Should KSP have a Delta-V readout?

[Kerbart]

5 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

Hardly. KerbalEdu is a lot more than just a delta-V indicator, and is marketed and licensed differently for institutional use. I don't see its existance as an impediment to a stock indicator being implemented.

On the other hand, it completely derails the argument it's so hard to get it right, we'd rather not give out the wrong figures. If you think it's good enough to give to my son in classroom (so to speak), than it's definitely good enough for me to use casually in a game, after all.

[Stoney3K]

Also, if you install KER, you have the exact same features as KerbalEDU on standard KSP, and then some.

And people are still purchasing KerbalEDU with almost everyone having KER installed, so having a working dV indicator is not hampering KerbalEDU sales.

It may even *boost* Kerbal sales since kids can try out the same stuff at home on their consoles when they learnt it in class using KerbalEDU.

[Corona688]

It's not a question of sales, it's a question of marketing.  The point of KSPedu is that it has this feature among other things.  That's its reason to exist.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Corona688

[Red Iron Crown]

16 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

It's not a question of sales, it's a question of marketing.  The point of KSPedu is that it has this feature among other things.  That's its reason to exist.

It is indeed marketing, but not in the way you think. KSPEdu is marketed to educational institutions, so it has things like volume licensing discounts and more direct support channels. Regular KSP is marketed to the individual recreational market, so it is literally playing a different game. A stock delta-V indicator would not change this, because it's not features that differentiate KSPEdu from regular KSP, it's sales agreements and support.

[Corona688]

You're kind of contradicting yourself...  Earlier you explain there's distinct features which make KSPedu a different product, now you emphasize that it's very similar but with different grades of support.

I understand where you're coming from on both accounts, but pitting its own products agains each other is the kind of conversation a software company really wants to avoid.

Quote

"KSPedu is good for education, so... vanilla KSP isn't serious?"

"No, KSP vanilla is educational, and as serious as you make it, but lacks these especially educational features and content.  It has many community mods to make it more realistic as well."

"So vanilla KSP is worse than KSPedu, the same thing with less content, but people have done some of the same work for free?  ...Does vanilla KSP cost less?"

"KSPedu has things vanilla KSP doesn't like the delta V meter but the base gameplay is the same.  With this license agreement, and enough units, t's actually cheaper per unit, with more features than vanilla, and a support arrangement on top."

"Wait, vanilla KSP is unsupported?  That's kind of cheesy, don't you think?"

"Vanilla KSP has a large official community forum, bug tracker, wiki, in-game help, official chat resources, frequent updates, and more!"

"KSPedu doesn't?"

"The same community can help both.  KSP updates should roll up into KSPedu updates, once they're thoroughly screened and tested."

"So vanilla KSP is poor quality?"

"Gamers want all the latest features as soon as they can.  Also, the support of our players is crucial in fixing bugs.  We do our best but nobody can think of everything."

"But...  Just how far behind is SPedu?  And how bad is vanilla?  Try putting them together, you could make something as new as vanilla with as few bugs as KSPedu with the features of both.  I'll definitely buy that.  Call me when it's ready!"

*Quietly weeping and trying to explain how programming doesn't work that way*

 

Competing with your own products is a competition you always lose.  I think Squad will try and keep them as distinctly different as possible to minimize this.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Corona688

[Red Iron Crown]

1 hour ago, Corona688 said:

You're kind of contradicting yourself...  Earlier you explain there's distinct features which make KSPedu a different product, now you emphasize that it's very similar but with different grades of support.

There's no contradiction. Earlier we were talking about features, so I discussed the features of KerbalEdu (features which are mostly available for free for regular KSP via mods). You brought up marketing so I mentioned how they are marketed differently, which is product pricing and support (and advertising too).

1 hour ago, Corona688 said:

I understand where you're coming from on both accounts, but pitting its own products agains each other is the kind of conversation a software company really wants to avoid.

Competing with your own products is a competition you always lose.  I think Squad will try and keep them as distinctly different as possible to minimize this.

