Multiplayer or resources ?

[I_Killed_Jeb]

Multiplayer for sure. Multiplayer just adds to the features already in the game without requiring an entire, game-changing set of gameplay dynamics. Resources can't do that without totally changing the way players interact with the game.

You see, what originally attracted me to this game was the fact that there were no resources in the game and that I could just go into the VAB and build a massive rocket with no regards for economic feasibility, health, or safety concerns, and (semi)realistically launch it into space. I mean, the way I understood that resources were to be implemented was that there was a finite number of resource X or resource Y or resource Z and you had to more or less "craft" them together to create resource Q so that you could build rocket part W. Everyone's so scared of KSP becoming the next Minecraft, I don't see why we're so sad to see resources more or less be scrapped. It's Kerbal Space Program, not Kerbal Mining Program. I don't know, it's about creating and managing a space program, even in career mode. Space programs, as far as I know, do not have their own mining divisions. You don't ask SpaceX to go out and mine its aircraft grade Aluminum out of the ground. No, they buy it in its more or less "completed" form and shape it to form the parts they need.

You can always just slap together rockets in sandbox. Career mode is a set of game-changing dynamics but that's here to stay, right? (Not saying I don't like career mode, I think ultimately it'll be sweet)

[Hiromoto]

Mulitplayer doesn't appeal to me at all. I'll probably never use it. On on the other hand I've always wanted to build off world and colonize the planets and their moons.

[Nexustrimean]

Both! Each is Awesome. and 2x Awesome is better than either one. This need not be an either or decision, and we should not look at it as such.

[I.O.M.]

While I enjoy multiplayer games part of the appeal of KSP is that I can do my own thing at my own pace. Also, I typically play with a large number of mods (remotetech, kethane, etc.) and I think it would be difficult to get compatibility sorted out in multiplayer.

I'm certainly not opposed to multiplayer in KSP, but it just wouldn't do a whole lot for me.

[Scotius]

Resources will add a whole new layer to the game. I have so much plans for them already..

Multiplayer? Here's my thoughts about it: My ships already tend to lag - how will it look with three or four comparable ships in vicinity? Will my painstakingly pieced together space station be safe from another player borking his docking attempt ? Accidentally or not? And so on...

And probably most important: I want to play my game as i want it. On my own pace - not feeling obliged or being expected to adjust to someone else. I simply don't have time for this due to real life obligations.

[RocketPilot573]

Neither, we need better aerodynamics, that's the only thing I want right now.

[Giggleplex777]

I vote resources, just because... well... Would YOU let me log in to your server and take the risk of me putting something on the launch pad?

Whackjob on KMP.

[Skyler4856]

I vote resources, just because... well... Would YOU let me log in to your server and take the risk of me putting something on the launch pad?

Yes... I Would

[PDCWolf]

All these polls, jesus christ. Why do I feel the impulse of voting on them all.

anyways, resources.

[JDobs]

To be honest when I found out about multiplayer I was kind of bummed. I feel like it will ultimately take away from what the devs could have done with game because they now have to spend time building that whole system. Also I feel like multiplayer in this game will be like other multiplayers: trolls. People are gonna build cool things and then get them destroyed. Might not happen but when was the last time anyone played a multiplayer without getting killed at least a handful of times?? Also, this may have been answered elsewhere, but how would timewarp work on a multiplayer game anyway?? Bad idea overall squad

[Holo]

but how would timewarp work on a multiplayer game anyway??

DEFCON style or KMP style. That problem was solved a long time ago.

[OdinYggd]

I vote resources, just because... well... Would YOU let me log in to your server and take the risk of me putting something on the launch pad?

I would gladly take this risk. Please do come on my KMP server.

Honestly I would rather see stock resources over stock multiplayer purely because when developing a protocol for a purpose you need to factor in feedback on how it is being used and what kinds of issues people see with it. Squad has quite the reputation for not taking this into account, while a modding group working on multiplayer is working much more closely with the community and can respond a lot more quickly to community interests and needs when developing the client and server.

As it is KMP already has problems with griefing, to the extent that a prior version was actually the target of a DoS attack that rendered the KMP server unusable until an admin reset it.

[ddavis425]

I just posted this in another thread but I think it would make more sense here.

Squad has been looking for a long time to make planets more interesting. They tried to do this with research but failed, there's nothing interesting about right clicking. If resources were added there would be a huge amount of things to do. Make satellites to scan for resources in advance, make landers to drill for the resources, send up tanks to hold those resources, add some converters to make them useful, and then turn the whole thing into a spaceport for building, launching, and refueling rockets. Or you could just scrap all that so that a could drive a rover beside of another person's rover, because that sounds like a blast.

[Seret]

Bad poll, there should also be options for neither and both. As it stands the poll presupposes that we can only have one or the other, which is not the case. If Squad wanted we could have both, neither, or either.

[Themohawkninja]

I would gladly take this risk. Please do come on my KMP server.

Honestly I would rather see stock resources over stock multiplayer purely because when developing a protocol for a purpose you need to factor in feedback on how it is being used and what kinds of issues people see with it. Squad has quite the reputation for not taking this into account, while a modding group working on multiplayer is working much more closely with the community and can respond a lot more quickly to community interests and needs when developing the client and server.

