Ming

Oops, sorry about that. Maybe an admin will move it there ...

Save them styro cups and sandwich bags when zipping around the Kerbalverse, they just may get you back home ...

September 10th is my birthday too (I'll be 68). Hmm, strange forces may be at work here.

OK, here we go again. How do you, can you, cheat in a single player "sandbox mode" game? The concept of being able to "cheat" while in sandbox completely mystifies me. Sandbox Mode = No Rules (other than the physics) ... period

I think you've missed the OP's point. It's not the intention of this teacher to replace the entire school curriculum with KSP. Rather, it's to be used as a stimulus for learning collaborative physics problem solving. With that goal in mind there currently isn't a better learning tool, albeit a veiled game, than KSP. I introduced my 8 year old grandson (I'm 68) to KSP a few months ago and he took to it like a duck to water. I was amazed by how quickly he coordinated the available YouTube tutorials with his building and launching goals. Hell, he even stopped playing COD on his PS3! So "yes", KSP could easily become an international education phenom. Even though I'm most likely known on this forum as the resident "game lag nag" I can assure you that my opinion about KSP is otherwise 99% stellar (-1% for lag, still a nag, LOL). P.S. Sixty years difference between me and my grandson and we both love this game. Talk about spanning generations, simply amazing! Kudos Squad!

Really, so posting suggestions, bug reports, concerns, etc. are of no value to the Dev's? So, hardcore players do not have life outside of the game and therefor should be ignored? Interesting prediction, where did you get the stats to support that notion? Another prediction that totally stumps me on how you can make such an assumption. In other words, according to you, the sandbox mode isn't very important in terms of game satisfaction. If KSP was truly a "real life space program" simulation then it would be beyond the scope of understanding for the majority of people who tried to play it. Rather, it's a "game" first and a quasi space flight simulator second. A unique, compelling, and wonderful game yes, but it still needs to balance "real life" with usability for it's average player base. This thread is all about balance. New features yes, but not at the expense of user frustration due to poor performance. Note: I have no delusions about this KSP performance problem. Realistically swapping out the game engine is just too expensive in terms of direct cost and labor costs for a total rewrite. Also, at present Unity isn't going to provide much in the way of significant performance gains even with some tweaking. The only viable solution is, IMO, to acknowledge this performance "wall" and keep KSP development within the constraints of said wall. “Magnum Forceâ€Â, Detective Harry Callahan: “A Man’s Gotta Know His Limitations†In KSP terms, Squad needs to be aware of its own limitations (Unity) and not have performance take a back seat to more bells and whistles.

Perhaps you're right, but I really hope you're wrong.

What you are most likely eluding to is Knuth's "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming". That often used structured programming canon, even though widely accepted, is not without its detractors. By contrast there are professional programmers that contend that late optimization implies slipshod design. Joe Duffy, a Microsoft architect and developer: "I have heard the "premature optimization is the root of all evil" statement used by programmers of varying experience at every stage of the software lifecycle, to defend all sorts of choices, ranging from poor architectures, to gratuitous memory allocations, to inappropriate choices of data structures and algorithms, to complete disregard for variable latency in latency-sensitive situations, among others." As I see it Squad's prioritization on what game elements are to be included, and when, is the problem. Wasting valuable coding time down the road in an effort to optimize "all of it" may not be viable, and as a result some of those labor intensive KSP features may have to be trimmed or entirely dropped.

The OP is pretty much on point and I agree that adding more features ("fluff") is ill-advised at this point in KSP's development milestones. Quite simply, adding more functions will only exasperate an already overloaded and non-optimized core program (Unity). I absolutely have a love-hate relationship with KSP and have rage-quit and deinstalled it many times because of its sluggish performance. But, I always come slithering back for more. However, at some point its performance, or lack thereof, will become a game stopper for me. The most recent "load time" issues with .21 unfortunately have moved KSP even closer to the non playable door for many. If .22 adds even more "things" that are performance degrading cumulative then it will most likely become intolerable even for whining tech-wimps like me. So, my thoughts and concerns are along the same lines as the OP. Optimize now, add new stuff after (strengthen your foundation before adding more floors).

I think I understand most of what you said. However, your "Squad being unable to fulfill their promises" has me a bit stumped. Can you elaborate? Thanks

Damn, they must be version .21! Houston we need a hotfix! Kepler Mission Manager Update: Recovery Begins ... http://www.nasa.gov/content/kepler-mission-manager-update-recovery-begins/#.Ughm0pzpxhN And ... http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-wheels-come-off-kepler-planet-finding-mission

Hmm, what's your point? Are you just trying to make Dingbat1967 feel bad? Well, he shouldn't. He's only been playing a couple weeks (read his post) and if he's already into the docking phase then he's doing, IMO, pretty damn good. A lot of new KSP players are still struggling just to get into orbit during their first couple weeks of play. I don't understand why some people find it amusing to chide struggling players who obviously just need a few words of encouragement, or better yet, some experienced help. So, keep trying Dingbat. You'll get the hang of it. Go easy on the RCS, baby steps (patience) work best during the final link up . Also, kudos to you for advancing into the docking phase in only two weeks.

Yes, that's true (reproduction), but the followup comments on the related STEAM thread are a good read as well.

I frequent the KSP forum on Steam daily and this, IMO, is the best thread so far. "Article by Artyom Zuev, content developer for KSP" http://steamcommunity.com/app/220200/discussions/0/864975632356201786/

deleted by Ming ...

