thanks for the heads up on .23

[longhornchris]

Eh, if an update forces me to start over then it means more practice with early missions. I've restarted career mode several times, usually due to a mod update breaking something. Each time I get better at getting early science, landing on minimus and mun, and generally doing more with less.

[Kilmeister]

Needless to say I'm existed

Now that's deep

But yeah, you shouldn't get too down on losing your save if happens. I've had a mission or two just go "poof", but no need to worry over it, just launch it again. And I've been thinking about restarting my game with remote tech installed this time. I don't want to do it right now because my fleet on the way to Jool w/ 3 unmanned vessels would be rather screwed.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Kilmeister

[Xephirious]

Thanks for the update Harv!

I'm excited for the updated career mode and the science logs. What I meant by "wasting my time" was that the updates came so close together that a save breaking update would make all the infrastructure I built for my Space Program a waste. Fuel depots, space stations and Science probes on interplanetary missions would all need to be rebuilt if the .23 update was save breaking, therefore building out the infrastructure would, infact, be a waste of time. Anyhow all of that is moot now as it appears .23 will work fine with .22 saves.

[LethalDose]

Thx for the update HarvesteR. Now, SHOO! back to work! Your recent posts have only whetted my appetite for 0.23!

Back to the code mines with you so I can restart my career mode!!! MOAR SCIENCES!!!

(Srsly, though, great game. Really appreciate the work you guys put into it!)

[Stratoroc]

I'd appreciate save compatibility because then I'll actually get to a point in a save to leave Kerbin's sphere of influence for more than a moment, for once.

Biggest thanks I have to say for career mode is being 'forced' to explore deeper in space to earn the science, whereas in previous saves I'd agonize over station modules, satellite grids, and munar bases, all for future exploration that never arrived. As for KSP being about the journey, couldn't agree more considering the most intricate of stations that takes many missions to design and put together is nothing more than laggy boxes when it's all done.

[AGlassOfMilk]

One more thing I just have to mention is, that a multiplayer mode would be epic. I showed my nephew the game, and tried to explain him some stuff about getting stuff to fly and building rockets. I think a two player multiplayer would be really awesome for KSP for several reasons:

- because ksp is extremly physics based, it should work well as multiplayer game as physics run by themself and only buttonpresses would need to be submitted, the outcome/result on both computer would be the same, if the button press is executed in the same frame on both computers (aka delayed).

- while both players are far away from each other the amount of data transfered between both players would be tiny

- because of multiple things you can do on a ship (like send data from satelite dish, control upper boosters, control robot arm on ship, on board paint food roket launchr) and ships can have multiple kerbals and vehicles (like spaceship, footman and mooncar, etc) players could fly and discover on the same spaceship and split up

- and of course each player build, launch and fly their rockets and planes independetly or rescue each other, as the game keeps always running, even while the other player is offline, this would of course require a second base like 2 km or more next to the player 1 base

- players could help or manipulate each other, they could sent stuff into space leave it there and let it for the other player there to continue from there and so on and so forth

I think KSP has huge 2 player potential. Just my 5 cent as I am game developer myself.

[Trann]

Pfft! KSP is too damn fun to let it sit idle waiting for .23.

My probes are still on course, my landers are still in their launch windows, and exploration of the Kerbol system will continue.

[rhoark]

Given the balance improvements that are coming to science progress, I think you'll want to restart career mode, even if you aren't forced to.

[elxverde]

My favorite part of each update is getting to start over. I get my dead Kerbonauts back with a fresh opportunity to build better things in an improved game system.

[hawkinator]

One more thing I just have to mention is, that a multiplayer mode would be epic. I showed my nephew the game, and tried to explain him some stuff about getting stuff to fly and building rockets. I think a two player multiplayer would be really awesome for KSP for several reasons:

- because ksp is extremly physics based, it should work well as multiplayer game as physics run by themself and only buttonpresses would need to be submitted, the outcome/result on both computer would be the same, if the button press is executed in the same frame on both computers (aka delayed).

- while both players are far away from each other the amount of data transfered between both players would be tiny

- because of multiple things you can do on a ship (like send data from satelite dish, control upper boosters, control robot arm on ship, on board paint food roket launchr) and ships can have multiple kerbals and vehicles (like spaceship, footman and mooncar, etc) players could fly and discover on the same spaceship and split up

- and of course each player build, launch and fly their rockets and planes independetly or rescue each other, as the game keeps always running, even while the other player is offline, this would of course require a second base like 2 km or more next to the player 1 base

- players could help or manipulate each other, they could sent stuff into space leave it there and let it for the other player there to continue from there and so on and so forth

I think KSP has huge 2 player potential. Just my 5 cent as I am game developer myself.

There is a mod for multiplayer, but the devs have said that they don't plan to implement it into the stock game right now. They have not completely ruled it out, however. Also, you're forgetting time warp in your post above, which thoroughly makes a mess out of multiplayer some times

[FlamedSteak]

I have a ton of crew off-world....if .23 is a save breaker I will consider them killed.....

The guys on the Mun have a way home sitting right next to the Munar One base.

I have a perfectly good Duna craft ready to launch that can get that team back.

The Laythe crew are in real trouble. I'm working on an lander/ascender but it's still in development and not ready for launch yet.

[little square dot]

That said, there seems to be a balance to strike here (as with all things), because following this argument to its logical conclusion would lead to the idea that games should not be persistent at all, and we're back to how coin-operated arcade gaming worked.

There is merit in working towards a higher goal in a near future, most definitely. But games, like many other things, are about the journey, not the destination. With KSP, that's actually quite literal an analogy.

I agree with everything but the first bit.

I would never dispute that there's merit in working towards goals; ultimately that's what fun is.