I don't think they really overlap much. Institutions will mostly buy Edu because it offers volume discounts and has an education-focused officially supported "mod". Individuals will mostly not buy Edu because of DRM, no Steam support, it's not cheaper for them, and the features of Edu are available to them as mods anyway (mostly).

They're not competing, they're different products in different markets. I doubt many if any institutions would choose regular KSP with a dV readout over KerbalEdu with its dV readout. Even if one did, it would still be sales for KSP so Squad is no further behind. So I really don't see the disadvantage of improving the consumer product in this way.

[Superfluous J]

If a dV indicator in KSPEdu precludes having one in KSP, then why do both have other features in common? That argument makes no sense.

[John FX]

8 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

If a dV indicator in KSPEdu precludes having one in KSP

It doesn`t.

What is precluded though is standard KSP using the code for said readout from KSPEdu as they don`t/can`t share that due to licensing. A Dv readout would have to be written for our KSP from scratch.

[foamyesque]

55 minutes ago, John FX said:

It doesn`t.

What is precluded though is standard KSP using the code for said readout from KSPEdu as they don`t/can`t share that due to licensing. A Dv readout would have to be written for our KSP from scratch.

 

I'd be surprised if that was the case.

[John FX]

1 minute ago, foamyesque said:

 

I'd be surprised if that was the case.

I imagine you will be surprised then. To get back on topic of whether KSP SHOULD have a Dv readout rather than COULD it. I see it rather as why should KSP *not* have a Dv readout because when looked at that way, there is no real reason not to have one.

[Red Iron Crown]

2 hours ago, John FX said:

It doesn`t.

What is precluded though is standard KSP using the code for said readout from KSPEdu as they don`t/can`t share that due to licensing. A Dv readout would have to be written for our KSP from scratch.

KerbalEDU uses KER code (with permission) for its delta-V calculations, and likely some other functions, too. That would seem to imply that KER's vessel simulation code could be incorporated into stock so they wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel.

[John FX]

44 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

KerbalEDU uses KER code (with permission) for its delta-V calculations, and likely some other functions, too. That would seem to imply that KER's vessel simulation code could be incorporated into stock so they wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel.

Ah, didn`t know they used third party code. I assume code written purely for KerbalEDU couldn`t be used due to licensing? That has been the reason we could not get other EDU features historically.

I would hope that the logic from KER and Mechjeb would be donated for stock usage.

[Jovus]

I'm going to take a stab at two arguments for not having a delta-V readout.

Before I do, I will emphasize I am strongly in the camp of 'it should'. If I didn't have a delta-V readout (via mods), I would have stopped playing this game a long time ago.

Nevertheless, these are arguments I find sympathetic, and I haven't seen them in this thread.

Argument one:

KSP is a game about lego-like construction and experimentation within that structure. One of the primary pleasurable skill-curves in this game is figuring out roughly what a rocket with various capabilities 'looks like' and figuring out how you can change that while still accomplishing your objective. With a delta-V readout, this aspect of the game and its experimentation is completely quashed. This is an aspect some people find enjoyable, whether or not you do. (I don't.)

Argument two:

KSP is a game about rocket science. In that sense, it's a vehicle to have a good time learning more about rocket science. KSP gives players a real incentive to learn about things like orbital mechanics, momentum, the Tsiolkovsky equation, the vis-viva equation, etc. Providing a delta-V readout gives players an 'easy out', meaning it will stunt that knowledge-growth endeavour, much like having maneuver nodes means I don't have to learn anything about orbital mechanics other than some gut-feeling basics, instead of understanding the mathematics behind a Hohmann transfer. Some people find learning in this way enjoyable, whether or not you do. (I do.)

For both arguments, a common response is, "Then we'll make the delta-V readout optional, and you can turn it off." But this misses the point. Human nature and human weakness are such that, if there's an easy way out, people will often take it, even if they wish they wouldn't. So a delta-V readout would largely quash both methods of playing the game, even if optional.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Jovus

[Corona688]

1 hour ago, Red Iron Crown said:

KerbalEDU uses KER code (with permission) for its delta-V calculations, and likely some other functions, too. That would seem to imply that KER's vessel simulation code could be incorporated into stock so they wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel.

