Has KSP Found Its Unique Voice?

[moeggz]

In a recent thread Aladran posted this link http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=22998. That link is HarvesteR announcing KSP to the Orbiter Forum community. There was, of course, discussion in that thread about that link. However, I think a new thread with a more specific focus on a certain part of that link is necessary. Specifically, this part:

This game is not meant to compete with Orbiter, mind... that wouldn't be a good idea anyway, to compete with a freeware simulator with 12 years of development on it... This is meant to be a different take on space games, it's not a full blown space sim, but it's not your average space shooter either. At best, I hope this can be a stepping stone for people to get into Orbiter. At worst, I hope it's at least somewhat entertaining.

So do you think KSP has found it's 'different take' on space games? Are you satisfied with its approach? And, most importantly, do you believe it has achieved or surpassed HaversteR's original goal of being a stepping stone for Orbiter?

Oh and one more thing,

There are still many design decisions to be made, before we can be sure of how we should go about things... Mainly, I'm divided between having orbital mechanics in the game or not... So we decided to leave it up to the players to decide. ...So if you like it, join the KSP Forums

If anyone on this forum was part of the community back in the time when orbital mechanics were being debated... Thank you SO MUCH for influencing this game to include my favorite feature of this uniquely 'Kerbal' Game!

[unrepentantAuthor]

I think that what KSP brings to the table is authentic enough spaceflight, but sufficient levity, that it becomes accessible to a wide crowd yet retains room for realism. It's the middle ground of spaceflight simulation that accommodates Apollo replicas and prohibitively unaerodynamic monstrosities alike.

On the other hand, there's no real push from KSP to Orbiter, since the two games have no direct link, and I've seen Orbiter veterans claim that Orbiter was more of a stepping stone for KSP than the inverse. It's a truism that KSP has more space in which to learn why things happen in spaceflight than almost any other route to that knowledge. Perhaps that means KSP has 'surpassed' its intended role as a stepping stone. It certainly has an identity of its own that stands unsupported by other games.

[Kevon87]

I like to think that KSP and Orbiter compliment each other. I started playing Orbiter around the time the 2010 update came out. I loved it, but it was not (and still isn't) the most intuitive game out there, not even close (I still get lost with IMFD). However, It did give me the basic gist of real spaceflight and passing knowledge of orbital mechanics that translated very well into KSP. Likewise, I've noticed that since playing KSP regularly, my Orbiter skills have improved considerably.

[MKI]

In terms of ONLY getting a handle on orbital mechanics. Kerbal is a great stepping stone to Orbiter.

Kerbal also has a lot more to it in terms of "fun", since it is much more of a game than a simulator. With map view taking place of Orbiters complicated and realistic MFDs, Kerbal can display data much easier and simpler to a new player.

Beyond Orbital Mechanics, Kerbal Space program has more depth. The biggest aspect is ship design, which is nearly half the game along with the soon to be implemented Career mode aspects of funds and reputation.

It depends on what you know and what you dont. If you go from Kerbal to Orbiter, you will understand the mechanics easier but will need help with the deeper realism and difficulty. If you go from Orbiter to Kerbal, you will probably need to learn how to design rockets just as much as fly them.

So both have their own style of play, but because Kerbal has you build your rockets, it is a much more interesting experience IMO. Orbiter still is THE Space SIM, but Kerbal is THE game to play if you want to go to space YOUR WAY.

[SkyRender]

KSP received something from its fanbase that Orbiter never got: an identity that's so powerful it's downright memetic. Most people who learn of Orbiter do so out of an interest in Newtonian-style space flight simulators. Most people who learn of KSP do so because they discover one of the more interesting players who showcases just how amazing (or silly, or explosive) this particular space flight simulator can really be. Even in its earliest days this was true: I only ever heard of Orbiter after I tried KSP, and my own discovery of KSP was through an LPer I watched at the time showcasing 0.8.4 by goofing around and failing in hilarious ways.

So yes, KSP has found its unique voice, and that voice originated from the very people who discovered it.

[rkman]

So do you think KSP has found it's 'different take' on space games?

It seems to me their take on it is not yet finalized, but it is moving in an interesting direction.

Are you satisfied with its approach?

So far yes, although a bunch of features are still up in the air.

orbital mechanics

I don't think a space game without orbital mechanics should be called a space game, it would just be a game with a space backdrop.

[Moss]

So far yes, although a bunch of features are still up in the air.

Ha. Get it? Because they still haven't fixed the aerodynamics?

...

Anyone?

...

Sorry.

[Ravenchant]

Ha. Get it? Because they still haven't fixed the aerodynamics?

Well, those features are obviously abusing the infiniglide bug.

[pxi]

Has KSP found it's unique voice? Yes.

Did the presence of screenshots showing docked craft in the link provided by the OP, confuse the heck out of me until I realized the post had been edited? Most assuredly.

[dryer_lint]

Did the presence of screenshots showing docked craft in the link provided by the OP, confuse the heck out of me until I realized the post had been edited? Most assuredly.

I was also wondering where the heck the new tracking station came from

[Boris_T_Roach]

I've played orbiter, and KSP

And I plain like KSP a bunch more, partly for the 'design your own wobbley space rocket' bit, partly for the 'lets see if this contraption will fly after you strap 17 SRBs to it' but mostly because I can start it up and have fun for 30 mins launching something at the mun and hoping it gets there and can land.

Its incredibly deep space sim if you want, waiting for launch windows and getting your ships to far away worlds etc, or it can be used for a complete casual gamer to launch something and watch it blow up(which is how I started out... then got sucked in to 'go on .. land on the mun using stock parts in 0.12)

Boris

[WafflesToo]

Ha. Get it? Because they still haven't fixed the aerodynamics?

...

Anyone?

...

Sorry.

BUH-dum-dah, pshhh!

These are the jokes people ;p

[montyben101]

A bit off topic but the picture from that link of the two kerbals on the mun and one falling over is the same as the one on the cupola module?!

[dlrk]

It definitely surpassed the goal of not competing with Orbiter, KSP can be modded to be just as realistic.

[DJEN]

It's like Lego, While Orbiter is like figurines. Which one is "superior" I cannot tell.

Also, yes.

[AlternNocturn]

I play Orbiter when I want to fly IRL rockets and spacecraft, like the Delta IV, Falcon 9, and Dragon, or spacecraft concepts like the Delta Glider or the spaceliner (basically a Boeing that can go to space. Built by Harvester's brother, actually). I play KSP when I want to make my own rockets and spacecraft as well as run my own space program. Truly, no other game did what KSP does. Even Buzz Aldrin's game didn't let you build your own spacecraft, it only let you manage the space program. Take On Mars is close to KSP, but doesn't really allow the same amount of freedom that KSP does. Games like Elite and X only focus on arcade-y, semi-realistic spaceflight and combat (though there really isn't anything wrong with that).

I think Harvester's decision to try not to compete with Orbiter was one of the best decisions he's made. There's no reason to compare the two games or even recommend one over the other. You either play Orbiter, KSP, both, or neither. Conceptually, and especially with the upcoming 0.24 update, the two games couldn't be any more different. The reliance in orbital mechanics is the only thing they share, and even then they're just based off of real life physics. You might as well be comparing Battlefield 4 to Unreal Tournament 2004.

Really, you should be comparing KSP to games like Buzz Aldrin's Race Into Space or Take On Mars. And in relation to those games comes my answer, yes, KSP's found its special voice.

Edited July 12, 2014 by AlternNocturn