The Question of 1.4

[UranianBlue]

I would like to see native support for extra star systems in the newest update. In Kopernicus, you have to make all the other stars orbit Kerbol if you want support for other planet packs (GPP, OPM, etc.)

[katateochi]

In addition to my previous (GC issues and bug fixes), I do think there are quite a lot of refinements that are still needed in the core game. 

• search/filter on load craft list in editors (always end up with >100 craft and it would be really nice to jump to craft starting with a particular letter, or type 'cargo' and filter the list to craft with cargo in the name). That just seems like a basic must-have for any list feature in any software.
• ordering/grouping/filtering of astronauts in astronaut complex and crew list in the editors. again, why isn't that a given? Really would like the option to group astronauts by class and order them by rank and be able to exclude tourists.
• ordering/grouping of contracts in mission control (and in contracts list, also with toggling-visibility). Ie sort by closest due date, or by value and option when in flight/editor to only show contracts relevant to current/selected SOI. ie when building a craft to go to Mun, have option to just show contracts that involve Mun. while in flight around Mun have option to limit list to those relevant to current SOI. 
  (notice a theme here? just some basic search/sort/group options to anything that vaguely resembles a list)
• contract improvements;
  • show picture of the body/bodies the contract has to take place in
  • if the contract requires certain parts, show a picture of the parts!! (including for recovery missions).
  • and with both those adding a bit more color and content to the contract we could get rid of the useless briefing text.
• When you right click on an Ap/Pe marker to toggle the display of info, that info should continue to be shown if you exit and reenter map mode.
• Have some actually useful info on the engineer report such as max elec draw vs max elec production.
• Options to change the default camera modes (ie have the option to not auto switch to orbital when reaching circular orbit)
  • Attach mode toggle in editors, you know when you're trying to attach a part by its nodes inside something like a cargo container, but it can also surface attach and so you either have to put the camera at just the right odd angle and gingerly move the part in without letting it near anything else, like playing operation, or (the better approach) first attach a long pole made out of pylons to the part and then use that to poke the part into place. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to toggle surface attach on/off? (turns out this exists, hold alt(mod) key to disable surface attach, thanks @Mako for pointing this out)
• Ability to customize (hide/show/reorder) items on the stock toolbar (and also have option to make it autohide), basically give it the same usability attention to detail that the blizzy toolbar has.
• Bring back the ability to ctrl+click multiple different items in the staging list and move them together (used to work in the old versions).
• Bring back the ability to ctrl+click on a part on a craft in the editor and be taken to the section in the parts list where that part is from.

I think there is actually a lot of refinements that could be made to the game , this was just a quick list of things that came to mind during one afternoon of playing.  My hope is that sale of DLC content goes well and provides the impetus to continue with improvements to the core game.

Ok this one is a whole new feature, not just a refinement but something I really think a space program simulator needs; mission planning. A place where you can go that gives a similar interface  to the tracking station but lets you create "projected" orbits at any time and place maneuvers on them.  So for example, you go in and define a new mission (which gives you basically a blank tracking station view, ie just the planets, but with the option to include currently existing craft).  Then you can arbitrarily setup an orbit around Kerbin with whatever characteristics you like, you can then fast forward time to any point, and plot maneuver nodes to work out when you are going to do a IP transfer burn and how much dV it's going to need.  Having set your transfer you could then plot the intercept and capture burns and get the total dV requirements for that leg of your mission and work out when the best time to depart would be.  Taking it further you could plot another orbit around the planet you transferred to and call it your pre-departure orbit and again move time forward however much you want and plot the return burns.  So you could get a pretty good idea about how much dV the whole mission would need, when to depart/return and total mission time (handy if you're playing with life support). 
For bonus points, you should be able to save any number of mission plans and then when you actually launch the mission you should be able to access it's mission plan and either use it to create the required m-nodes or at least see how far you are deviating from the plan. 
I don't know if the DLC will have any/some of that (kinda doubt it), and while that is something I'd wouldn't mind paying for, I really think that is something that is missing from the "program" aspect of Kerbal Space Program. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by katateochi

[Lord Aurelius]

In terms of features I would like to see in 1.4 or other future updates...

The only other major feature that KSP is missing IMO is stock life support. This would finally let the game properly balance manned flights, especially now that we have a stock comm network feature.

Otherwise, most of the work that needs to be done is polish and balance. There graphics and audio still needs an overhaul, there's a few gaps in the stock parts list, the tech tree still leaves a lot to be desired, and career mode needs some more direction, but the frameworks for these are already in place so they count more as polish and balance items rather than new features.

Although I wouldn't mind some time based mechanics as well along the lines of Kerbal Construction Time.

 

As far as what 1.4 will actually contain, other than a unity upgrade and bugfixes (and some new bugs for the version after to fix), it's total speculation right now since we only just heard Squad officially mention the version number.

[Mako]

1 hour ago, katateochi said:

Attach mode toggle in editors, you know when you're trying to attach a part by its nodes inside something like a cargo container, but it can also surface attach and so you either have to put the camera at just the right odd angle and gingerly move the part in without letting it near anything else, like playing operation, or (the better approach) first attach a long pole made out of pylons to the part and then use that to poke the part into place. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to toggle surface attach on/off?

