Sign in to follow this  
Gusta10069

Do you enjoy sci-fi things on KSP?

Recommended Posts

I enjoy things that could realistically come about in the next 50 years or so.

Conversely I've seen plenty of people who would prefer the game to stay at 70s tech and dislike the NERVA, Rapier and ION engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I enjoy things that could realistically come about in the next 50 years or so.

Pretty much this. I enjoy "advanced" looking ship parts, but anything with warp drive or something similarly OP is too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think that ion engines are ok, but nothing more than that, such as reactors and extremely enormous engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do as long as the science cost exponential to the outlandishness.

Any engine or tech that has at least been test fired on release day should be reasonable. Something like warp drive should require maxing out every science point in the kerbolsphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stock KSP has an analog, 1960s flavor to it. I prefer part mods that stick to that flavor where possible.

The info/control mods I use are more modern in using digital displays and avionics, but that's a category where I value functionality over aesthetics.

Conversely I've seen plenty of people who would prefer the game to stay at 70s tech and dislike the NERVA, Rapier and ION engines.

The NERVA and ion thruster are both 1960s technology. The Rapier, though, is near-future tech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like to play with near future parts or interstellar. I'm especially picky about propulsion. I am ok with Ion and nervas, rapiers are pushing it... but mods that add parts like fusion generators and that fancy theoretical engines are not my cup of tea, not to mention warp. Maybe that will change at some point once I got bored but thats a long way down the road.

From my point of view technology hasn't changed that drastically after the space race, beside computers and some projekts that were experimental are now in use.

I do get weak when it comes to "futuristic" looking aircraft parts as long as it's not too extreme. Fun fact is that those sharp edged surfaces for hypersonic flight aren't nearly as scify as some people might think. A couple of weeks ago I stumbled across an article about the germsn SHarp Edge Flight Experiment. It looks a lot like some pats from b9. Darpa has even more interesting stuff but sadly I couldn't find much info on that :(

Edited by prophet_01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way KSP tech is pretty close to that Earth has, or sort of has, in the case of the nuclear engine, and op ion engine. It gives it that an idea of things that would almost be possible if we had the money, and the obsessive will the kerbals have.

That said, the interstellar mod looks well done. As a Sci-Fi enthusiast, And maybe aspiring writer, it would be a waste to not give it a try, which is why I'm going to set up an RSS+interstellar install some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like to play with near future parts or interstellar. I'm especially picky about propulsion. I am ok with Ion and nervas, rapiers are pushing it... but mods that add parts like fusion generators and that fancy theoretical engines are not my cup of tea, not to mention warp.

Same here.

Besides - I don't like how they break game balance (arguably more than patch 0.25 did)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not even tried. I do not see any reason to get any better engines. I can send whatever my computer can handle (about 1000 parts) to wherever in Kerbol's system I want by using stock parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer a XX. century look and feel. ;)

What I'd enjoy seeing more of is "what could have been" sort of tech that might have been researched on Earth, but never used (for lack of courage and stupidity). Looking at how Kerbals have those in abundance, stuff like fission engines are totally not pushing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything short of nuclear fusion I'm fine with. Stuff like ISRU, fission engines and power reactors, inflatable habitats, food-producing greenhouses, they're all near-future/stuff we could put into space within ten years if we really wanted to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the realistic nature of Kerbal. Anything that can go wrong IRL, I'd love to see in the game! Even my failures are EPIC in KSP :D It is the reason I never get bored. Sci-fi engines and models would be a terrible idea. However, there is a difference between sci-fi tech and POSSIBLE tech. Possible tech is a great idea! For instance, they are currently developing microwave-type transport systems that will be far more effective at launching us deeper into space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with tech that is possible\will become possible in the next thirty years or so - that's covered by Near Future.

Things like Interstellar, Star Trek\Star Wars-oriented mods, unobtainium-fueled drives - no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since nearly everything in and around space exploration (and their counterparts ingame) were at one time of the last 70 years science fiction i am fine with as much ideas and inventions can imagine for the next 100 years or so. Including some potential (if maybe overly optimistic) breakthroughs like the alcubierre drive or other spacetime "warping" innovations.

Of course one could put forward a extremly conservative if not pessimistic view of coming space travel but in my book games dont fit very good witch words like conservative or pessimistic. And in my view since i first saw it kerbal space program is first and above all a game. It will never be a simulation, imho hoping for the day when suddenly the curtain drops and a super realistic, orbiterlike ksp pro hardcore extreme realism comes into the light is a great recipe for false hopes, misdirected energy and frustration. A bit more "realism" will find its way, but never on the scale of FAR or RSS. As a matter of fact ksp will have achieved everything one could realistically hope for if it sees 2017 without beeing significantly dumbed down for one goal or another.

So... Why should i have a problem with technologies, near or far (no pun intended) that get only integrated via mods anyway? What incentive could i possible have to tell everyone how proud to be stock i am, why everything that nasa at least experiments with (and dreams of) that exceeds Wernher von Brauns ideas is devils work? Feeling superior to other gamers that have fun with things like greenhouses, drilling karbonite or energytransfer through space? So yes, i enjoy potential technological advances that look like science fiction in the same way as todays space travel would look like for oberth and braun in the 1920s. Put these things into mods, place it right in a enhanced techtree, make it a challenge to get there and all is good for me.

What? Thats exactly the situation now? Great :)

By the way - these kind of threads have become something of a initiation ritual for forum newcomers like the first mechjeb rant. I wonder why...

Edited by smart013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm ok with engine up to Fusion thruster, however I'm not against unrealistic things like a warp-drive as an ultimate end-game reward as long as it is fun to play with. It's not like there is a new challenge after you got most science from every planet, so might as well have fun.

As structure and size go, I hope we don't get another size up, but I wouldn't mind continuing the small size with high-thrust engine and longer fuel-tank.

As technology level go, I'm ok with basic ISRU and wouldn't mind parts allowing to do everything Kerbal can do (except plant flag) as long as it is fun to design.

As scale limit go. I don't want KSP to turn into a resources management game, so colonization or mining are right out. KSP aiming for realism I don't mind missions requiring a dozen of others to complete and will gladly build an infrastructure as long as it is not truly necessary and just for artistic or efficiency purpose.

Lastly, as realism go, KSP is a GAME so I'm ok with simplification for the sake of gameplay and amusement. Like Kerbin being appropriately sized like it is now, eventual life-support or reentry-heat being simplified and else.

It's one thing to emulate reality, it's another to choke on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this