How many of you play career vs sandbox?

[overkill13]

1 hour ago, The Space Dino said:

IOn a side note, I can't seem to be able to see the target distance indicator on the main HUD so when docking I basically have to eyeball how far my target is - any solution suggestions?

F4 opens and closes the overlay marking for the current target.

[Bingleberry]

3 hours ago, Tonka Crash said:

I'm an engineer and have worked with NASA in the past and my company currently has a few projects with NASA. You're reading a bias into my post that was not intended.. I was arguing the contract systems is not that different than NASA missions    To use your example: Cassini is but one mission among many for NASA. "furthering scientific inquiry" is a justification, not a plot.  

NASA programs are very much like the contract system in this game: launch a rocket, put a man in space, land a man on the moon and safely return to earth, put a orbiter around Saturn with xxx scientific experiments, land on Mars, etc.)  There is no overall narrative to these missions like some in this thread say is lacking from the game.

Right, but I was trying to highlight two main aspects with the first post (sorry about the edit while you were reading, but things dawn on me right after hitting that submit button)... the first is, in reality, each project has its own narrative to the particular researchers that are performing it, so it’s tough to necessarily apply a real world comparison... the second, if you are providing a video game with a “career” system, it should have a narrative that gives life to it, that’s the nature of video games and career modes.

 

3 hours ago, Tonka Crash said:

f you want to argue about I'd say it's too narrow to focus solely on NASA as the US space program.  Space-X intends to colonize Mars. Virgin Galactic is looking at tourism. These are not strictly "furthering scientific inquiry".  To be cynical you could also argue Apollo's mission was more about politics and would have never happened if it were only about science (beat the Ruskies). 

I hate to argue semantics, but if you’re going to say “the US space program,” you mean NASA (and perhaps jpl)... if you said “a US space program,” I’d give you a little more liberty. That said, those private programs must drive the technology further, as Apollo did, in order to accomplish the task. Mars colonization is pretty far off, from a practical human biology/life support perspective...

 

And no, you are not cynical in saying Apollo was more about politics than anything else, I absolutely agree with you. However, I also believe that every single scientist and engineer that worked on that project worked on it for the science of it, not for the politics of it.

[jimmymcgoochie]

I play career mode with the science gains turned down to 10% so that it's not possible to unlock everything without leaving Kerbin's SOI. There's not much of a story behind it except what you make up yourself, but trying to force a story on a game this creative wouldn't work particularly well.

Sandbox mode is what I use when I'm testing mods or trying to replicate bugs, I never use it for anything else.

[HansonKerman]

On 4/24/2020 at 12:03 PM, Logan Timmermann said:

In fact ever since career mode was really only science mode.

those were the days. Also, yes, I do play Sandbox a lot but I play on a career save once in awhile

[DStaal]

I play almost exclusively Science mode.  I like the structure of unlocking parts and advancing the tech tree, but I find most of the contracts basically busywork.

(I also tend to over-engineer my space agency - having them have multiple missions and bases on Mun and Minmus, and then a new version of KSP comes out and I can't transfer my save to it without breaking something...)

[southernplain]

I have been playing Science mode lately. I like the feeling of organically growing in capability with better parts through the tech tree but I do not have the time or desire to grind out contracts and raise money to pay for my endeavors. I am also fairly risk averse when it comes to my Kerbal lives so most of my missions are exploration probes anyways for the first long while.

[Cavscout74]

I play almost exclusively career now, with sandbox used for some testing.   Usually with science gains turned way down to slow down advancements.

[pandaman]

Almost exclusively sandbox.

I like the idea of Career mode, but the current way it is implemented doesn't inspire me to want to continue beyond the 'let's try it again' phase of a few flights.  Likewise with Science mode (or the original career mode as it was).

Hopefully the KSP2 'Progression' mode will be more to my liking, but if not then Sandbox it is.

 

[ExtremeSquared]

Career with cash rewards bumped up allows a taste of sandbox play without losing the features of career.

[LoneKharnivore]

4 hours ago, ExtremeSquared said:

Career with cash rewards bumped up allows a taste of sandbox play without losing the features of career.

This is exactly what I'm doing. I like upgrading my buildings and unlocking tech, and I like the direction that contracts bring to the game, but I didn't want to have to fight for every Kerbucken.

[Misguided Kerbal]

I have 2 sandbox saves, one that I test on and one that I play on. I have yet to start playing Career or Science mode, but I just don't like it. I hate restrictions, and also because the tech tree is messed up. 

[xendelaar]

Sandbox for testing or movie making and challenges

Career for the most of the time

[Bariel]

Like several others on here I play career, but with a sandbox save to test stuff.

As I am pretty comfortable making rockets, but much less so with spaceplanes, it is the spaceplanes that tend to be built in sandbox mode first. With rockets I'll generally take the hit in career if it doesn't fly/explodes, etc.