If I understand what you're asking for, this is already implemented and usable by holding down the Alt key (or Mod key) while trying to place a part. With Alt held down, the part you are placing will only attach to nodes and won't show surface attaching possibilities. It's not a toggle per se, but the functionality is there.

[322997am]

On 10/30/2017 at 2:32 PM, regex said:

Because new sales of the game have likely dried up. This is supported in part by the anger over the console version as well as the move to create a new DLC. The console release was an absolute mess from what I've seen and that sort of bad will is very hard to recover from.

E: Bottom line: If you can make more potential money from a DLC than continuing to update only the base game, then you do that, especially now that your game is "in production". Everyone who was interested enough in KSP to buy it probably already has and, while you may see new players appear, that number of new arrivals is going to diminish over time. Better to monetize the playerbase you already have with DLC or other merch.

true, but here goes the game off of many people's computers. Nobody wants this game to become sid meiers civilization, but im afraid 2k will clamp down on the modding community to push DLC. Pretty much that is what they did with gta. considering 2k is in some cases worse than EA, I wouldnt hope for development continuing after 1.4

[regex]

10 minutes ago, 322997am said:

but im afraid 2k will clamp down on the modding community to push DLC.

Why?

10 minutes ago, 322997am said:

Pretty much that is what they did with gta. considering 2k is in some cases worse than EA

Oh, because of GTA? Haha, okay man. Let me know when KSP has been transitioned to an online format with micro-transactions and there's actually a viable business case for shutting down modding that interferes with micro-transactions.

10 minutes ago, 322997am said:

I wouldnt hope for development continuing after 1.4

[Francois424]

Speaking of DLCs, they could make a lot of money by making the correct ones.

Which ones?  
 - Outer Planet Mod
 - EVE/SVE
 - A parts xpac that adds electric propellers(0,65/1,25/2,5m), bigger LV-Ns (250kn/2.5m), Spherical tanks, bigger Ion engines (1,25/2,50m 25/100thr), etc...  (check the thread about missing parts, I have a complete detailed post in the suggestion forum)
 - Kerbal Attachment System, Kerbal Engineer, Life Support...  Use them toggles in the menu.

Why would anyone pay for these while they are fully available from modders ?  If done correctly (and the mod isn't far better), it's always updated with each passing version and no need to keep updating these mods.  It's taking so much of my time that I'd be willing to shell good money for a couple DLCs like that.
It also makes sure the "mod" never goes missing (like a favorite mod of mine, which I can't take over because owner went AWOL and didn't/cannot give permission)... 
KSP has been very good to all of us, even when it broke all our saves and our mods, and if I can keep supporting ppl making it go, I will.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Francois424

[invision]

i just want bug fixes and better optimization, im pretty content with the game as it stands.

[Francois424]

10 hours ago, invision said:

i just want bug fixes and better optimization, im pretty content with the game as it stands.

This is still my main wish... When a streamer that does KSP almost 5h/day - 5 days/week was reviewing the last major KSP version update with 64 bits... and that he was saying a 600-800 part vessel was in the "Green" as far as clock went.
Then the patch was released to public and I still get in "Yellow" from 250 parts onwards with annoying lag starting over 500.  My computer is brand new too so it's not that.

But sure if we make it so 1000 parts ship is in real-time "green", that would FAR outweighs any other wishes of mine.
You get my vote.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Francois424
spelling

[Not Sure]

You know what else could be implemented? A use for surface bases. That with a very simplistic life support such as CLLS and a graphic overhaul with part performance fixes as mentioned above. Maybe an option for background processing, so you craft uses resources in the background. 

We all know squad just wants to increase sales. A proper multiplayer similar to DMP would totally boost this. I can imagine all the friends who were iffy about getting the game immediately get it when they find out they can play with their pals. 

Theres so much potential just waiting, mods are great and all, but people buying the game for the first time don't usually think about the modding community and see the base game pretty dry just as I did.

[katateochi]

On 01/11/2017 at 9:01 PM, Mako said:

If I understand what you're asking for, this is already implemented and usable by holding down the Alt key (or Mod key) while trying to place a part

No. Way! I didn't know that! sweet, thanks dude! 

20 hours ago, Francois424 said:

 - Kerbal Attachment System, Kerbal Engineer, Life Support...  Use them toggles in the menu.

tbh i've felt that stock implementations of existing mods have been rather watered down, and KAS, KAS is fantastic and I'd be leery of a stock implementation of it (not to mention a fully reworked KAS is in the pipelines). 

19 hours ago, Francois424 said:

This is still my main wish... ...snip.....
But sure if we make it so 1000 parts ship is in real-time "green", that would FAR outweighs any other wishes of mine.

I agree. Smooth running with increased part counts outweighs my other wishes too. I'd rather have better performance and let the modders fill in the missing features. And not just increased performance on a single craft, to be able to have several large craft in the same physics bubble would be great.  

