Jump to content

What ya'll prefer, casual ksp, or realistic ksp.


Recommended Posts

Basiiiiiclyyyyyy........ what'cha think is better, a KSP version like in -1.3 mode, where it's more casual than realistic,  or ya know like in +1.4, where ksp became more serious than it's was before? just sayin' mods don't be offended and don't delete it it's scary... it's an oppinion questions, discussions allowed, offence not.

 

With love.

me

 

(insert a stock kiss photo)

Edited by JERONIMO
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JERONIMO said:

Basiiiiiclyyyyyy........ what'cha think is better, a KSP version like in -1.3 mode, where it's more casual than realistic,  or ya know like in +1.4, where ksp became more serious than it's was before?

How do you mean?

KSP 1.0 was a huge change to gameplay (new aero model, added reentry heating, significant update to water physics).

KSP 1.2 was also a significant addition to gameplay, with the introduction of CommNet.

But 1.3 and later? What new gameplay features have they added since then? I'm hard pressed to think of any. I mean, they've certainly added plenty of features (dV meter, etc.) and a new part here or there... but the actual gameplay in terms of "realism"? What big difference do you see between 1.3 and 1.4?

Seems to me that the actual gameplay has been essentially unchanged since 1.2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Snark said:

How do you mean?

KSP 1.0 was a huge change to gameplay (new aero model, added reentry heating, significant update to water physics).

KSP 1.2 was also a significant addition to gameplay, with the introduction of CommNet.

But 1.3 and later? What new gameplay features have they added since then? I'm hard pressed to think of any. I mean, they've certainly added plenty of features (dV meter, etc.) and a new part here or there... but the actual gameplay in terms of "realism"? What big difference do you see between 1.3 and 1.4?

Seems to me that the actual gameplay has been essentially unchanged since 1.2.

1.4 was a huge change in gameplay, as forcing more realistic movement, as an addition, a DLC, and the name of it. KSP 1.4 does chage a lot of textures, so it'll look like the game forces you to leave the previous game aim (as i see it), now, from 1.4 the game litteraly forces you to play seriously, leaving (we will remember you orange jumbo tank) only with texture that match some historical events, 1.3 and lower, were more casual, with more options to play casualy, including 1.2-1.3 and it's commnet, which needed more preciss tech, but it's actually increased the casual gameplay, as (idk the youtubers name) he builded a sation around the mun, from all sides to connect to this one thingy thing on the munm which looked like fun. tbh i'm just an old gamer who really just want's more krakens than a new texture to a engine that nobody uses.

 

even with more love.

 

me

 

(p.s. did i realy just wrote a paragpah bout what i think? maybe the resent ACT test did something to me)

Edited by JERONIMO
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, JERONIMO said:

1.4 was a huge change in gameplay...

Maybe I'm just biased since I've been playing since .17, but the differences between the last few updates have been pretty minimal.  If anything, the game has gotten more casual over time, as features have been added that make it easier to play. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say some mix of the 2.  I mostly do sci-fi in KSP (with a focus on stock space combat and some BDA tanks) but even then i try to make most of the ships i have at least plausible from a realism perspective.

That said, sci-fi or not, I try to avoid things like excessive clipping (only do it when i absolutely want a achieve a specific shape/look and cannot otherwise), and since 1.7 ive started designing alot of lifters and ships that rely far more on RCS then reaction wheels.  I still use those ofc as its very hard to be ultra precise with RCS (and im shooting other vessels so orientation makes a huge difference) but now most of my ships have 1-2 wheels and are reliant on RCS for the rest.

Im still not a fan of RO/RSS style mods mostly because i find launching to LKO boring and monotonous (and in a full realistic universe its borderline impossible to send crewed anything much past kerbin as it is IRL), but i do try to give all my ships a bit of realism when i make them especially now after we got some half good looking RCS engine choices to use (especially vernor, old vernor looked like garbage).

AjJLsA1.png

Thats my latest shipyard.  Its still more sci-fi then something youd see IRL, but it doesnt rely on reaction wheels, and even the capital ship isnt too unrealistic.

nQmlAr6.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't answer that, as I want realistic physics but casual control. I don't want to have to de-saturate my almost-useless reaction wheels, but I want engines to act like real engines do in all reasonable situations, including anything bad like off-center thrust, being useless in atmospheres, breaking when they hit the ground too hard, etc.