There may have been a slight misunderstanding, as following my argument to its logical conclusion definitely wouldn't land you in an arcade in the 80's.

To clarify, there is absolutely nothing wrong with setting ambitious long-term goals, however there absolutely is something wrong with a player feeling a genuine and profound sense of loss from a broken save, feeling as though they are simply wasting time if they haven't the ability to save, or feeling any sort of negative impact whatsoever to their emotional well-being that stems from playing a game.

Such thinking is never compartmentalized, somehow restricted to one facet of life, rather it is indicative of a general pattern of thought that is harmful and illogical(although perfectly natural), leads to excessive levels of attachment, and will lead to significantly more acute depression and anxiety.

I short, goals are great, but genuine emotional attachment to said goals is not.

I always start fresh with each update, whether it's a save-breaker or not, and admittedly every single time I am extremely hesitant to delete my old save, but I know that's just the dancing monkey in my head talking.

So, I force myself to take the plunge, start over, and I haven't once regretted it.

We just need to learn to let go of such trivial things.

Edited December 5, 2013 by little square dot

[Vanamonde]

I am extremely hesitant to delete my old save

Who says you have to? On my hard drive I have 15.2, 16, 17, 18.4, 19.1, 20.2, 21.1, and 22. I had way too much fun with them to just get rid of them, and every station I ever built and design I ever flew is still there. When a new version comes out and I start over, my next generation of stations and designs is better because of the lessons I learned building the previous generations.

[Whackjob]

There is merit in working towards a higher goal in a near future...

My goal is to build a planet. Then lift that planet off a planet, to dock with a planet. Then I take the planet and the docked planet and land it on another planet.

Then I'll consider making coffee.

[vexx32]

Whackjob, if you ever accomplish that, I expect videos -- not a smidge less -- you hear me?

[Whackjob]

Whackjob, if you ever accomplish that, I expect videos -- not a smidge less -- you hear me?

Optimizations must come first. The moment I dock something together that makes it more than about 2.2km in length, physics goes nuts. Pure Krakenbait.

[Corw]

now that you guys announce when you enter experimental phase, i don't need to worry about squandering my time playing career only to have it wiped away by a new update. the heads up has arrived and I thank you. now i will hunt zombies until space, SCIENCE, and .23 beckon for me.

Well, along that line of thinking, shouldn't you just stay away until it is released? Wait until then and "win" in one playtrough. What is the difference if they didn't announced it now? What is wrong in playing just for the shear enjoyment of playing it? And who said the update will break the save?

[KerbMav]

Optimizations must come first. The moment I dock something together that makes it more than about 2.2km in length, physics goes nuts. Pure Krakenbait.

Does that certain mod extend physics range or simply stops things from being deleted?

OT:

For me it means, I will bring my currently active missions to a close - for which I will have a bit more time than the release of .23, as I will be waiting for compatibility checks of my mods.

After that it is off to a new save for me too. Changes to science are mostly changes to the beginning of a save in this game and these I want to try out.

[Unimatrix1]

This is great news I wonder if they will release by Christmas,they could include a present like a new planet. I know there's a mod for that but it's nice to have some thing for the whole community to explore.

Mark just having fun with science.

[RedPine]

Honestly I'm looking forward to an update that takes attention away from science. Game progression is fun and adds a lot to KSP, but it seems many KSP Lets Players have let themselves get distracted and are now stretching the boundaries of exploration and returning home safely instead of attempting insane, unsafe designs. I miss IRD and Hanland

As for the original question of whether to keep playing KSP 0.22, I say take a break and shoot zombies. Sure, everything you learn in .22 will carry over to .23, but don't risk burning yourself out. KSP would be a very bad game to get bored of.

PS Don't worry about restarting. Your second career attempt will go WAAAY smoother than your first one.

[r4pt0r]

Well, along that line of thinking, shouldn't you just stay away until it is released? Wait until then and "win" in one play through. What is the difference if they didn't announced it now? What is wrong in playing just for the shear enjoyment of playing it? And who said the update will break the save?

Being that the game is still very much in development its smart to assume updates are game breaking until the devs say otherwise. i don't know about others but i play in waves. update is released > play for 3 weeks straight > play other games for a bit to mix it up > maybe pick up ksp again pending news on release. as experimentals have begun, i dont think it too efficient to start my planned multi-part space station. could be gone tomorrow right?

[Bobbydylan]

Being that the game is still very much in development its smart to assume updates are game breaking until the devs say otherwise. i don't know about others but i play in waves. update is released > play for 3 weeks straight > play other games for a bit to mix it up > maybe pick up ksp again pending news on release. as experimentals have begun, i dont think it too efficient to start my planned multi-part space station. could be gone tomorrow right?

Pretty much what I do. Play till something else takes my fancy. forget about the game, then watch a Scott Manley vid which inspires me to do it all again.

[Scrogdog]

Hello. My name is Scrogdog and I am a restart-aholic.

No new version required!

It's actually YOUR fault! Yes, you, and you, and you!

When I read these forums I am usually left with a sense of "why the heck didn't I think of that"!

Restart.

[Wahgineer]

Tweakables could break some things, if they do change what fuels nuclear engines use. So either put of, or finish those missions before updating.

If they changed the nuke engines, then they're 100% likely to only use liquid fuel (why is that every one thinks that the nuke engines will get they're own special fuel if/when they change them?)

[jduchock]

If they changed the nuke engines, then they're 100% likely to only use liquid fuel (why is that every one thinks that the nuke engines will get they're own special fuel if/when they change them?)

probably because mods are now using alternate fuels (interstellar, impossible innovations, etc..)

I like the idea of alternative (and more efficient) fuels. Without them, reaching the Krag system is incredibly difficult...