Jump to content

Suggestion, Use Named Features and Anomalies as Educational Opportunities


Recommended Posts

Assuming that KSP2 will include references to notable people and missions, in the form of named features, memorials, anomalies etc...

Why not have a 'pop up' menu/window appear, when a kerbal (or probe?) is suffiently close, that gives a very brief 'introduction' to the people or events it is mamed after?  This could then either give a link to a more in depth 'KSPedia' article, and/ or hints as to what to search for out of game.

So, for example...  Harvester Massif in KSP1,  Getting within say 50m of the dish brings up a window...

 'Harvester Massif, named after the original  creator of KSP'  - Click 'Tell Me More' button for more information'.

This opens up a KSPedia page with more details,  and (if relevant) a list of things to search for away from the game. 

This could engage players curiosity, and give them pointers as to what to search for to learn more about the named persons or events, without needing everything on an 'in game' enyclopedia.

Edit...  Not sure if a 'pop-up' window is the best method, as it could get distracting.  Maybe a small 'icon' that shows in map mode and/or the 'Kerbnet' window (a bit like anomaly question marks) would be less intrusve.  And rather than opening a window or link immediately it adds it to a 'Read later' list to be browsed at your leisure.

 

Edited by pandaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sounds like a good idea. Having a window pop up would be annoying if the feature is near where you decide to do some long term operations thou. Maybe a floating name that is clickable or the name only shows in the info screen from whatever mechanic they use for resource hunting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

That sounds like a good idea. Having a window pop up would be annoying if the feature is near where you decide to do some long term operations thou. Maybe a floating name that is clickable or the name only shows in the info screen from whatever mechanic they use for resource hunting.

Yes, I agree, the 'mechanics' of the pop up or label would need to avoid it being too intrusive or annoying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hate that, unless it was a specific “developer commentary” game mode you have to explicitly enable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/3/2021 at 7:23 AM, Brikoleur said:

I would hate that, unless it was a specific “developer commentary” game mode you have to explicitly enable.

If it's not done well it could get very annoying I agree.

As a 'toggleable' settings option and/or a 'don't show this type of hint again' checkbox so it can be disabled in game, yes that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it pops up the first time, and it has a switch to turn it off. If you turn it off, you can turn pop-up info on in your settings. If you keep it on, the switch is still there for when you get annoyed. Maybe this happens when you science an anomaly? Kind of like the Squad monolith or the Apollo memorial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dientus said:

I think if this is done correctly, as you guys previously stated, this could be very interesting to those who want to know.

Developer commentary in general would be really interesting, and I would certainly explore a "commentary mode" if one was provided.

However, I would very much like to keep the firewall between in-game and metagame clear. It's the same reason I don't like memorials to RL astronauts, easter eggs with pop-culture references, naming Laythe's geographical features after American science popularisers, and what have you. So I would want, at a minimum, the option to disable those pop-ups.

This is about a space program, yes, so it makes sense that the parts are inspired by/modelled upon their RL counterparts and that it's possible to build spaceships that resemble real ones. And as I said elsewhere, nods to RL personalities in kerbal names is fine by me and fits with their whimsical nature. However, I would very much like to draw the line there. For me KSP is first and foremost a game, not an educational tool or even simulator, and fourth-wall breaking stuff like this wants to jolt me out of it.

(Although I expect that it would be pretty easy to learn to ignore it, so it's not like this kind of thing would ruin the game for me. Even so, I would prefer if it wasn't there in the first place.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Half Life: Alex (and a few other Valve games) has a developer commentary mode where you can play through the game as normal, but you can pick up Walkmans that have the developers' voice memos throughout the levels. They talk about struggles with lighting, how they decided on the movement system, the deliberation of plot points, and more. What if you found cassette tapes of floppy disks around the KSC with developer insights in a special mode? You could build yourself a little rover and drive around learning about the games' development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Brikoleur said:

For me KSP is first and foremost a game, not an educational tool or even simulator, and fourth-wall breaking stuff like this wants to jolt me out of it.

So KSP can't teach the orbital mechanics or the thrust equation or the other physics principles that the background simulation for the game relies on? (Which are very close or the same as real life principles.) KSP can't explain or link/point to info on some of the excepted astrological phenomenon that would be seen in space? The devs can't name geological or astrological features they add to the game anyway they see fit? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

So KSP can't teach the orbital mechanics or the thrust equation or the other physics principles that the background simulation for the game relies on? (Which are very close or the same as real life principles.) KSP can't explain or link/point to info on some of the excepted astrological phenomenon that would be seen in space? The devs can't name geological or astrological features they add to the game anyway they see fit? 

 

 

I understand the point you're trying to make, maybe in a small way it's educational, but that would be to people unfamiliar with space and physics. I personally think of the game more as an introduction to basic mechanics and a way to have fun exploring those mechanics in creating things that could never exist in real life. That's what makes it a game and not a simulator. It's like you said very close (well, not really very close but that is splitting hairs lol), but no space agency such as NASA would settle for "very close" and no population or government would spend billions of dollars on "very close", they want exact. Being exact saves lives, time, and money. Being exact makes the experiments and the flight planning repeatable and reliable to advance us to the next phase.

 

But for me that is a lot of the draw and attraction of KSP. The fact that it's not exact. Things like the "kraken" that can get you at any time when it doesn't make sense and the fact that you can actually complete missions when you mathematically really shouldn't be able to. Not worrying about time dilation or travel time for communication waves, for me it's relaxing and fun the way it is.

 

Of course the devs can and do name features and places whatever they wish to. It's just an opinion of keeping in game and real life separate. Such as @Brikoleur suggesting to make it an option and @Kernel Kraken suggesting something as unobtrusive as discs you can choose to play or not. They are alternate ways of thinking about the naming convention as well as learning about inspirations and details I actually agree with myself. Nothing more. ;p

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

KSP can't explain or link/point to info on some of the excepted astrological phenomenon that would be seen in space? The devs can't name geological or astrological features they add to the game anyway they see fit? 

Of course it can, and they can. However, I would prefer that it doesn’t, and they don’t.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brikoleur said:

Of course it can, and they can. However, I would prefer that it doesn’t, and they don’t.

I do understand, and fully respect, this point of view.

My 'logic' behind the basic suggestion of some way to enable players to learn about people or events referenced in game is to build on the 'accidentally educational' aspects of the game.  If players feel forced to learn it can spoil the fun, but if a gentle prompt can somehow let them know that 'this name has some significance' and can give them a relatively easy way to find out how to learn about it, should they wish to, then why not try to find a suitable way to impkement it. 

However, it is paramount that the fun of playing the game is not disrupted.  We all play for fun after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah the “accidentally educational” aspect is great. If you can work that stuff subtly into tutorials and such, great. However I do think that adding fourth-wall breaking educational material into the game itself will actually damage it — it’ll come across as heavy-handed and didactic while at the same time being half-baked, making it a worse game and a worse educational tool.

Basically, I feel the same way about this stuff as I feel about the various realism-related controversies. I play KSP for fun. It’s play. I don’t want that compromised or diluted by pursuing other goals like realism or education, however worthy those goals are in their own right. If a realistic or educational feature doesn’t at the same time make the game more fun, then it should be dropped .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jack Mcslay said:

sounds much easier to have that be the text for when you scan the object with a scanning arm.

Yes, that could certainly work for objects, but not if it is a terrain feature, like a hill or crater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...