I too don't see any significant changes to "realism" since 1.0, except maybe CommNet. Textures? Really the textures force you to play more realistically? I guess that's fair, seeing how many complained (and still complain) that the old textures ruined everything for them I guess there have to be those on the other side. I personally never let the old textures keep me from making reasonable ships, any more than I let the new ones keep me from making ridiculous contraptions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 5thHorseman said:

I too don't see any significant changes to "realism" since 1.0, except maybe CommNet. Textures? Really the textures force you to play more realistically?.

tes

Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer realism but I'm not ready to add mods that add an extra layer of realism like TAC Life Support.

I suppose I prefer realism but need training wheels as of right now and I'm prefectly fine with KSP the way it is until they add a third survival career mode with parts that cater to the needs of astronauts similarly.

Edited by MisterKerman
Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer less realism.

 

Unless you think it's actually fun to fill out a form for approval to request approval to fill out a form to order a form so you can fill out another form to let someone know you got the form.

Because, apparently, that's how we're going to get to the moon in 5 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit if a mix fir me too...

For me gameplay itself needs to be casual, so I can actually do stuff.  I am not a rocket scientist, but I love the fact that KSPs style and 'attitude' lets me pretend that i can be (sort of).  And it's a game above all, and i do it for fun.

That said the appeal for me is that it is generally realistic in the way it does the physics etc.  So the 'inner rocket scientist' does get to do some actual rocket science of sorts.

Realism is good, but as a game it needs to remain accessible by 'hiding' some details under the hood (eg. doing the maths) and simplifying others (very few fuel types etc.)

I like stuff to work in a realistic way, but that doesn't mean the gameplay itself can't be casual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Really the textures force you to play more realistically?

15 hours ago, JERONIMO said:

tes

I'm going to assume that was a yes, and ... well ... I just cannot understand your logic or point of view.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see that the game is forcing players to play in a more serious way, by which I assume the OP means harder and more realistic.

Here's how I see the current state of things.

  • Texturing doesn't affect gameplay at all.
  • Comnet can be disabled.
  • The aerodynamics are more realistic but it's still possible to do all sorts of crazy stuff (e.g. half my returning re-entering vehicles still don't have heatshields).
  • There's as much general crazy being done with the game as ever.

Regarding the last point, here's some examples from the "What did you do in KSP today?" thread, from the last couple of weeks.

D5159pR.png

eJkZXGy.png

LiuFWnQ.png

sRueHW5.png

I think the non serious side of things is alive and well in KSP.

Edited by purpleivan
Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me a bit to realize that the original question is relating to paint-jobs/textures.

Is the OP not aware that many of the parts now have multiple different paint options?  (I believe the orange tank is still an option)

Also, almost all of the parts have a paint-job taken from some real craft, so from that perspective, it has always been fairly realistic(paint-job wise).

 

Personally, I have never considered the paint-jobs to be relevant as far as realism/silliness, and if I want to be ridiculous, I would get one or more of the 'Silly' mods, like the one that has parts modeled after parts of a burger

(I think tomato slices are wheels for example).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fraston said:

Sorry, you lost me.  Contentless meme that doesn't actually address why I said, or whether you think what I said is relevant or not, and why?  The water-physics update is pretty useful and important, for anyone who ever lands anything in water (which an awful lot of my craft do, given that water covers a large percentage of the planet).

And if someone cares about "realism"... the new water is way better (or, if you prefer, way less bad) than the old water.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Fraston said:

I mean, for a fix, they didn’t make me stop being more careful about landing speed on water than on land.

Before the fix, ships coming down at 10m/s on water were completely destroyed while those doing so on land would lose 2-4 of their lowest parts.

After the fix, a ship coming down at 10 m/s into water will survive fully intact.

Of course much faster than that you'll have issues but you will in real life also.

44 minutes ago, Fraston said:

I mean, for a fix, they didn’t make me stop being more careful about landing speed on water than on land.

Before the fix, ships coming down at 10m/s on water were completely destroyed while those doing so on land would lose 2-4 of their lowest parts.

After the fix, a ship coming down at 10 m/s into water will survive fully intact.

Of course much faster than that you'll have issues but you will in real life also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer more casual, with the only realism the kind that doesn't make it more like work than fun (LS), or that make it too difficult to play a casual game. And I don't see how a texture change would change that. I was never worried about aesthetics anyways, I actually liked the old oil drums. Especially when Textures Unlimited made them nice and shiny...

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.

×
×
  • Create New...