KSP Weekly: Space Junk

[Farix]

On 9/21/2018 at 4:45 PM, SQUAD said:

The team is working tirelessly on Update 1.5 and at this stage, progress is quite evident. For instance, the revamped part catalog continues to grow and this week was the turn of another classic: the Probodobodyne QBE Command Module.

Will we see the stock vessels redesigned to use the revamped parts in 1.5?

[Frozen_Heart]

3 hours ago, passinglurker said:

Engines might be some pretty big shoes to fill.

 
I think I'd like to see them maintain good quality over multiple consecutive previews before they take a pass at competing with this. maybe other early parts or deep space parts? the service bays, the parachutes, the 2.5m pod, the 1.25m/2.5 fuel tanks, the radial decouplers, the nose cones, etc plenty to do first.

Been waiting for that LV-T15 engine for ages now. Hope it doesn't get cut, even if they end up using different art assets for it.

 

Combined with the 1.875m tanks it would make the perfect Falcon 9 engine.

[Redneck]

44 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

I will admit I am growing more and more puzzled as to why Squad has not, and is clearly still not doing that to begin with.

I'm not going to get into a discussion about which technique or art vision is better. I'm purely thinking from a practical point of view, from the standpoints of return-of-investment and crowd management.

Here they have a whole heap of pre-made work that looks very close to being release-ready. The public at large clearly likes this stuff, as can be deducted from how much the community has been asking about future plans on integrating it, and the community efforts for 'finishing' it. Lots of brownie points could've been scored by Squad with seemingly very little effort, and if they had wanted to release/change other parts at the same time that use a different style, people would've likely not made a huge deal of it because they're still getting a lot of what they do want and like. Kids tend to take medicines they don't like with a lot less trouble when it's mixed with their favourite foods; if you so happen to be sitting on a pile of it, all the cheaper a solution.

Instead, Squad decides to completely sideline Porkjet's parts without explanation, then spends a lot of labour on other art and retouches and presents only that new stuff by itself. Not exactly surprisingly, the discontent and picketing  grows even louder. "Porkjet!" "Porkalike" "Piggie Bank!" "Bacon and Eggs!" "Birdstrike!"

It makes no sense. It took no crystal ball to predict this. Why then still risk it? There has to be some incredibly strong reason to decide to spend time, money and effort on a job that you could've known is going to spark less-than-happy reception. Doubly so when you have a pile of pacifying candy to hand out RIGHT THERE... and decide not to do so. But we're left in the dark to wonder and speculate.

 

legal crap like licensing and copyrights all the bs nobody cares about that always comes about when money is involved. Im sure they would use them if they could. But they are not for reasons we may well never know. So we just need to let it go. Its not going to happen. Its Done! And here we are

[Mutex]

But surely SQUAD had a contract with PJ which ensured they owned the IP for the work he did for them? It really doesn't make sense.

[swjr-swis]

12 minutes ago, Redneck said:

legal crap like licensing and copyrights

No infraction was ever committed by stating "we would be breaking a rule by doing this, so we don't do it". It even works for NDAs.

It's arguably the easiest type of reason Squad could possibly give, because it puts things out of their hands. No permission means off limits - anyone that has ever spent any time on this forum knows about that all-important rule. People could put the matter to rest and move on. So if that's it, just make the statement and be done with it.

 

[Redneck]

15 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

No infraction was ever committed by stating "we would be breaking a rule by doing this, so we don't do it". It even works for NDAs.

It's arguably the easiest type of reason Squad could possibly give, because it puts things out of their hands. No permission means off limits - anyone that has ever spent any time on this forum knows about that all-important rule. People could put the matter to rest and move on. So if that's it, just make the statement and be done with it.

