What's the secret feature?

[mattinoz]

Already been stated a half dozen times in the thread... 1: it means static objects in the scene can be (re)placed (easier kerbtown stuff) and closer to real time

2: Upgradeable buildings and buying completely new buildings, possibly placed where you want them.

3: Bigger career mods

4: 1 step closer to craters around the bodies of the world.

5: demonstrates the new splosions (this is a different reason than "its funny", therefore it counts)

Isn't that all speculation more than stated feature development?

It "may" lead to some of those things but it might lead to something entirely different.

Oh one general question....

Was KSP built on an ammunition dump?

It would be the Kerbal way.

I mean all the building explode like the fuel is below them when it seems they are hit from above.

[CaLVin-K]

If i could just add my two cents here I feel like there are two camps of people, those who want new features and those who want the game polished (and find new features in mods). In my honest opinion destructible buildings seem like the kind of thing that should satisfy both parties. Its both a new feature and polishes the game. Lets face it buildings that can sustain the damage rockets falling on them (which I have done more than once) aren't realistic, so this is pollish in that regard, and its a new feature where can "accidentally" blow up KSC. Yay fun for everyone, now you have a realistic incentive to not drop stages low and the ability to have fun with explosions. Coupled with the fact that Squad explicitly stated that this was going to be a small feature I'm not really sure what everyone is complaining about. Are there things I wanted more then destructible building? Yes (space stations) but I'm not Squad and Squad has a plan (or at least an outline) so I trust that they know what they are doing.

[Lhathron the Elf]

Oh one general question....

Was KSP built on an ammunition dump?

It would be the Kerbal way.

I mean all the building explode like the fuel is below them when it seems they are hit from above.

That's an awesome explanation.

Let's just go with that.

#becausekerballogic

[NathanKell]

Yep, all your rockets should have a 50% chance of exploding during launch, and half the time should veer off course. ~so kerbal~. Wouldn't that be super fun, and get to the really important part of KSP, the explosions? I mean, that's why everyone loves aero-stress in FAR, right?

[AlexinTokyo]

Is there a way to watch the Squadcast video NOT on Twitch?

I can't for the life of me get Twitch to play the video, and I'd really quite like to watch it.

EDIT: Or can someone tell me how to watch back episodes in the Twitch iOS app? Since now I got the site to load at all I find it needs Flash (ugh!) and that's not available on iPhone.

Edited September 29, 2014 by AlexinTokyo

[TMS]

You can't watch historical videos on the Twitch iOS app.

The money-shot has been ripped to YouTube:

[Laie]

Give me a reason, other than 'it's funny a couple times', why this feature is useful.

Because the feature hints at the possibilities of the underlying system, allowing changes to building at KSC (and perhaps elsewhere).

That may well be, but remains to be seen. For now, it's destructible buildings. Factor in the new cargo/bomb bays, and I presume this will go down as the "bomber patch". It may be the coolest feature they have for this update; improved navball and more spaceplane parts, nevermind their utility, just don't have much hype potential.

I think SQUAD mismanaged the hype machine this time. When maxmaps came around to state (repeatedly?) that really, it's just a small & silly thing -- well, that came too late to deflate the sky-high expectations. But then again, I wonder if the hype machine must be cranked up to full for every update. Sometimes it just is less conspicuous, under-the-hood stuff, and that's just as well.

(navball and SP+ aren't exactly under the hood, but for hype purposes they could as well be).

[Darnok]

I don't understand one thing... Devs said that they wouldn't want to tell us what is secret feature... so maybe we have something more. I still have hope for better aero and stock fairings

As for destructable buildings I guess it can be used in multiplayer to improve performance... we should be able to choose do we want to load other people crafts to physics engine or not and even if we won't load them (or those players won't give us permissions to do that ) we still can crash with them and both crafts are getting destroyed.

[Guest]

I wonder, new navball will fully replace "Enhanced Navball" mod?

[Shuttle]

I am disappointed. If I want to blow a building up, I'll launch Battlefield. KSP is a game where you spend most of the time constructing and launching rockets so I personally think physical model, aerodynamics, avionics, life support, interface (separate thrust control for shuttles? Nah, haven't heard about it) are the components that need to be improved in the first place. But it looks like developers have changed the conception and are now developing FlatOut in Space. Yes, I know that it is just the ground work blah-blah, but the developers still had to create 3D-models for the destroyed buildings! That requires time that could be spent on improving more important components of the game.

Also, I've been playing KSP since 0.8.x, .24 was the first update I skipped and it looks like I'll skip .25 for the same reason - it doesn't offer anything new in the sandbox mode. I think this is the second mistake made by the developers - not everyone plays career mode, and a lack of new features in sandbox makes people bored.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94770-Secret-feature-is-completely-underwhelming?p=1438507&viewfull=1#post1438507

Not fixed aerodynamics, that's for sure.

That's something that may get another look post-scope complete.