[Not Sure]

26 minutes ago, katateochi said:

I agree. Smooth running with increased part counts outweighs my other wishes too. I'd rather have better performance and let the modders fill in the missing features. And not just increased performance on a single craft, to be able to have several large craft in the same physics bubble would be great.  

Just mentioning that is like an orgasm on demand, sorry.

[Azimech]

On 10/30/2017 at 3:42 PM, Snark said:

(Caveat:  The following statements are just my personal thoughts, based on my general observations of the industry from having worked in it for a couple of decades.  I'm not basing this on any "insider information"-- I don't work for Squad and don't have any more visibility into their internal operations than you do.)

As several folks in this thread have already suggested:  I wouldn't hold my breath for any more significant features in the stock game.  That revenue stream has basically dried up by now, so they'd be foolish to plow large amounts of money into developing stuff that won't pay anything.

My assumption is that from now on, the new feature development will basically all be DLC.  I would expect them to leave the stock game alone... except where necessary to make changes to support DLC.  Bug fixes; moddability updates to enable DLC; and perhaps localization into more languages.  My guess is that that'll basically be it.

The good news is that this may open up new areas for modders.  KSP is an exceptionally moddable game... but it still has plenty of inaccessible spots, where it's physically not possible to mod a certain aspect because things are hard-coded in a way that prevents it.  If they want to ship a DLC that does some cool new thing, and the stock game doesn't allow that cool thing... they'll want to patch the stock game to enable that.  And opening the door to the DLC likely means opening the door to mods, too.  So that seems like fertile ground.

And that reason would be money, the same reason that basically any company ever does anything.  Presumably that would be all the money yet to be made in paid expansion packs.  My guess would be that the T2 acquisition is an indicator that Kerbal packs will be coming out for a while.

I'd be astonished if there are any significant new features added to the stock game, for reasons discussed above.  I assume they intend to keep it going via DLC sales.

Will there ever be a KSP 2?  Maybe... but my guess would be not for a good long while, if ever.  Developing a brand new game from scratch is incredibly expensive, and requires a huge investment of capital up front before you can start selling it and try to make that money back.  Given that KSP is already developed and sitting right there... from a developer's perspective, selling DLC is an attractive option.  It's a lot less time and effort to develop DLC that adds features to an existing game than it is to build a game from scratch, and the risk is a lot lower:  Invest a (relatively) little, then sell it and reap rewards.  Repeat.

My guess is that KSP 2 wouldn't be on the table until the DLC well starts to run dry, and my guess is that so far we've just scratched the surface there.

 

I agree. But there is something which makes KSP stand out from the rest of the industry: the editor and the physics. I've been saying this for a few years now and if T2 has a vision for the future, the editor will enable the production of a whole lot of new titles, outside of the tiny niche of the space thing.

Personally I've been busy with designing a new product around the editor & physics, in my head. Now I have to write it down and present it. And no. Space is not a part of it.

And the physics system is very incomplete for what I have in mind. But the market is huge.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Azimech

[Lord Aurelius]

1 hour ago, Azimech said:

I agree. But there is something which makes KSP stand out from the rest of the industry: the editor and the physics. I've been saying this for a few years now and if T2 has a vision for the future, the editor will enable the production of a whole lot of new titles, outside of the tiny niche of the space thing.

Personally I've been busy with designing a new product around the editor & physics, in my head. Now I have to write it down and present it. And no. Space is not a part of it.

And the physics system is very incomplete for what I have in mind. But the market is huge.

A bit off topic, but I agree that there's a huge market for games utilizing the editor and physics to allow the player to build their own vehicles/contraptions to solve problems. Bad Piggies is probably the best known example of this (it's a shame Rovio pushed monetization so hard with it though, it's practically unplayable without some sort of adblocking), and there's some other indie games like Besiege, and Homebrew Vehicle Sandbox that use this idea as well.

However, none of them have the world scale that KSP does.

[PaperAviator]

Oh and I forgot to mention: HAVE THE OPTION TO TURN OFF EDITOR MUSIC!

 

[Superfluous J]

27 minutes ago, PaperAviator said:

Oh and I forgot to mention: HAVE THE OPTION TO TURN OFF EDITOR MUSIC!

 

I assume you mean separate from the other music? Because I've had the editor and all other music off for years.

[Azimech]

24 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

I assume you mean separate from the other music? Because I've had the editor and all other music off for years.

Yeah, me too. I build with the music of case fans and hard drives.

[Geschosskopf]

Hmmmm........  If history is any guide, the phrases "Unity update" and "bug fixes" cannot co-exist in the same universe    

So, I think it safe to assume that when 1.4 comes out, it will break major aspects of the game and we'll have to go through months ironing that all out again as best we can.  And then, just when things are starting to work well again, the cycle will repeat.

[Rocket-man]

I would personally love to see the ability to have axial tilt.  I realize this is hard coded at the moment.  This would unlock a huge area for planet packs to play with as well as allow RSS to properly implement Earths axial tilt.  The other thing I think would go a long way is a slider type feature to adjust the systems scale when starting a new game, or have more than one system in the same install.  I don't have any problem with the current system as it is, but as you learn how it works, it gets small and being able to scale the difficulty with increasing size is a good way to add a "hard mode".