guess.  The suggestion that the franchise could be Dream, Build, Drive/Fly/Sail/Dive seems spot on as new game development routes.
 

Edited by LoSBoL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

Which is why I ended with that question :wink:

Career overhaul, Graphical overhaul with higher minimum specs, near future, colonisation. They all sound like niches within a niche game like KSP. I might be thinking to simple here, but not all KSP players yearn for this stuff, instead of widening the target audiences, you could actually be narrowing it here. These all sound like they could be sold far better to existing players as a DLC/expansion then it would be to sell them the same game again, but just as little better on a front that may, or may not apeal to the players.
I might be relating it to much for myself here, but I'd rather spend money on expanding a game with these things, than to buy a new game that just tackles one of these.

So throw them all in. Maybe ignore the near future stuff since KSP already includes that in the shape of high thrust ion drives, hybrid air breathing rocket engines and ISRU. At the end of the day I don't suppose it matters much whether you go for expansion packs or KSP 2 - both have pros and cons. Although KSP2 would allow a clean start rather than wedging yet more features into an old game engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KSK said:

Maybe ignore the near future stuff since KSP already includes that in the shape of high thrust ion drives,

This wouldn't be the case if they finally took the time for a polish pass. Another reason I refer to old parts as "place holders" is because thier stats have hardly changed since they were added in early access and its not because they got it right the first time. The Ion engine in particular suffers from inflated thrust because some one stated the xenon tanks with an arbitrary poor mass fraction that makes even the ant engine+fuel a better choice in all but the most impractical long burn scenarios. Make the tanks lighter and the ion engine's thrust and isp can be curbed to more reasonable levels while still maintaining usability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2017 at 10:18 PM, Vanamonde said:

Speculation is immune to logic and common sense, and needs no encouragement. It's like a weed that grows even where there is no soil.

I'm writing this one down... :wink:

 

Edited by Just Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

You can't patch the game, you can however expand it for though, expansions with higher minimum specs are not uncommon. As for half a decade might be long in general in computer technology, it doesn't really seem to matter much for a physics sim like KSP, it was fairly easy to bring KSP to it's knees 5 years ago, but it still is today.

Sure, you can expand it, but that doesn't make as much revenue as a new game.  The developer has to weigh in the amount of dev cost it takes to expand the game vs the revenue stream of a new game.

7 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

A competition based mutiplayer?, players just have to buy that if they want to continue competing. (you don't really have to, but you won't want to fall behind, or at least, feel like you fall behind)
Sports games like NFL, NHL, F1, FIFA, PES? They all have there origin from millions of sportsfans, teams change each year, and you just can't play with old team compositions. Off course they sell like hotcakes.
And If you think about it, FS, truck simulators, car simulators, train simulators or any simulator of real life for that matter tries to 'get better at realism' would apeal to their enthusiasts. Again millions of people who are dreaming to get the best realism experiences are buying.

I'm sorry, but have you ever played KSP?  You are aware of what KSP does, right?

7 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

Are our opinions really in the minority? The mentioned games have a completely different targeted audience, KSP is a completely different beast for a completely different breed of gamers, I don't think they get warm for an yearly updated game like FPS'ses, Sports games or realism simulators do. Even though for some KSP is a space sim, it indeed really isn't. We steer our rockets which isn't even done in reality. For most it really is Dream, Build, Fly I guess.  The suggestion that the franchise could be Dream, Build, Drive/Fly/Sail/Dive seems spot on as new game development routes.
 

So, your argument is that even though I mentioned several unrelated genres to illustrate that the effect is all of gaming, somehow KSP is exempt from the same rules as the rest of the industry.  Good luck with that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alshain said:

Sure, you can expand it, but that doesn't make as much revenue as a new game.  The developer has to weigh in the amount of dev cost it takes to expand the game vs the revenue stream of a new game.

