Jump to content

Try to convince me to stay


Recommended Posts

I've been unsatisfied ever since the 1.4 update because it wrecked more than 100 uploads to KerbalX.com. Since the devs never seem to listen, I have given up hope and won't invest any future money into KSP 1.

So its a goodbye to the "original" team. I'll put my money in KSP 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please stay, you have been an excellent contributor to KSP and the community.

Your explanations of game mechanics, work with stock bearings, challenges and mechanical designs have been a major inspiration to me and many others during your time on the forum. 

I do understand the frustration you feel that a lot of your hard work was lost through updates to the game and if we cannot convince you to stay for KSP, I do take hope that you will be back for KSP 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, James Kerman said:

Please stay, you have been an excellent contributor to KSP and the community.

Your explanations of game mechanics, work with stock bearings, challenges and mechanical designs have been a major inspiration to me and many others during your time on the forum. 

I do understand the frustration you feel that a lot of your hard work was lost through updates to the game and if we cannot convince you to stay for KSP, I do take hope that you will be back for KSP 2.

@Azimech

I have to agree with @James Kerman but you do what you want. You're a big boy and you stick to your decision to either stay or leave. Sorry you're having issues with KSP at the moment but.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although 1.4 and beyond wrecked several of my favorite craft...

  • The Mk3 Cargo Bay collider debacle (sorta fixed, but still not what it was in 1.3)
  • The countless landing gear interaction with ground issues that destroyed my moon bases
  • The abysmal (and destructive) interactions related to docking with own craft
  • Trying to use the Claw without destroying the craft involved
  • Bugs that disallow self-docked parts to undock themselves via Action Group keys
  • The Wheesley and Goliath engine fixes that no one asked for or wanted (I still miss the reverse thrust on my submarine, and honestly why not allow people to stack/embed engines?)
  • The Wolfhound engine to build that "more powerful" interplanetary mothership that you always wanted!  Oh wait, nevermind we didnt' actually mean to do that.
  • Introducing rotor blades in 1.7 and then deciding they all need to be reworked in 1.8, and hey why not add cyclic in 1.9 and stir the pot some more...
  • That's just off the top-o-my-head in terms of things that aggravate me; I'm sure I could fill the page if I tried!

In spite of it all, I still find things to build that are fun.  I'm really excited to see if my next idea will work, the initial tests have been positive!  ...and in the process, I'll probably trip over 3 or 4 new ideas to build upon.  I think the most fun that I have with the game is when I set out to solve a specific problem or task with a certain idea in mind.  Then in the process of working and re-working the design a totally different approach to solve the problem presents itself and works wonderfully!  I had another of those moments this morning, and I'm looking forward to further testing this evening and through the weekend.

So yeah, they break stuff constantly, and infuriate me at times...  I have been able to rework a number of my craft to adapt with the latest versions of the game.  So "Adapt and Overcome" has been a bit of a mantra in my space program.  Your designs are far more complex than my mission-oriented craft and I can see where the frustration might be a bit overwhelming.  I imagine the tolerances on some/most of your designs are very tight and the constant tweakings between updates and the Unity engine could very well be too much to endure.  So I do empathize.

As long as I can find something fun to do next, the game will probably keep me around.  I do wish they would be a little more respectful of the time and effort some folks may have put into their fleet of (sometimes beloved) craft before making some sweeping change or a cosmetic rework that damages the function/looks of long-time favorite craft.  In the games of the past that I left behind, it was actually this element (developers damaging or obsoleting my hours/days/months work) that have turned me against them.  I'm not quite there yet with Kerbal, but the idea of losing robotics and propellers/rotors in 2.0 does really bring me down.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2020 at 10:57 AM, Bej Kerman said:

Gonna hang on to the past, are you?

To tell you the true, the guy is changing his bets about the future.

Not a unreasonable bet, by the way.

Until further notice, KSP2 is the future and KSP1 is far from being a safe Harbour for long date users.