 

i dont know guys. But for whatever reason its not going to happen. It is what it is. All we can do is give constructive feedback to the current artist and help him anyway we can. And from what i see they are open to ideas and listening. So i am good with that

[KSK]

1 hour ago, Redneck said:

legal crap like licensing and copyrights all the bs nobody cares about that always comes about when money is involved. Im sure they would use them if they could. But they are not for reasons we may well never know. So we just need to let it go. Its not going to happen. Its Done! And here we are

I'm pretty sure that the people creating content for you to enjoy care about copyrights, licensing and other 'legal crap' as you so eloquently put it. Much as you might like to be, you are not automatically entitled to other people's work. If they choose to give that work away to you, all power to them for choosing to be generous with their time and efforts. If they wish to try and sell it to you - that's their choice too. 

Edited September 25, 2018 by KSK

[klgraham1013]

4 hours ago, Farix said:

There are probably some legal issues with that. It really depends on if Porkjet's part overhaul falls within the "work for hire" framework or if it was a project he did on his own.

How would it not be Squad's property?  Every indication was that the work was being done for a future overhaul for KSP; for Squad while PJ was under their employment.  It wasn't a mod project.  If PJ does own those parts, it was some smooth contract negotiations on his part.

Edited September 25, 2018 by klgraham1013

[Redneck]

On 9/25/2018 at 9:04 PM, KSK said:

I'm pretty sure that the people creating content for you to enjoy care about copyrights, licensing and other 'legal crap' as you so eloquently put it. Much as you might like to be, you are not automatically entitled to other people's work. If they choose to give that work away to you, all power to them for choosing to be generous with their time and efforts. If they wish to try and sell it to you - that's their choice too. 

i was talking about a system of legalities and crap that sometimes result in, well, porkjets parts not being used. Do we know thats exactly what happened? no. It is just the nature of the beast. I never said i was entitled to anything

Edited September 27, 2018 by Deddly

[Farix]

1 hour ago, klgraham1013 said:

How would it not be Squad's property?  Every indication was that the work was being done for a future overhaul for KSP; for Squad while PJ was under their employment.  It wasn't a mod project.  If PJ does own those parts, it was some smooth contract negotiations on his part.

That really depends on Porkjet's contract. It could very be that he was a freelance artist and thus SQUAD purchased the copyrights to his artwork peacemeal rather then as work-for-hire. Or he could have some artwork as work-for-hire and other works as a freelancer with the part overhaul in the latter category.

Other explanations could be that SQUAD just didn't like his redesigns or there were personnel conflicts and SQUAD refuses to use any of his work that wasn't already in-game as a consequence. Remember that Porkjet left at around the same time as 7 other developers, so there were likely some bad feelings.

But Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest reason, copyrights, is the most likely answer.

[HebaruSan]

26 minutes ago, Farix said:

That really depends on Porkjet's contract. It could very be that he was a freelance artist and thus SQUAD purchased the copyrights to his artwork piecemeal rather then as work-for-hire. Or he could have some artwork as work-for-hire and other works as a freelancer with the part overhaul in the latter category.

Other explanations could be that SQUAD just didn't like his redesigns or there were personnel conflicts and SQUAD refuses to use any of his work that wasn't already in-game as a consequence. Remember that Porkjet left at around the same time as 7 other developers, so there were likely some bad feelings.

But Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest reason, copyrights, is the most likely answer.

One of the few facts we have to go on is that the license.txt of PartOverhauls.zip says:

Quote

These parts are by Porkjet / SQUAD. License CC-BY-NC 3.0

The "NC" part means "non-commercial," and using them in KSP would definitely be commercial, so if this is the only license applicable to this content*, then it would have to be re-licensed to add it to stock. Both Porkjet and SQUAD are listed as authors, which may mean there's some kind of co-ownership arrangement for this IP. If that's so, then (I think?) SQUAD couldn't unilaterally change the license without Porkjet's consent (and presumably some transfer of funds). Maybe the situation is sufficiently murky that a fresh start with separately developed parts was deemed the better option.

* Of course it's entirely possible that there's another separate license that we haven't seen, which could make all of that speculation moot. Too bad we have nearly zero information on this.

