Don't we already kind of have all the features of Making History present in KSP?

[Clockwork13]

One of the biggest selling points of MH is that you can edit/create missions and share, however you already can do this in Stock KSP by copying and editing the scenario files (and someone could easily use python, javascript etc to make it more user friendly), then letting others download the file, and the historic parts already exist in mod packs. Will there ever be actions taken to block players from utilizing these features?

Edited March 11, 2018 by Clockwork13

[Starman4308]

For the mission editor:

Tech support from people who are paid to provide tech support.

Ease of sharing.

Will be usable by stock-only players (which will include console players once that's upgraded to 1.4/MH status).

Generally easier to use, and possibly easier to see statistics about (like: "how many players completed this, what's it rated, etc).

 

For the parts:

Stock (and thus much easier to share).

Will be continued through all future versions of KSP, and won't disappear because a modder retired.

 

As to Take Two taking action against mods that "infringe" on them: so long as they're not copying Squad code or assets, they're free of any copyright issues. As to whether they will start to C&D mods that are too close to stock functionality, well, let's wait and see about that. I'm personally inclined to suspect they'd look at that idea with a big giant whopping "no, the PR storm just isn't worth it".

EDIT: C&D in the sense of "you're not allowed to plug your mod into our game anymore", not in terms of "you can't distribute your copyrighted mod anymore, because we're evil and ignore the law".

Edited March 11, 2018 by Starman4308

[Clockwork13]

13 minutes ago, Starman4308 said:

For the mission editor:

Tech support from people who are paid to provide tech support.

Ease of sharing.

Will be usable by stock-only players (which will include console players once that's upgraded to 1.4/MH status).

Generally easier to use, and possibly easier to see statistics about (like: "how many players completed this, what's it rated, etc).

 

For the parts:

Stock (and thus much easier to share).

Will be continued through all future versions of KSP, and won't disappear because a modder retired.

 

As to Take Two taking action against mods that "infringe" on them: so long as they're not copying Squad code or assets, they're free of any copyright issues. As to whether they will start to C&D mods that are too close to stock functionality, well, let's wait and see about that. I'm personally inclined to suspect they'd look at that idea with a big giant whopping "no, the PR storm just isn't worth it".

A few points:

1) From what I've seen from previews, 'ease of sharing' just means you can send people download links to your missions, similarly to mods and by extension, scenarios.

2) An upside of scenario editing is that they can be used for both stock AND modded saves.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

If you think a modder or even a team of modders working together could come anywhere close to making it as user friendly or robust as Squad has, you're out of your mind.

If you don't agree, feel free to prove me wrong by creating said mod.

[Starman4308]

3 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

If you think a modder or even a team of modders working together could come anywhere close to making it as user friendly or robust as Squad has, you're out of your mind.

If you don't agree, feel free to prove me wrong by creating said mod.

To be entirely fair, the Realism Overhaul suite probably represents a similar magnitude of work.

Granted, the moment Squad announced "we're going to do this", the probability of modders doing that and doing it well dropped to approximately 0.000001%, because 99% of what drives a modder is "the stock game doesn't do this and I want this".

[Clockwork13]

7 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

If you think a modder or even a team of modders working together could come anywhere close to making it as user friendly or robust as Squad has, you're out of your mind.

If you don't agree, feel free to prove me wrong by creating said mod.

Never even suggested that I could. All I was stating is that editing the scenario files provides a workable level of flexibility for creating missions.

Edited March 11, 2018 by Clockwork13

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Well yeah, I mean we've had Contract pack mods for ages. As well as Historical part mods.

I guess I'm just not really getting the main "thrust" of your argument here though.

I mean, should Squad not release any new engines because we can already modify the .cfg files to create any range of parameters we want with the existing ones?

Edited March 11, 2018 by Rocket In My Pocket

[StrandedonEarth]

1 hour ago, Clockwork13 said:

One of the biggest selling points of MH is that you can edit/create missions and share, however you already can do this in Stock KSP by copying and editing the scenario files (and someone could easily use python, javascript etc to make it more user friendly), then letting others download the file, and the historic parts already exist in mod packs. Will there ever be actions taken to block players from utilizing these features?

yes, but then each modified scenario is created as a one-off, custom work essentially built from scratch, and requires some advanced knowledge to do (I doubt I could learn how in a day). By creating a mission creator, anyone could make one, even me, with many more possible features, like part failures.

[Kerbart]

10 minutes ago, Clockwork13 said:

2) An upside of scenario editing is that they can be used for both stock AND modded saves.

That seems a very limited upside, given that MH has implemented facilities for mods as well.

Quote

Clicking it will open the following window, where you will name your mission and enter the mission briefing notes. Here, you can also include mod details, select the custom Play, Success, and Fail Banners, the awards, and other specifications.

(Emphasis added by Kerbart)

 

As for creating a mod that creates similar functionality as the MH mission builder/player:

• Good luck with that. You'll need a mod that starts at the main game menu and then starts the mission. I haven't seen any mod that does something like that. But: I'm not big into mods, so maybe there is one.
• You'll need a mission builder. If you say that missions can be hacked together from modifying scenarios, I have one word: CKAN. Given it's popularity and all it does is replacing a file copy job, I would not be too optimistic that most players will hex-edit scenarios to make their own.
• But suppose we get beyond all this, and we're pretty far in la-la-land at this point, what format of mission files will be the de-facto standard? The ones from the Squad Mission Builder, which are pretty much stock, or those from whoever built a (laden with issues as it's not as tightly integrated into the game as MH is) mod to replicate it for free. Keep in mind that the players who really like the mission concept likely already have MH.