We are on the same page, but I have doubts like Tidus has as well. Doubts that a new game like KSP will bring more revenu (at this point and time). I think it's fair to say that KSP is played and loved in so many different ways, that it resolves in to a huge wishlist of different kind of things what should be needed in a second version of KSP. Nearly everybody has a different opinion on how KSP2 should be like. Like KSK mentioned, they'd have to throw it all in to make everyone happy. I just tend to think that breaking it up into DLC's, and therefore spliting development could bring more revenue than not fulfulling everybody's 'wants' in a KSP2. 
 

Quote

I'm sorry, but have you ever played KSP?  You are aware of what KSP does, right?

Hardly realism, it's a fantasy (Dream, Build, Fly) space simulator  which does have a great physics simulation and orbital mechanics. But totally different from simulators I've mentioned that really profit from getting more realistic every year or so.

Quote

So, your argument is that even though I mentioned several unrelated genres to illustrate that the effect is all of gaming, somehow KSP is exempt from the same rules as the rest of the industry.  Good luck with that one.

I'm sorry, I just thought that with the genres you've illustrated there are very good arguments as to why sequals in those genres sell like hotcakes, I just can't think of arguments as to why this would be the same for the KSP playerbase.

 

Edited by LoSBoL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

We are on the same page, but I have doubts like Tidus has as well. Doubts that a new game like KSP will bring more revenu (at this point and time). I think it's fair to say that KSP is played and loved in so many different ways, that it resolves in to a huge wishlist of different kind of things what should be needed in a second version of KSP. Nearly everybody has a different opinion on how KSP2 should be like. Like KSK mentioned, they'd have to throw it all in to make everyone happy. I just tend to think that breaking it up into DLC's, and therefore spliting development could bring more revenue than not fulfulling everybody's 'wants' in a KSP2.

You can doubt it all you want, but the case is pretty clear.  It works, the gaming industry has proven it, I've listed many examples.  KSP is part of the gaming industry so it is not exempt.

 

20 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

Hardly realism, it's a fantasy (Dream, Build, Fly) space simulator  which does have a great physics simulation and orbital mechanics. But totally different from simulators I've mentioned that really profit from getting more realistic every year or so.

That's no different than any other simulator except MS Flight and Xplane.  Did you think Farming Simulator actually simulated farming?   That's adorable.

20 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

I'm sorry, I just thought that with the genres you've illustrated there are very good arguments as to why sequals in those genres sell like hotcakes, I just can't think of arguments as to why this would be the same for the KSP playerbase.

I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't.  It's the exact same scenario.  Make incremental improvements, release as a new game.  I promise you it will work, it has been proven.

Share this post


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

You can doubt it all you want, but the case is pretty clear.  It works, the gaming industry has proven it, I've listed many examples.  KSP is part of the gaming industry so it is not exempt.

 

That's no different than any other simulator except MS Flight and Xplane.  Did you think Farming Simulator actually simulated farming?   That's adorable.

I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't.  It's the exact same scenario.  Make incremental improvements, release as a new game.  I promise you it will work, it has been proven.

I'm not convinced it works that way, not every playerbase is the same. I think every genre has a bit of its own industry and are looking what there specific playerbase are prone for... To me there isn't 'one' gaming industry, nor 'one' kind of playerbase.

And no, I don't think a farming simulator is about realistic farming, the real world vehicles they integrate in that, are getting more realistic. The same goes for 'mimicking' real world cars, planes, trains, trucks etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

I'm not convinced it works that way, not every playerbase is the same. I think every genre has a bit of its own industry and are looking what there specific playerbase are prone for... To me there isn't 'one' gaming industry, nor 'one' kind of playerbase.

You don't need to be convinced.  There are apparently a lot of people that aren't convinced the Earth is round but their doubt doesn't alter facts.  Yours doesn't either.

Quote

And no, I don't think a farming simulator is about realistic farming, the real world vehicles they integrate in that, are getting more realistic. The same goes for 'mimicking' real world cars, planes, trains, trucks etc.

No they aren't.  They haven't become any more realistic than the were 6 years ago.  The incremental improvements they make will be similar to the ones in KSP 2.

Edited by Alshain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right, I don't have to be convinced, just thought I'd share my views on the subject.

Share this post


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.