[Vanamonde]

We've trimmed an argument from this thread. As always, please do not attack each other over differing opinions about the game. 

[Redneck]

38 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

We've trimmed an argument from this thread. As always, please do not attack each other over differing opinions about the game. 

thank you

[Terwin]

On 9/25/2018 at 2:29 AM, Dafni said:

Are you serious here? I wont go into the discussion of Linux being an unpopular platform (anyway the game is advertised as being compatible, fwiw) but calling joysticks unpopular peripherals for a space flight sim?

I dont get it. But then again I dont follow popular trends much.

By my understanding most KSP players do not play on Linux, and Most KSP players do not use joysticks to play.  That is the only thing I mean by 'unpopular,'  most players don't use them(as far as I am aware).

On 9/25/2018 at 2:37 AM, steve_v said:

Yeah, that kinda did my head in too.
The whole "minorities shouldn't get bugfixes / Linux is unpopular" BS really grinds my gears as well... But there's no accounting for opinions.

I never said shouldn't.  I personally think they should get bug-fixes, I just deem it unlikely.

I said that it is probably not cost-effective, and as SQUAD is probably not the one making calls on where coding resources get used, I would not expect their corporate owners to authorize using those resources in a way that is not cost-effective.

Unfortunately,  'Should' has no real impact on corporate logic, only 'cost effective' and 'not cost effective.'  

If the corporate bean-counters decide that they will make more money with DLC that adds Dora the Explorer skins for all the space-plane parts than they would fixing a bug that only affects a small percentage of the user base, then that is what SQUAD will be directed to do.This is the reason I suggested advocating for a new Unity version might be more effective than advocating for a code fix for Linux Joysticks.

If there has already been a corporate decision on the priority of a Linux Joystick fix, then continuing to advocate for it will have little to no impact, while advocating for a new Unity version may be an easier sell as it would have a significant impact on the entire(PC) user-base and therefore might be much more cost-effective( even if it just happens to provide a Linux Joystick fix as a side-effect).

Edited September 26, 2018 by Terwin
KSP not KPS

[Enceos]

The Unity game engine gathers user statistics and showed in that March 2016 Linuxusers accounted for 0.4% of players. Less than 10% of PC players have a gamepad or a joystick... I agree with Terwin, in corporations every decision you bring to a table needs to have a financial or reputational impact for it to have a chance of getting resources for implementation. Indie days are gone for SQUAD,  most CEOs of gaming corporations don't even play games, they play numbers.

Edited September 26, 2018 by Enceos

[Kerbart]

12 minutes ago, Enceos said:

most CEOs of gaming corporations don't even play games, they play numbers.

I didn't know most gaming corporations were so badly managed.

[swjr-swis]

55 minutes ago, Enceos said:

The Unity game engine gathers user statistics and showed in that March 2016 Linuxusers accounted for 0.4% of players.

You are making a rather risky assumption that Linux users all allow Unity to 'dial home'. In general, the Linux population is a little more security and privacy minded than Windows...

[steve_v]

3 hours ago, Enceos said:

The Unity game engine gathers user statistics

It can try, but these "statistics" are sure as hell not getting out of my network.

 

2 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

You are making a rather risky assumption that Linux users all allow Unity to 'dial home'.

Indeed. I for one check all my games for "analytics" BS, and maintain a comprehensive firewall ruleset to prevent it.

If game developers are relying on this kind of borderline-spyware to get their usage figures, such figures probably bear little resemblance to reality.

[Cheif Operations Director]

4 minutes ago, steve_v said:

It can try, but these "statistics" are sure as hell not getting out of my network.

 

Indeed. I for one check all my games for "analytics" BS, and maintain a comprehensive firewall ruleset to prevent it.

If game developers are relying on this kind of borderline-spyware to get their usage figures, such figures probably bear little resemblance to reality.

Do you code your own firewall or use one. 

[Enceos]

2 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

You are making a rather risky assumption that Linux users all allow Unity to 'dial home'. In general, the Linux population is a little more security and privacy minded than Windows...