You can't have the cake and eat it too, and currently Squad appears to think they can.

19 hours ago, XLjedi said:

Although 1.4 and beyond wrecked several of my favorite craft.

The problem is not what was broken. It's what was not fixed.

Edited by Lisias
tyops
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some content has been removed due to making personal remarks.  Folks, let's keep it civil, please.  Users' choices are up to them, and there's nothing wrong with someone expressing dismay about something they used to like not really doing it for them anymore.

If you'd like to post your own reflections on your own reasons for staying or leaving, that's fine.  If you'd like to commiserate, or bid farewell, or otherwise share civil thoughts, that's fine.  But please don't get into the business about making personal remarks about other people's behaviors or choices-- that never ends well.

Thank you for your understanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Lisias said:

You can't have the cake and eat it too, and currently Squad appears to think they can.

Be a little more accurate please.

Squad works with KSP

Star Theory is working on KSP2

Squad is owned by Take-2

Star Theory is working for Take-2

 

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

Squad is owned by Take-2

Star Theory is working for Take-2

Squad is an independent Studio, or at least I found no evidence that they had sold themselves to someone. As far as I know, TTi bough the KSP IP.

And exactly what this has anything to do with my original argument?

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

Just pointing out that Squad has nothing to do with KSP2.  unless I misread your statement (entirely possible)

It's my opinion you did. :)

I had argued that KSP2 is the future, and that KSP1 is not a good option for long date players (there's a lot of people sticking on 1.3 and even 1.2).

These are statements about the products.

Then I argued that Squad appears to be willing to have the Quake, I mean, Cake :sticktongue: and eat it to. Squad develops KSP1, so the correlation - besides being implied - sounded evident to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should I convince anyone? If you're tired of KSP, take a break. If you want to stay in KSP1, then keep playing it! But having someone to convince you to stay is like me convincing my nine-year-old that asparagus is actually tasty. Find your reasons, weigh them out, make a decision.

As @Lisias said, I'm living large playing 1.3.0. More than likely, I won't go to KSP2. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 1:24 PM, Lisias said:

You can't have the cake and eat it too, and currently Squad appears to think they can.

I don't understand this analogy in this context. What metaphorical cake does Squad have and how are they trying to eat it too?

Ignore the fact that cake is pretty much useless if you can't eat it. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

I don't understand this analogy in this context. What metaphorical cake does Squad have and how are they trying to eat it too?

Aiming the future versus keeping the current userbase satisfied, instead of leaving or locking themselves on older KSP versions (eroding the changes of selling them DLCs).

 

25 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

Ignore the fact that cake is pretty much useless if you can't eat it. ;)

Exactly. It's pointless to have a Cake if you don't intent to eat it. On the other hand, you need to let it go in order toe eat it, as you won't have it anymore.

You want to have the Cake? Don't eat it. But if you will not eat it, why have the Cake?

Old adage. Useful reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_can't_have_your_cake_and_eat_it . It teaches people that when choices need to be made, you can't avoid the consequences of that choices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Aiming the future versus keeping the current userbase satisfied, instead of leaving or locking themselves on older KSP versions

So is KSP2 "aiming (at?) the future"? Or is DLC that?

If it's KSP2, they're not making it. They have no say on if KSP2 gets made or not or how it gets made. If I worked for Squad it would terrify me, in fact. All Squad has a say in as far as Kerbal IP goes is what they do with KSP(1).

If it's DLC, how is DLC not satisfying the current userbase? Because it's not 1.3?

Or is it something else that I didn't think of?

Just to be clear I am truly not understanding. I'm looking for clarity and am not trying to argue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

Just to be clear I am truly not understanding. I'm looking for clarity and am not trying to argue.

Open a new thread somewhere else on the Lounge and I will gladly talk about - I think we are starting to derail @Azimech's thread, as this is not about the reasons that could be influencing his decisions. Since I don't know exactly how you intent to handle this subject, I don't know how to name such thread, so I leave it to you. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...