It keeps being repeated: "Mods are free why pay for DLC" so I keep repeating it as well: the mod is a small part you pay for with DLC. It's a modpack that will be updated as soon as a new version comes out (note all the mod brouhaha right now regarding 1.4 to illustrate that point). It's a modpack with guaranteed support in the future (it will not be abandoned). It's a modpack that is "as good" as stock. If you're looking for a two-Kerbal capsule in a mission, it'll be Squads, not one of the five (or more) existing, even though some of them were published years ago. Why? Because it's Squad's, and it will be considered "THE" 2-Kerbal capsule (moon lander, rover, etc, etc).

[Clockwork13]

1 minute ago, Kerbart said:

As for creating a mod that creates similar functionality as the MH mission builder/player:

• Good luck with that. You'll need a mod that starts at the main game menu and then starts the mission. I haven't seen any mod that does something like that. But: I'm not big into mods, so maybe there is one.
• You'll need a mission builder. If you say that missions can be hacked together from modifying scenarios, I have one word: CKAN. Given it's popularity and all it does is replacing a file copy job, I would not be too optimistic that most players will hex-edit scenarios to make their own.
• But suppose we get beyond all this, and we're pretty far in la-la-land at this point, what format of mission files will be the de-facto standard? The ones from the Squad Mission Builder, which are pretty much stock, or those from whoever built a (laden with issues as it's not as tightly integrated into the game as MH is) mod to replicate it for free. Keep in mind that the players who really like the mission concept likely already have MH.

It keeps being repeated: "Mods are free why pay for DLC" so I keep repeating it as well: the mod is a small part you pay for with DLC. It's a modpack that will be updated as soon as a new version comes out (note all the mod brouhaha right now regarding 1.4 to illustrate that point). It's a modpack with guaranteed support in the future (it will not be abandoned). It's a modpack that is "as good" as stock. If you're looking for a two-Kerbal capsule in a mission, it'll be Squads, not one of the five (or more) existing, even though some of them were published years ago. Why? Because it's Squad's, and it will be considered "THE" 2-Kerbal capsule (moon lander, rover, etc, etc).

Once again, congratulations, for winning the argument(s) that I never made.

I can already tell that this thread isn't likely to go anywhere, so I'm just going to ask for @Vanamonde to lock it.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

So...judging from your signature this thread was just you making a point about Take Two?

Yeah, maybe locking it is for the best.

Edited March 11, 2018 by Rocket In My Pocket

[malkuth]

Believe it or not there are people who won't play mods.  Only vanilla.  

[Clockwork13]

30 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

So...judging from your signature this thread was just you making a point about Take Two?

Yeah, maybe locking it is for the best.

Uh, no, it had nothing to do with T2. My point was simply that Squad was implementing a feature that technically already exists in the game, now please stop trying to spin it into something it isn't.

16 minutes ago, malkuth said:

Believe it or not there are people who won't play mods.  Only vanilla.  

Creating custom scenarios requires no mods

[klgraham1013]

32 minutes ago, malkuth said:

Believe it or not there are people who won't play mods.  Only vanilla.  

I call them crazy people.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

12 minutes ago, Clockwork13 said:

Uh, no, it had nothing to do with T2. My point was simply that Squad was implementing a feature that technically already exists in the game, now please stop trying to spin it into something it isn't.

Ok...well we've been responding to that point, and you keep telling us we are dodging your actual issue.

I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to understand your actual issue/problem that prompted you to make this thread.

So let me ask you this again if you would; Should Squad stop creating content like engines just because we can mod existing engines in any way we choose already? By extension, should Squad stop making content all together because mods exist? Is that the argument you are making? I'm not dismissing your argument, you are welcome to your opinion, I'm just trying to understand it.

[Clockwork13]

Just now, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Ok...well we've been responding to that point, and you keep telling us we are dodging your actual issue.

I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to understand your actual issue/problem that prompted you to make this thread.

So let me ask you this again if you would; Should Squad stop creating content like engines just because we can mod existing engines in any way we choose already? By extension, should Squad stop making content all together because mods exist? Is that the argument you are making? I'm not dismissing your argument, you are welcome to your opinion, I'm just trying to understand it.

I'm not saying Squad should stop making engines because we can make our own, I'm saying that it seems a bit redundant for Squad to SELL us engines (mission builder aside) that have already been created in mods and can be downloaded for free.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Just now, Clockwork13 said:

I'm not saying Squad should stop making engines because we can make our own, I'm saying that it seems a bit redundant for Squad to SELL us engines (mission builder aside) that have already been created in mods and can be downloaded for free.

Ok, well that's a valid point.

I'd counter by saying that an official DLC offers a lot that a mod doesn't as others have pointed out; reliability, a guarantee of future support, that "special something" that only Squad can deliver. (I mean the GUI work and design alone sets it far out of the reach of any modder I know of.)

Personally I think it's great that we have both options. If you really don't think the DLC offers anything that mods can't; then don't buy it? Use the mod alternatives, for free; more power to ya!

[Gargamel]

38 minutes ago, Clockwork13 said:

Uh, no, it had nothing to do with T2. My point was simply that Squad was implementing a feature that technically already exists in the game, now please stop trying to spin it into something it isn't.

Have you seen the previews for the DLC mission editor?   I'm not sure what part of that you think already existed. 

[Clockwork13]

1 minute ago, Gargamel said:

Have you seen the previews for the DLC mission editor?   I'm not sure what part of that you think already existed. 

Because scenarios that users can create and/or modify already exist. The ingame mission editor itself is the only part that doesn't.

[Vanamonde]

Now that I'm home from work, thread locked by OP's request.