3rd Party Contributors (Modders)

[Bosun]

Seeing that KSP2 will allow modding from day one, with a very incomplete game, I have to consider that the modding community will quickly outpace the rate of official development.  Modders can build sub-systems, parts, even overhaul the graphics, and there's every reason to feel that the community, as enthusiastic as it is for a release-ready game, will get to work quickly to make it one.  

I would posit that modders need to be able to attain "3rd Party Contributor" status.   Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) does this with their modules.  In fact, over half the modules available in the game are made by 3rd-party developers and modders.  They all get vetted, of course, and tested, but this effectively doubles the rate of their development, and allows the game to reach a breadth it would never reach otherwise.   The Early Access version of the game will certainly be bug-fixed, added too, and embellished the way the original was, and I think that add-ons need to have a procedure and policy in place to be tandem to official development, sanctioned and vetted by the dev team, for release in official updates.  

The current timeline of 2024 for the 1.0 release and 2025-2026 for the complete game, based on extrapolation of current development speed, could be halved if this approach is encouraged.   It has worked very well in other games, and indeed is essential to any large-scale game in this modern era of technology.  The modules, the coding, are all too complex for any one development team to complete in any timeline that renders them relevant to the platform ability of their age.  What was started as a Unity 5 project, under a single development team timeline, would be 3-4 versions of game technology old by the time it was released.  

This represents a larger shift in the industry, as well.  Many companies are recognizing that it's not feasible to field a complete game on their own anymore, and this, I believe, is why modding is allowed from the start (along with precedent and tradition in KSP).  I think, to officially recognize these contributions as being not just add-ons, but essential core-game developments in their own right, is essential to completing the game.  

[jastrone]

mods often dont have the same quality as the main game tho. i think ill use mods when the game is done because then mods will build upon the main game and add parts built upon the same system as the main game. custom solar systems will be way better when the game has more than one because devs dont have to come up with everything.

[MechBFP]

So essentially recreate the problems of KSP 1 development but even worse this time around. 

Nah, I am good. 

[Bosun]

6 hours ago, jastrone said:

mods often dont have the same quality as the main game tho. 

I don't agree, to be honest.  DCS is a great example of this.  Their modules have to meet certain standards and criteria, and they have policies and procedures for how to implement them, that the 3rd-party contributor must meet.  That game is a stellar success, not in spite of those, but because of them. 

The Freespace Mod community is also a great example of this.  For the last two decades, they've been modding that old engine, and have done truly impressive work.  The Diaspora stand-alone, featuring the Battlestar Galactica universe was, simply put, undersold.  That could have been put out by a studio with investors.  It was a team of volunteers.  

DCS was never a complete game when it was released, it was released in 'modules', similar to KSP's timeline.  It worked because the modules came at a frequency quick enough to keep interest, and the community did not feel like a half-finished game was released and then half-worked on.  That's a huge and difficult impression to maintain.  Loss of interest has killed so many titles on launch, and KSP has a very, very real danger of getting some negative feedback on EA release, given the time it's taken them to get just the bare minimum done for it.  If we can help float interest and positive feedback with a vibrant contributor community, officially, and not just random modders, then it will be a massive asset to the development team, and the longstanding of the game. 

The modding community is what made KSP 1 have the community and longevity it still enjoys today, and I feel that in order to produce KSP2 in a timeline that meets interest, and to continue that interest, that community needs to be at the table, with the devs, as the development continues.  

[GoldForest]

7 hours ago, jastrone said:

mods often dont have the same quality as the main game tho.

You're right. Mods have better quality than the main game. At least in KSP 1's case. 

I can't play stock ksp anymore because of how spoiled I am with the art style improvements of parallax, avp, scatterer, planetshine and so many more. And that's just visual upgrades to planets. Restock, BDB, Tantares, SOCK, ACK, all surpass the stock parts in both style and function. 

Now, from what I've seen of KSP 2, it looks far better than KSP 1's visual style, partly thanks to full on PBR support, giving realistic metal sheen and other texture quality of life improvements.  But I still have no doubt that ReStock 2.0 will be made to change the style of some parts that people think should look different. Parallax 2.0 will no doubt make the terrain even more beautiful. 

Mods can match or far exceed the main game in every way. Look around the addon section of this forum just to see that. 

[Cpt72Bug]

8 hours ago, MechBFP said:

So essentially recreate the problems of KSP 1 development but even worse this time around. 

Nah, I am good. 

Can you elaborate more on this comment?

[MechBFP]

1 hour ago, Cpt72Bug said:

Can you elaborate more on this comment?

The original KSP 1 didn’t have a roadmap from the beginning that gave an overall vision for the game. As such as the game was being built new pieces were being added on in a more or less adhoc manner as the community requested things and as various idea popped up.

At least in the case of KSP1 the game development was still centrally managed by a single development team, so they could at least try to fit the pieces together as best they could. Regardless this resulted in a hodgepodge of functions and features and an unavoidable amount of bugs and issues.

So going forward with KSP 2 the game has had a start/end roadmap/vision right from the get go, so each piece being developed could be designed in a meaningful way that would allow each component to (hopefully) integrate in a much more seamless manner.

So the OPs suggestion here would not only completely invalidate KSP2’s original vision, you would now have individual components potentially being developed in complete silos from each other in an even worse manner than the original KSP1 development.

I cannot stress enough how unbelievably terrible that would be. 

Edited October 26, 2022 by MechBFP

[Ryaja]

It would be nice if there was an official mod loader, and the people with large enough mods could get better recognition.

[Bej Kerman]

On 10/25/2022 at 6:42 PM, Bosun said:

incomplete game

The roadmap isn't incomplete features. It's complete features that the devs have selectively enabled in the game so they can focus on getting and addressing feedback one thing at a time.

[pss88]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

The roadmap isn't incomplete features. It's complete features that the devs have selectively enabled in the game so they can focus on getting and addressing feedback one thing at a time.

Did devs say that explicitly? Or it is your own understanding of the situation?

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, pss88 said:

3 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

The roadmap isn't incomplete features. It's complete features that the devs have selectively enabled in the game so they can focus on getting and addressing feedback one thing at a time.

Did devs say that explicitly? Or it is your own understanding of the situation?

I don't need a dev to tell me that an Orion drive I saw in a dev screenshot several years ago actually exists and will come with the stage that adds interstellar scale parts.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, pss88 said:

Did devs say that explicitly? Or it is your own understanding of the situation?

We've seen assets for those systems constantly in show and tells for the past years.

We know they already have prototypes and stuff for the later steps in the roadmap.