Steam statistics show a 50% higher number of Linux users, which is 0.59%

[steve_v]

Just now, Cheif Operations Director said:

Do you code your own firewall or use one.

Eh, it's just a combination of per-process iptables rules and host redirects.

[Cheif Operations Director]

Just now, steve_v said:

Eh, it's just a combination of per-process iptables rules and host redirects.

I have no understanding of code so in English lol

[steve_v]

Just now, Cheif Operations Director said:

I have no understanding of code so in English lol

No "code" involved. Iptables is the GNU/Linux firewall facility (or at least the most common one), and it's configured with text-based rules.
I also have a shell script to launch KSP and grab it's PID for a firewall rule, but that's just fluff.
Host redirects are simply lines added to /etc/hosts to map a hostname to, say, 127.0.0.1, so it never resolves to a valid address. Works 99% of the time and dead easy.
None of this is coding, it's just reading the relevant manuals.  man iptables and  man hosts for a start.

There are a bunch of "easy" frontends to iptables around, but I have little experience with them.
I have used fwbuilder (GUI) in the past, but I'm not certain it can do per-process or per-group rules.

[Raptor9]

4 hours ago, Enceos said:

Indie days are gone for SQUAD,  most CEOs of gaming corporations don't even play games, they play numbers.

4 hours ago, Kerbart said:

I didn't know most gaming corporations were so badly managed.

Just because a studio is "independent", doesn't mean they don't operate in the same battle of Resources vs Time.  If anything, because they ARE an indie studio, they are even harder pressed to justify using what limited resources they have against a given problem.  On the flip side (and I'm speaking about businesses in general, not necessarily about Squad/TT), there is the possibility the indie studio team makes development decisions that aren't governed by the risk/benefit assessments, but rather their own passion about what they are doing.  Harvester never would have gotten his idea off the ground if he didn't have passion for KSP.

Management of a large corporation is predicated on good leadership and management skills, not whether that person actually uses the products they sell.  It most certainly helps; if anything to be familiar with such products and be able to identify with your consumer base.  But most importantly, a good leader ensures that he or she has the right people in the right jobs, with the resources they need to accomplish their assigned tasks.  A good leader provides a clear vision or goal for the organization to work towards, while ensuring that the vision or goal is attainable and sustainable.  If the end result is not both attainable and sustainable, than the success and continued existence of the business is at risk.

A large game publisher like Take Two of course spreads the financial risk across multiple products and gaming platforms; but in the end, the resources and time that game coders/artists/testers require both come from one source: money.  If you want more resources and/or time, you need more money.  If a CEO or business manager isn't good at making money, and properly allocating it to ensure it's efficient use within the business, he will most likely be replaced with someone that does; lest the business is eventually closed or files for bankruptcy.

So bottom line: gaming experience is a nice trait to possess if you are a CEO of a large game company, but knowledge and skills in economics and management is required.

Edited September 27, 2018 by Raptor9
grammer as usual

[Kerbart]

1 hour ago, Raptor9 said:

So bottom line: gaming experience is a nice trait to possess if you are a CEO of a large game company, but knowledge and skills in economics and management is required.

I'm afraid I didn't get my point across although you caught onto it.

My point was: if you have a CEO who plays with numbers you're up the creek without a paddle as a corporation. Surely they will look at numbers, but the underlings are the ones who need to play with them. A CEO's job is strategy, culture, people. If you have a CEO who looks at a spreadsheet to decide that selling My Little Pony skins as DLC for KSP will bring in more revenue than, say, multiplayer mode, then that's the wrong CEO. It's even the wrong CEO if she decides the other way around; the CEO shouldn't be playing with spreadsheets. Instead, she should set direction and tell the responsible VP to investigate what direction the game should take; and possibly overrule a short term outcome that clearly kills the game. That is the job of a CEO. And if she's truly a good CEO she put the right people in those spots and they won't make stupid decisions like that.