Posted to wrong comment ...oh well https://www.dropbox.com/s/ky4yqkjqlisdwcv/screenshot18.png https://www.dropbox.com/s/gqsanzec2xexk2r/screenshot19.png https://www.dropbox.com/s/6qrss7j3mzvwq2w/screenshot20.png Sorry about dropbox...too lazy to go to upload elsewhere. Oh and a huge thank you to Shaw......
This, but add Asimov and all the golden age sci-fi writers. Sorry to hear of your health problems(I can relate). KSP lets loose the child that watched the Moon landing in awe (in a way no other game has).
As a scenario, in the Civ style, limited tech-tree, focused goals, this would be interesting. As the main focus of career mode it would be annoying and would cause many to simply sandbox. Career is a way to: 1. Ease new players into the game. 2. Give those that need one reasons to "shoot for the mun" Career should not be an action movie plot.
Indeed I realise that. Many others thought it also including those spending money on it. The problem doesn't stem from changes in the "plan". Nope, it stems from what appears to be changes in the philosophy which massively contradict the original "cool" idea in favor of a uptick in short-term interest. Multiplayer will always generate "buzz" outside the existing users Incidentally if it involves taking payment then arguing they are doing the best they can is redundant. If they were doing otherwise that would portray them as dishonest, which they are not. They are however desperately in need of public relations training.
Your second paragraph is not relevant. It seems readily apparent there is no development path (optimal or otherwise) in place. The huge turnarounds (No multiplayer, don't even ask.....oh ok multiplayer is in now. Look at this resource map and drill models to get them...coming soon.....wait resources are not happening) demonstrate this clearly. A clear plan would negate these issues. Massive "sea changes" and scattershot approaches do not.
To be brutally honest, I don't really regard the already paid users as having much influence, with the exception of cherry-picked modders who can add something to the "core". The reality of the situation is developers have to eat, if they could do so they would not need "early access" users such as you or I. To continue to eat (and develop) they need a continuous flow of cash and new users. From what I have observed and read Squad seems to be very bad at PR and marketing. They oversell non-existent features and discuss things "THINGS THAT ARE COMING!" before actually proving to themselves that they can deliver. (The opposite is also true: refer to multiplayer). So honestly I believe the (paid)community to SQUAD is a mined out resource that serves little purpose beyond supplying the odd new idea to add to the chaotic development and the occasional modder worthy of absorbing into the team. Shame of it is it is an inspired piece of software being dragged down by a (apparent) lack of focus and /or development plan. (rarely if ever post on ANY forum, but yours was a question I felt I could supply a veiwpoint on)
@EKKU It would seem to me that you desire a management sim. The Devs appear to have a plan to give you plenty to do....Science, career,resources...not even mentioning a whole solar system to do it in. What they don't supply modders will/have. However what you're proposing is simply an unnecessary layer of complex "busy work". Isn't being the rocket scientist enough ? You appear to want to be the administrator, accountant and contractor also. It would not provide "realism" as Jeb would still be strapped to an SRB shooting for the Mun, he would simply have to twiddle his fingers (do Kerbals have fingers ? anyways....) wating for time to pass to do it again. Sounds as mind numbingly boring as grinding an MMO... Just my 2 cents.