I think they'd have to use mechjeb or something for the vanilla game, if they were willing to do so at all.  Again, they're unlikely to give us for free what kspedu users have paid for.

I think this in part explains their extreme reluctance to do so all along, if this is what they had in mind.

51 minutes ago, Jovus said:

For both arguments, a common response is, "Then we'll make the delta-V readout optional, and you can turn it off." But this misses the point. Human nature and human weakness are such that, if there's an easy way out, people will often take it, even if they wish they wouldn't. So a delta-V readout would largely quash both methods of playing the game, even if optional.

It already is easy, and we already haven't.

[Jovus]

There's a qualitative psychological difference between going out of your way to install a modification of the base game vs. disabling a feature that ships with the base game.

That's why we're having this discussion in the first place. Because "there's a mod for that" isn't an acceptable answer.

[Red Iron Crown]

8 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

I think they'd have to use mechjeb or something for the vanilla game, if they were willing to do so at all.  Again, they're unlikely to give us for free what kspedu users have paid for.

So you're going to just skip over the post above in which I laid out reasons why that isn't so? Edu's value proposition is not built around a delta-V readout, that is just one tiny part of it. 

[Corona688]

Are you asking me to be sassy to a moderator?  I smell entrapment!  ;p

[rkman]

1 hour ago, Jovus said:

KSP gives players a real incentive to learn about things like orbital mechanics, momentum, the Tsiolkovsky equation, the vis-viva equation, etc.

KSP gave even more incentives to learn about rocket science when the game had no maneuver nodes (and no 'delta-v required' indication), and even more so when it had no map.  

Are you sure KSP is intended to be an incentive to learn the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation? Because i've never heard the devs state that, but i have heard them say they'd like to include a delta-v readout if they can find a good way to integrate it into the career mode of the game. 

[Jovus]

Just now, rkman said:

KSP gave even more incentives to learn about rocket science when the game had no maneuver nodes (and no 'delta-v required' indication), and even more so when it had no map.  

Are you sure KSP is intended to be an incentive to learn the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation? Because i've never heard the devs state that, but i have heard them say they'd like to include a delta-v readout if they can find a good way to integrate it into the career mode of the game. 

Yes, it did. Yes, the argument applies to pulling out or never adding maneuver nodes. That doesn't make it invalid, just uncomfortable. Of course, there's such a thing as too much of a learning curve. Without Z, the game may be better, but without X & Y as well it may just never be played.

And no, I'm not making any arguments about what KSP is intended as. I'm talking about use cases, not developer intentions. Further, I don't mean it's a tool you can have fun with, but rather a game that, by playing it (and doing what's necessary to play it) causes you to learn.

[Padishar]

5 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

KerbalEDU uses KER code (with permission) for its delta-V calculations, and likely some other functions, too. That would seem to imply that KER's vessel simulation code could be incorporated into stock so they wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel.

No, just... no, don't even think that might be a sensible way to go.  The resource mechanisms are being considerably modified to make them more efficient and it would be far better to design the new code such that it can be directly used by the simulation code required to calculate deltaV, rather than doing what the mods do and basically reimplementing all of the core resource handling mechanisms (with inevitable bugs).

4 hours ago, Jovus said:

For both arguments, a common response is, "Then we'll make the delta-V readout optional, and you can turn it off."

A better response is, "Then we'll make the delta-V readout optional and you can turn it on if you want (or if you do the tutorial that introduces the concepts involved and the UI of the feature)".

However, I would also have to question both the arguments you gave.  In both cases you say that a type of gameplay would suffer from having a deltaV readout available, but you also make the point that "This is an aspect some people find enjoyable,".  Surely, if they find either of those aspects enjoyable and would enjoy them less with the readout then they would turn it off (or wouldn't turn it on).  In any case, simply knowing the deltaV/TWR of your vessel really doesn't quash the experimental aspect of the game, nor does it give a disincentive to learning about most of the things you mentioned, the only one it uses is Tsiolkovsky and I would definitely add a tutorial (and KSPedia entries) that describe that in detail anyway.

