CaptainKipard

If this is what you mean then that's not quite what I need because that just adds a large part to fit the bottom of the pod. That's exactly what I need it for, which makes me wonder what on earth Squad were thinking when they playtested this game.

I don't want this thread to get locked, and people clearly are being really silly here. K :/ You called it cherry picking. I gave you more examples to mitigate that. It's time to move on with some grace. I don't think I'll respond to another point here unless it's pertinent. Too many people seem to be getting emotional. Keep on trucking.

Get to a constructive point fast. You're starting to look like a troll.

If you don't feel qualified to judge a game just because you played it then what makes you think the rest of us do. Stop projecting. Also what makes you think we're not formally educated to do so?

OK but if you're going to say you figured this out then actually explain it with examples. Are you speaking from experience or just making up stories?

I used this pod, I just wasn't sure it's ok for 1.0 What tweaks do you mean? I tried it. The IVA breaks immersion really horribly. It's not even suited for that pod. Yes. Around Tier 3 or 4.

Exactly. Which part was the strawman. You conveniently and intentionally left that out and replaced the words with "blah blah". You're confusing opinions with arguments. An opinion is "I think Y" An argument is "X is true therefore Y" I've been a gamer for literally decades now. I think I have enough experience to spot quality and the lack of it by now and I for sure know how to construct a valid and sound argument. It's a gift. And despite my request I still don't know why you think that. It's your decision not to clarify, so I'll just put this to rest. Also if your argument were solid don't you think there'd be no seams to pick?

It's not very pretty.

You spend too much time outside if you don't know that the state of games journalism is universally panned. You've added nothing of substance to this discussion. The game is of mediocre quality. You seem to be confused because it's the first game of its kind. Because its the first it will be the worst, and because its the first the originality of it will be praised despite its obvious and frankly easily fixable flaws. This is what I can't stress enough: People like KSP because it's something new. The execution leaves a lot to be desired. I wish people would finally realise this simple difference.

Actually that's something I raised here, but apparently if you cram them in you can just about get away with having them side-by-side without helmets.

You're attempting to refute having a few categories, by showing what happens to a lot of categories. That's wrong. I don't know how else to explain this. Scoring categories is obviously more meaningful than scoring the whole game. For what it's worth (not a lot) you're still able to quickly judge whether you'll like it based on criteria that you care about. This is on the face of it true. That's a great question that game designers, players and journalists would need to come to an understanding on. It's a huge topic but I'm sure anything we could come up with would be better than what we have now. Just taking graphics for example, since that's what you picked, I would take into account things like: 1. The current state of PC technology particularly the median level of gaming machines, and how well the game performs in a set range. 2. Other games of similar type and level of detail and their performance. 3. How the graphics look in the scope of the game. E.g. Let's compare Besiege and KSP. Besiege has a small scope, KSP has a large scope. Besiege graphics obviously took less effort to make, but that is a decision for the team leaders. KSP would score lower because despite their commercial success they simply refuse to give KSP graphics the attention they demand from the large scope of the game. Going out of their depth or not hiring more professional artists is a decision that should factor into judging the end result. 4. Simply the quality of the graphics. That's probably the easiest to judge. Quality is not the same as complexity.

The title...

I've added video tutorials for making plugins by Cybutek. As always this aspect of the sticky is somewhat lacking, especially for beginners. Please consider adding to it.

Hanuman you give the impression that you're not familiar with the criticism levied against Squad. A lot of what you mentioned in this thread is either a strawman or completely irrelevant. Could you take the time to lay out a to-the-point coherent conclusion drawn from actual observations, because I really want to understand where people like you are coming from. You're making this really difficult though. Thanks for that.

Ok well if you insist on calling it cherry picking then head over here for example and count all the pro and anti posts. The thread is not anywhere near as one sided as you think.

I don't need to "pick" on their trollish language, because of some other thing they said? It looks like you're not busy enough playing it to not visit the forum to say how much you love it. And there are many others like you too. Your point fails.

Looks interesting.

I've been trying to add larger round profiles with their own custom icons for filtering. It looks like it's STILL hardcoded. I followed the naming convention and added icons for sizes larger than 3 but the game wouldn't use them. Has anyone else tried this?

I don't understand why you appealed to an extreme example to rebut this. It seems fallacious to me. If you can't think of more appropriate language then maybe you shouldn't be expressing yourself at all. Manage your emotions.

You mean how objective can someone be before their lack of objectivity is pointed out? Let's just get back to the topic. This is going nowhere.

And here we go again.

I can see it. I think maybe some people, who have lower standards then others, take criticism of Squad personally. They might feel it as an attack on their own values with which they judge the game. It's sad, but what can you do? The artificial environment, which the forum rules create, make it nearly impossible to address this logical deficit without the trolls regressing to a child-like state. What logical argument can you present to someone who doesn't value logic?

Then let's disabuse them of that fantasy. First of all score reviews are completely meaningless. These numbers don't translate to anything practical, and therein lies the problem. Were someone to break down KSP into meaningful categories for review, I think the scores would be much lower. From the PCGamer review thread: So let's put on our objective hats and rank each of these in the context of the current state of the gaming market. Some of those will score very high, but the rest?... No chance in hell! And the average will not be anywhere near 96%. KSP is a commercial success, but some people can't seem to distinguish that from quality. I'm looking at you Apple users. Let's not forget Squad grew out of a marketing company.

:/ ... ok but in the log there is.... You're making this really difficult. Please keep up.

Hello Sage, do you have any public reference material from which you worked out all the components of that engine? It would go well in the Engineer's Handbook for Modders sticky