DLC Idea: Universe Editor

[Spricigo]

3 hours ago, demibear said:

Allowing mods is the the same as support for mods. Now I am curious what gimmick Squad will come up with next.

And I'm curious about two things:

• how you failed to notice that the person quoted is not a Squad's employer or representative. 
• how that skewed interpretation of my view about mod support relates with the discussion at hand.

 

[demibear]

15 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

And I'm curious about two things:

• how you failed to notice that the person quoted is not a Squad's employer or representative. 
• how that skewed interpretation of my view about mod support relates with the discussion at hand.

 

God damn it, I meant to say "Allowing mods is not the same as support for mods." What I get for not checking my own damn writing.

[Spricigo]

3 minutes ago, demibear said:

God damn it, I meant to say "Allowing mods is not the same as support for mods." What I get for not checking my own damn writing.

I agree that is not the same. 

My perception is that there is real support, not just tolerance.

And I'm still curious.

 

 

[Kerbart]

9 hours ago, Gargamel said:

As I've said, it's makes NO SENSE at all for Squad/TT to attempt to make a DLC that mimics the functionality of a mod already in existence.   The sales of that DLC would not come close to the development costs. 

The recent DLC is a good thing, as it added a gameplay mechanic that was not available through mods.   That's what we need to be asking for, game play mechanics that aren't available through free mods. 

I don’t like responding in this thread, for reasons, but I cannot resist a post with reasonable arguments...

First of, the DLC consists of parts, which we can get through mods as well. However, coming from Squad, therea certain attractiveness of these parts over normal mods; the “as good as stock” status, the high level of quality (despite certain bugs, which was a bit disappointing) and the integration with the extension elements of the DLC.

So, the DLC, can provide mod functionality, as long as it goes beyond what mods do. In case of a Kopernicus-style DLC you could think of a “planet editor”that offers a GUI to place and skin the planet. The DLC could also offer “outer planets,” not discoverable through the tracking station, that can only be discovered by a orbital telescope. Orbits, sizes and skins could be seed generated so that discovery is not symply a matter of knowing where to look.

At the same time, Kopernicus is so well ingrained by now that special care needs to be taken to make the DLC compatible, or at least not crash, with Kopernicus. Same applies to extensions that are geared towards life support (Roverdude...), robotics, remotetech, etc.

 

[Gargamel]

20 hours ago, Red Thought said:

I do like the parts that the DLC added.

All of which (in some form) have been available for some time with mods. 

[HebaruSan]

1 minute ago, Gargamel said:

All of which (in some form) have been available for some time with mods. 

Really? Engine plates?

[Gargamel]

1 minute ago, HebaruSan said:

Really? Engine plates?

Hence the "in some form".   While MH has some specific parts, historical parts packs have been available for a long time.   

[HebaruSan]

3 minutes ago, Gargamel said:

Hence the "in some form".   While MH has some specific parts, historical parts packs have been available for a long time.   

In what form were engine plates available?

[Gargamel]

Just now, HebaruSan said:

In what form were engine plates available?

A  lot of mods had multiple engine mounts, forgetting the term. 

Yes, there some unique parts to MH, but the vast majority are available as mod packs. 

The point is, the DLC was not just a parts pack, it was a gameplay mechanic.   That's what you purchased, a mechanic, not a parts pack. 

[klgraham1013]

On 3/24/2018 at 11:52 PM, passinglurker said:

If KSP development finally froze they could literally hack in patches themselves.

I was really hoping 1.3.1 would be the last.  Possibly minor patches for DLC, but nothing mod breaking.  ...but here we are, and most players and modders have moved on to a buggier version because inertia. 

On 3/25/2018 at 10:44 AM, Geonovast said:

I for one would love a stock "solar system builder" that lets you create your own solar system from a pool of planets and moons.  It is a good idea.  It would be fantastic for a point-and-click system to do this.  They're just trying to tell you to not get your hopes up, because, from a business standpoint, it would likely lose money.