As it is KMP already has problems with griefing, to the extent that a prior version was actually the target of a DoS attack that rendered the KMP server unusable until an admin reset it.

Seeing as this poll has achieved around 90% for resources, perhaps you (having more authority than a user) should contact the devs about this. They might want to see that their community is almost entirely against their decision. Perhaps they will change their decision as a result?

[OtherDalfite]

For those of you who would like multiplayer, I'd like to list what that entails.

>Docking with someone else

>Fighting someone else with a ship

>Walking around on a barren landscape with two different kerbals

>Derby racing

>Launching two rockets

Think about how the average part count for a space freighter in KSP is about 150 parts, and that can be hefty on some machines. With something like staging a war with someone (parts counts in the thousands) along with servers having to keep up with all the physics calculations and locations for vessels, I can't even think of a feasible way that Squad could develop multiplayer on an already stressed game and not have it be a laggy, strewn together heap of errors and processor-destroying calculations. Unless .23 is a MAJOR overhaul on performance, there is no way that playable, enjoyable multiplayer will even be possible.

Along with the topic of multiplayer, think of the development process involving it once it is "finished".

>Alright, we got a better aerodynamics model, let's test it for multiplayer

>Nope, ships are acting strange and the game is crashing

>Fix it

>Well, there is another problem with the docking code now, people can't dock while still in the atmosphere (a realistic problem, I'm talking high atmosphere, the game doesn't like importing spacecraft while still in the atmosphere).

>Fix it

>Alright, now to test every other feature in the game but still goes into multiplayer.

This has to be done for EVERY feature in KSP if actual multiplayer is established. It's like testing two versions of the same game slightly different for the same bugs, except the bugs can correspondingly create more problems, and eventually one side must settle for a worse solution so the other benefits. Multiplayer is by far the worst thing to ever happen to KSP, and I pray that multiplayer does not become a reality for KSP until either near the very end or as some part of DLC, which I would much prefer it be, seeing as how I or many players will never use it.

[Themohawkninja]

Bad poll, there should also be options for neither and both. As it stands the poll presupposes that we can only have one or the other, which is not the case. If Squad wanted we could have both, neither, or either.

It asks which one you want the MOST. It's still good in that sense.

[Seret]

It asks which one you want the MOST. It's still good in that sense.

Sure but that means the poll is based on a hypothetical situation, not reality. As the OP said:

So, if it was up to you and you had to choose one feature, which one would you pick?

Since there's no indication that this is the actual decision Squad were faced with, this poll doesn't accurately reflect the real situation. Some people seem to be suggesting it does.

[OtherDalfite]

Sure but that means the poll is based on a hypothetical situation, not reality. As the OP said:

Since there's no indication that this is the actual decision Squad were faced with, this poll doesn't accurately reflect the real situation. Some people seem to be suggesting it does.

You're right. It's not really a decision at all. It's SQUAD going against their original plans, lying to the community, and deciding to ditch it in order for one last haul of cash.

[PDCWolf]

The pool says "would you chose multiplayer or resources?". The only way it can be taken apart from playing developer, is what people like the most, and you can see resources have 10 times more voters than mp

[Themohawkninja]

Sure but that means the poll is based on a hypothetical situation, not reality. As the OP said:

Well, then there seems to be a conflict in wording.

Since there's no indication that this is the actual decision Squad were faced with, this poll doesn't accurately reflect the real situation. Some people seem to be suggesting it does.

I'd say resources going into the scrap heap, and multiplayer returning as a possibility within such a short timespan is somewhat indicative of a decision. It's not absolute, but there does seem to be a binary decision here.

[Themohawkninja]

You're right. It's not really a decision at all. It's SQUAD going against their original plans, lying to the community, and deciding to ditch it in order for one last haul of cash.

They game still has many more chances for Squad to go for your so-called "haul of cash" maneuvers. Just calm down and let's see if Squad changes their mind after seeing the community response. Yelling at them over the Internet will only get you banned from the forums.

[Seret]

I'd say resources going into the scrap heap, and multiplayer returning as a possibility within such a short timespan is somewhat indicative of a decision. It's not absolute, but there does seem to be a binary decision here.

Well, that's the assumption many are making. It's not one I agree with. There's been no progress on resources for quite a while now, I think it has been in severe danger of being binned for quite a while. Just because several announcements were made at Kerbalkon doesn't necessarily mean they're all interdependent. It just means it was a PR event where they make lots of announcements.

[Rastaman]

The question is, what is meant with "resources"? Is it a method to replenish fuel and life support, or is it meant to be full fledged spaceship production.

[OtherDalfite]

The question is, what is meant with "resources"? Is it a method to replenish fuel and life support, or is it meant to be full fledged spaceship production.

<reaction image="" removed,="" text="" added<removed="" reaction="" image,="" added="" -="" mods="">{{reaction image removed, text added - mods}}

I would humbly recommend that if you are of age to access that you check out http://boards.4chan.org/vg/res/55347179</reaction>

Edited December 15, 2013 by sjwt