Very disappointing. "may get another look"? I can't believe it.

[Guest]

Agree with Shuttle.

[stupid_chris]

Also, I've been playing KSP since 0.8.x, .24 was the first update I skipped and it looks like I'll skip .25 for the same reason - it doesn't offer anything new in the sandbox mode. I think this is the second mistake made by the developers - not everyone plays career mode, and a lack of new features in sandbox makes people bored.

You're aware that the devs declared KSP to be sandbox complete back in 0.21, over a year ago? They're not making new features for Sandbox because it's done. It's normal that they're working on polishing career as this and multiplayer is pretty much all what's left for them to call the game scope complete.

[Sun]

To me, sandbox complete will be when the rest of the Kerbol system's planets and moons are added.

[KerbMav]

To me, sandbox complete will be when the rest of the Kerbol system's planets and moons are added.

Maybe there is a difference between what Squad thinks is sandbox and what is KSP as a whole?

[Shuttle]

You're aware that the devs declared KSP to be sandbox complete back in 0.21, over a year ago? They're not making new features for Sandbox because it's done. It's normal that they're working on polishing career as this and multiplayer is pretty much all what's left for them to call the game scope complete.

No, thank you for pointing that out. However, I've always thought all those features were sandbox related:

physical model, aerodynamics, avionics, life support, interface

If aerodynamics is not a new feature for sandbox, then it is a career mode feature then? It doesn't make sense.

[Alshain]

No, thank you for pointing that out. However, I've always thought all those features were sandbox related:

If aerodynamics is not a new feature for sandbox, then it is a career mode feature then? It doesn't make sense.

At the highest level there has to be at least 3 categories for new features. 1. Sandbox 2. Career 3. Overall Gameplay

The things you have listed fall into that 3rd category. They do not apply to just sandbox or just career, it affects both.

[Darnok]

IMO it should be like sandbox = overall gameplay, in sandbox should be everything without any restrictions... not like right now where I can't use some buildings/features.

[B787_300]

not like right now where I can't use some buildings/features.

uuum what use would the research center be? oh look you can go in and look at the tech tree? MC i can understand to have something to do, but the research center?

[Paul Kingtiger]

uuum what use would the research center be? oh look you can go in and look at the tech tree? MC i can understand to have something to do, but the research center?

You should still be able to conduct science experiments and see the history of those experiments, it's just that you wouldn't need to spend the science of research because it was all unlocked. In sandbox it would be science for science sake, but it should still be an option.

[Alshain]

IMO it should be like sandbox = overall gameplay, in sandbox should be everything without any restrictions... not like right now where I can't use some buildings/features.

The lack of a feature is a feature. Sandbox lacks money, science, and reputation. That is the feature of sandbox. What would you do with those buildings without that fundamental function?

[Darnok]

I would see how much science I can get from Mun landing or any other mission.

I would see how much my mission can cost.

I would have achievement list in sandbox, it could be fun for people that doesn't like "quests" in games, but they still like to see achievements list

[stupid_chris]

No, thank you for pointing that out. However, I've always thought all those features were sandbox related:

If aerodynamics is not a new feature for sandbox, then it is a career mode feature then? It doesn't make sense.

Maybe they're simply not planning onto adding those features? Really I don't think anyone knows what's ahead of us for the game except the devs.

[regex]

Maybe they're simply not planning onto adding those features? Really I don't think anyone knows what's ahead of us for the game except the devs.

Would be a pretty sad day if the current drag model were considered "complete" for stock, not to mention all the bad math. Just this morning the feature on the Facebook account was CHECK OUT HOW I EXPLOITED TEH DRAG MODEL USING CONTROL SURFACES LOL.

But then, this is KSP after all, where blowing stuff up and figuring out how to cheat the physics is the height of gameplay.

[Sky_walker]

Would be a pretty sad day if the current drag model were considered "complete" for stock.

That day is bound to happen.

[juanml82]

I am disappointed. If I want to blow a building up, I'll launch Battlefield. KSP is a game where you spend most of the time constructing and launching rockets so I personally think physical model, aerodynamics, avionics, life support, interface (separate thrust control for shuttles? Nah, haven't heard about it) are the components that need to be improved in the first place. But it looks like developers have changed the conception and are now developing FlatOut in Space. Yes, I know that it is just the ground work blah-blah, but the developers still had to create 3D-models for the destroyed buildings! That requires time that could be spent on improving more important components of the game.

Also, I've been playing KSP since 0.8.x, .24 was the first update I skipped and it looks like I'll skip .25 for the same reason - it doesn't offer anything new in the sandbox mode. I think this is the second mistake made by the developers - not everyone plays career mode, and a lack of new features in sandbox makes people bored.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94770-Secret-feature-is-completely-underwhelming?p=1438507&viewfull=1#post1438507

Very disappointing. "may get another look"? I can't believe it.

No video game lasts forever, even games with a lot of replay value (and I'm not sure unmodded KSP is one of those)