Basically this.  I think it's a good idea.  A good UI would make it a great idea.

On 3/25/2018 at 6:52 AM, klesh said:

significant console user base

[citation needed]

On 3/25/2018 at 12:02 PM, Kerbart said:

Bad idea. Kopernicus offers it for free.

Kopernicus doesn't offer an easy to use graphical UI.

On 3/25/2018 at 2:56 PM, Spricigo said:

The specifications of the stock system are there for a reason.  It's part of the game balance set by the game designers.

Yeah.  Because everything in the game was well thought out and is there for a reason.  #jokes

4 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

In what form were engine plates available?

They are in Procedural Fairings.

[Spricigo]

On 27/03/2018 at 9:12 AM, klgraham1013 said:

On 25/03/2018 at 4:56 PM, Spricigo said:

The specifications of the stock system are there for a reason.  It's part of the game balance set by the game designers.

Yeah.  Because everything in the game was well thought out and is there for a reason.  #jokes

If you have a different explanation for how the devs decided how to setup the solar system, please tell us.

 

 

[klesh]

He's just super salty for some reason.

[klgraham1013]

4 hours ago, Spricigo said:

If you have a different explanation for how the devs decided how to setup the solar system, please tell us.

The same explanation for their use of random, nonsense contracts as the main gameplay loop of career mode.  The same reason the tech tree has areas that make no sense.  The same reason tank ratios weren't standardized across the board until recently.  The same reason certain GUI elements are just randomly floating in the editor scenes, and aren't integrated into the overall UI.

The explanation is design that wasn't thought out.  I actually don't have much issue with the stock solar system besides the scale, but that doesn't mean everything about it was considered and thought out for a reason.

[Spricigo]

@klgraham1013 I didn't ask for a rant about what you don't like in the game, I asked how do you think the decisions about the game design are made.

 

In any case the devs decided somehow, if that was by racional analyses, divine inspirations or a raffle don't really matter. The point is that having The Stock System offer some advantages that the devs may want to keep and any proposal to change it need to take that in consideration.

 

 

 

 

 

[NSEP]

On 27/03/2018 at 9:23 AM, HebaruSan said:

In what form were engine plates available?

SSTU?

[KerbolExplorer]

i think this dlc should be something like univerese sandbox

[GoSlash27]

On 3/24/2018 at 10:13 PM, Red Thought said:

So many negative people on here,  all I hear is, a mod did it, don't say another word noob. 

Red Thought,

 I think you're missing DAL59's point. Squad is not likely to invest the time and effort to develop paid DLC that users can already get for free. If they wanted to include this functionality, it'd probably be part of a free update rather than paid DLC.

 Having said that... I don't think they'll ever include this functionality in stock KSP because it's too easy to induce a fatal error with it.

Best,
-Slashy

[pandaman]

IMO, the most likely way they would introduce 'stock/DLC' alternative 'universes' would be in the form of pre-constructed 'ready to go' new solar systems or extensions to the current one . Along the lines of a stock version of RSS or HalfRSS maybe, that way the 'common experience' element is not completely lost either.

[RedPandaz]

On 3/25/2018 at 3:36 AM, The Aziz said:

You can move planets with HyperEdit I think.

But creating new is not something you can do with few clicks. There is just too many variables, even if there was actual visual UI to use. Diameter, orbit, sphere of influence, sure, doable. But possible atmosphere, pressure, temperatures (mind you, there is a termosphere so it's not just 300K to 2K from sea level to space). Then, there is terrain. Sure you can make it full procedural, but it would be as boring as the Mun, or even worse. Textures? Because possible ice caps would not look the same way as hills or plains. Where are you gonna use mentioned textures? What if you're gonna create some advanced terrain features, like huge crater or canyon? Where it should be? How should it look like?

Too. Many. Variables.

Be happy that such thing as Kopernicus exists, otherwise we wouldn't have so many beautiful planet packs as we have now.

You can use HyperEdit, yes. I once put one of Jool's moons so close that when it passed overhead it would pull my ships off the ground XD