2 hours ago, Corona688 said:

Are you asking me to be sassy to a moderator?  I smell entrapment!  ;p

No, he isn't posting as a moderator.  He's asking why you've basically ignored what he said in his previous post(s), which you haven't answered, sassy or otherwise...

[Corona688]

Well, I feel my key point has been ignored -- Squad can't give something free which they've already charged people money for.  That's the same problem which prevents them hosting old versions.

[Jovus]

@Padishar I pretty much agree with you, and I think making it toggle on solves a lot of the issues raised by those arguments. Not that I'd be sad if it were a toggle off, or just on all the time; I'm in the camp of not seeing how you can play this game without a delta-V readout. Just trying to do my bit to represent another facet of the issue in what I hope was an accurate manner.

[Padishar]

2 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

Well, I feel my key point has been ignored -- Squad can't give something free which they've already charged people money for.  That's the same problem which prevents them hosting old versions.

No, I haven't ignored it, I just don't believe it's a particularly valid one.  Why can't they give something away that they've previously charged for?  There's no law against it, it's their program(s), they can do what they like with it.  RIC made it very clear that the deltaV readout part of KerbalEdu is only a tiny part of the difference between the products, whereas I don't think it's a particularly valid point in any way at all, plenty of companies have released old versions of their games which they previously charged for (much more than Squad ever did for early versions of KSP) and this has even included full source code in quite a few cases.  I don't think it would hurt Squad's business at all if they released every version up to and including 0.90 (at least) for free download.  They may not want to host it themselves as the bandwidth might be costly but I'm sure they could work something out, even if they put them up on torrents...

A much more likely reason for them not doing so is that it could well considerably complicate the support issues, however, it would be pretty easy to spot people trying to get support for old versions and the downloads could easily be provided on the basis of no support entitlement...

[Corona688]

4 minutes ago, Padishar said:

No, I haven't ignored it, I just don't believe it's a particularly valid one.  Why can't they give something away that they've previously charged for?

I don't know, but they're apparently not willing to.

[Superfluous J]

8 hours ago, Jovus said:

Argument one:

KSP is a game about lego-like construction and experimentation within that structure. One of the primary pleasurable skill-curves in this game is figuring out roughly what a rocket with various capabilities 'looks like' and figuring out how you can change that while still accomplishing your objective. With a delta-V readout, this aspect of the game and its experimentation is completely quashed. This is an aspect some people find enjoyable, whether or not you do. (I don't.)

Argument two:

KSP is a game about rocket science. In that sense, it's a vehicle to have a good time learning more about rocket science. KSP gives players a real incentive to learn about things like orbital mechanics, momentum, the Tsiolkovsky equation, the vis-viva equation, etc. Providing a delta-V readout gives players an 'easy out', meaning it will stunt that knowledge-growth endeavour, much like having maneuver nodes means I don't have to learn anything about orbital mechanics other than some gut-feeling basics, instead of understanding the mathematics behind a Hohmann transfer. Some people find learning in this way enjoyable, whether or not you do. (I do.)

I'm going to assume you don't think these at the same time, but are instead using them to show that no matter a person's position about the game, dV should NOT be in it.

I disagree with Argument 1. Figuring out roughly what a rocket with various capabilities looks like is EXACTLY what I used an in-game dV calculator (KER in my personal case) for at the start. When I started playing KSP, I went to the Mun with a dozen orange tanks and mainsails because that's what my gut told me I needed and it worked, and 10 orange tanks didn't cut it. After several HOURS with KER in the VAB fiddling with different things I'd have never tried (because that learning would have taken WEEKS and not produced anything workable, I would have given up long before) I wasn't just guessing what I needed and adding more when I thought that's what was required, I KNEW what I needed because I had LEARNED (well enough to play a video game) how the rocket equation balanced out payload, fuel, and engines.

I disagree with Argument 2 as well. The devs have repeatedly and without question stated that this game is about wonder and magic and all that. They do NOT want you to have to learn the rocket equation to play the game (though you are of course welcome to) and I agree with them on that one. There are dozens of "easy outs" in this game from the size of the planets to EVA fuel to Kerbals being massless in capsules to infinite reaction wheels to lack of life support to... you get the point.