Point well taken. I should have been more specific and indicated that it's the new "crew layering" (which acts upon the logging) that I don't like. By layering I mean the additional menu choices and so on. I, and from what I've read on this forum, don't want to consider the ramifications of crew loss. Rather, I just want a pure hardware testing platform like it was prior to .21.

My thoughts exactly. Sandbox, with the addition of crew mortality logging, has now moved away from pure design and testing to a quasi career environment. Please leave the crew stuff for the future Career mode and leave the Sandbox for hardware design/refinement and kinetic physics analysis.

I'm probably in the minority when it comes to building really big heavy lifters with 1000+ parts. But, that's what I really enjoyed doing and for the most part my designs worked just fine. Well, not anymore with this latest update. I'm totally stock, no mods at all and my big lifters just crumble on the launch pad, or if launched fall apart shortly there after . I have 340+ hours of experience with KSP so I know enough to build wobble free and mass centered designs. Also, I noticed when I'm depressing the shift key to throttle up that the thrust indicator just creeps slowly upwards. In 2.0 the thrust indicator moved quickly. I don't think there are bugs as such, rather it's a KSP update that simply left big rocket builders, like me, out in the cold. Not mad here just really sad I can no longer do those big design projects.

1. Do I like DRM? No. 2. Do I like it that EA bashes WII U? No. 3. Do I like paying extra for DLC's and game perks? No. 4. Do I want Squad to sell out to EA? No. However, I have enjoyed playing these EA games: Arcticfox 1986 Abrams Battle Tank 1988 Sentinel Worlds I: Future Magic 1988 688 Attack Sub 1989 F-16 Combat Pilot 1989 Populous: The Promised Lands 1989 SimCity 1989 Starflight 2: Trade Routes of the Cloud Nebula 1989 Centurion: Defender of Rome 1990 Desert Strike: Return to the Gulf 1992 SimCity 2000 1993 Syndicate 1993 Wing Commander: Privateer 1993 Wing Commander: Armada 1994 Wing Commander IV: The Price of Freedom 1996 Wing Commander: Prophecy 1997 Jane's Combat Simulations - 688(I) Hunter/Killer 1997 Comanche 4 2001 SimCoaster 2001 Sub Command 2001 Battlefield 1942 2002 Delta Force: Task Force Dagger 2002 Battlefield 1942: Secret Weapons of WWII 2003 Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome 2003 Battlefield Vietnam 2004 Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault 2004 Battlefield 2 2005 Crysis 2007 Medal of Honor: Airborne 2007 Crysis Warhead 2008 Spore 2008 BattleForge 2009 Medal of Honor 2010 Battlefield: Bad Company 2 2010 Battlefield 3 2011 Bulletstorm 2011 Dead Space 2 2011 Shank 2 2012 Crysis 3 2013 So, would I buy another EA game? Yes, if it looks good and the reviews are good. Bashing EA serves nothing IMO. If you don't want to buy an EA game because you think the Company sucks then that's your prerogative. For me I'm all about having gaming fun, even if it's from EA. WIKI: Electronic Arts, Inc. (EA) is an American developer, marketer, publisher and distributor of video games. Founded and incorporated on May 28, 1982 by Trip Hawkins, the company was a pioneer of the early home computer games industry and was notable for promoting the designers and programmers responsible for its games. Electronic Arts is the world's third-largest gaming company by revenue after Nintendo and Activision Blizzard.

Are you an official spokesperson for "Space Simulator"? I'm asking this because your forum profile is pretty much void of any useful information. If you're acting in an official capacity then how can you be contacted? Where can we see more recent screenshots?

Wiring, no prob. Finally finished. Looks great! That wasn't so hard after all. OK, here goes. Shift Key, SAS, Spacebar ... Huh? What? Red wire goes where? Oh crap!

That's what I though too until I read this on their website (sounds like a lot of parts) ... And ... Wiring, àla Minecraft Redstone "You can even design the rocket's wiring". Really? I don't think so.

Could this be a classic case of biting off more than you can chew? Space Simulator (http://www.space-simulator.com/) has grand goals and must be using some type of incredible 3D physics engine that I've never heard of. Their Space Simulator forum is pretty much dead, and researching the parent company "Brixton Dynamics" (http://brixtondynamics.co.uk/portfolio-item/space-simulator/) hasn't been very helpful in terms of getting a fix on their simulation methodologies. My bet is that they've stalled because their unrealistic goals have been thwarted by a big dose of reality ...

I don't agree with many of your observations, however you do make some valid points concerning KSP's performance issues. I truly believe that the dev's need to make this nagging performance problem their highest priority. IMO continuing to build on an already overloaded core system does not bode well for KSP's future sales. I've seen it happen before, public opinion via forums can make or break a game. P.S. This thread does not belong in "Live from Mission Control". It should be moved to something like "General Discussion".

Here's a good example of why notifying players about the impending update is a good thing. Commander Zoom has been around since Sep 2011 and he just found out (Yesterday, 23:20) about this "save" breaking update. I realize that this forum already provides notice of the update(s). I'm only suggesting going a little step further with a KSP game launch banner for those that don't use the forum. By the way, once this notification banner coding has been implemented it can then be a resident utility for any future update notifications, hot news topics, alerts, etc.. That would be kinda cool I think. For those that think this idea sucks space dust take solace in knowing I'll not labor it any further. Ultimately it's up to the Dev's anyway.