FITorion

link? I missed everything. I saw a tweet from KSP that some big muck-i-muck famous game world person I'd never heard of was streaming the game and I was curious but could not at the time watch. Incidentally I just checked KSPTV for it thinking it was on there... and apparently it wasn't... also no Devstream this week?

VABs and launch facilities and buildings such as that were part of the Resources system that got scrapped. They were the first things to get scrapped and then some months later the whole system got scrapped. It's why a lot of us are upset and is basically my number 1 most desired feature... to be able to build working purposeful colonies on the planets and moons.

the altitude is when they fully deploy. The min pressure is when they first open to the semi-deployed state. A lower number for min pressure means they open higher up. A low number for altitude means they fully open closer to the ground. High opening and low full opening would reduce the shock. Although... I do want to try fully opening at like... 60km...

Yes I want it. There are other things I want more... Cough***Resources***Cough... I also see that the Devs want to complete the basic structure of the game before they start replacing the place holders and filling everything up with neat features.

Because "Scope Complete" does not mean Finished. Scope Complete is having the Skeleton of systems that all the other features will fit into. Having an aerodynamic model at all is part of scope complete. Having a better model is part of Feature Complete. They are not the same thing.

I think you're confusing "scope complete" with 1.0. It is not 1.0. 1.0 happens after "scope complete" AND them cramming as many "neat" features in as they can. Redone aerodynamics is one of those "neat" features.

An economy and possibly missions. What I want? Always and forever RESOURCES!

The solar panels in boxes. Why would I saddle myself with extra weight for zero benefit?

All the time? nope. In certain situations? yes. They are good for getting stages away when you've had to strut them in place. They work as a way to deorbit small craft. They're great for getting excess structure used for landing away from your rover. If you do launch escape towers then they work great for that.

"That version of resources wasn't fun. We canned it and will work on a different better version." is what I want to hear. I don't want to hear: We are never adding resources to KSP. We might add them with an expansion. If we do anything it will be after we're done with Multiplayer. None of that. Resource mining is a must for KSP. They are completely within scope and in fact a pillar of Tycoon style gaming as they call it. I'm fine with them being delayed for the final update of Career before they start Multiplayer. They should not be delayed past that. I trust that they can find a way to make it fun. I am annoyed that they gave up. Try again and try harder this time. Don't come back until you've succeeded.

people keep saying multiplayer would make squad money... how? The only way I can think of is a subscription based squad managed server set up. This is the exact opposite of the type of multiplayer I would want.

well there is the smiley face under the water... but you need ISAMAPSAT to see it and that hasn't been updated in quite a while. Or do you mean something different?

put a pod on the launchpad... take a crew report... hop out and get a surface sample and an eva report then get back in and recover the vessel.

http://www.twitch.tv/ksptv/b/487174346 11:55

Your post is the first time I've heard of that name being applied to a plane. I had no idea it was in KSP. I've never looked at the prebuilt things in stock. The only thing regarding the albatross I was aware of was the legend of their appearance bringing bad luck. or was it killing one brings bad luck?... something about bad luck.

I find myself less exited about KSP in general since the news of Resources and Multiplayer. Even before though .23 wasn't something I was too terribly exited about. Some tweaks to science. good. Tweakables. good. Optimizations. very good but hard to get exited about. Don't really care about the new engine. It's nice and all but just doesn't come into play with my play style really. Missions and an economy system are what I'm looking forward too... As well as convincing them that resources as a concept is a good idea and deserve another look even if the way the were doing them originally was scrapped.

All that was said was that the resource system they were working on would not happen. No where did they say that they would not work on another different resource system. However they did not say that they would be working on any future version of resources either. Some things they said about not wanting to put too much sci/fi tech into the game indicated that they think mining tech is sci/fi... even though it isn't... and that they wouldn't be putting it in the game. In short there is no definitive NO on resources ever but there is a lot of indicators that it is the case.

I want to be able to go to a planet. Land on the planet. Extract resources from the planet initially manually and later in an automated fashion. I want to then be able to use those resources to construct buildings on the planet. These buildings to include Kerbal Housing, Fuel tanks, VABs, Launch platforms, and Science labs. Scanning for the resources might be an unnecessary mechanic or could be done differently from the way it was planned to be. You could make finding and gathering resources really fun or really boring or really tedious... That is where the real work is. But the system of using said resources to build a multi planet civilization is something KSP can not do without.

That would be a simplified version of what was being done. What was being done was many resources allowing for construction of parts and buildings in orbit or on other planets. It would have been glorious. KSP is not complete to me without being able to build an operating civilization across all the planets and moons in the system.

The game does lack activities to do on the planets. Resources is one way... I won't say it's the best way... to give things to do on the surface. There are other things that could be done. Multiplayer is not one of those things. I have no plans to partake in any Multiplayer. I could be convinced maybe to participate if it was set up for privately run servers like minecraft. A little LAN game here and there could be fun from time to time. Multiplayer does not solve the problem of there being nothing to do on the planets once you get there. Resources does solve that. If no systems like resources to increase the activities available on planets is implemented and multiplayer is implemented then I will eventually tire of KSP and go away. If multiplayer is done in such away as to require a subscription to access the Squad controlled servers and no private servers are allowed... then I will never partake in multiplayer ever.

What's good about KSP? Building your own rockets. What would make KSP better? The ability to build buildings, colonies, infrastructure to let you build rockets from other locations than KSC. What is one realistic way to allow that? Resource mining and automation of such. But we aren't doing that in real life yet. Any such thing would be sci/fi tech. We have every technology we need to do such things right now. It is not sci/fi. The only reason we don't do it yet is that it hasn't been cost effective. That's changing. There are several companies right now assembling the hardware from off the shelf technology to go and do asteroid mining. SpaceX is vastly reducing the cost to get to space. With that cost reduction it is becoming economically feasible to go grab a rock floating in space as an alternative to blasting it out of the ground. It is CURRENT tech and near future activity. If you want realism in KSP then resource mining belongs. If you don't want realism in KSP then simplified resource mining still belongs for game play reasons.

No. It does the update without any input needed from me. It doesn't break saves. I just continue gaming without a care in the world.

You are mistaken. They have not dropped Career. Mulitplayer is not their Main focus. Multiplayer in the next thing they'll be doing after they finish off Careers base systems. Career is only in the initial phases of work. They still have quite a bit to do on it. Once that's got the skeleton of systems all done they'll do multiplayer for sandbox and career. Once those are done they'll be "scope complete". Meaning the games basic framework will be done. Then they can fill up that framework with all the features they've been putting off... like planets... asteroids... more parts... resources... all the stuff filling their "neat feature" list.

I for one don't care to have or use multiplayer in KSP. That is my simple and initial stance on the subject. I could see the KSP IP becoming great fodder for a second game that would be a space MMO like game. That could be good. Adding multiplayer to the current game really won't add anything to my game play. I don't care to have it. While it's the focus of attention then the game play experiance I do care about (sandbox and career) will be neglected.

This about resources... not multiplayer. We should have a discussion about multiplayer but it should be it's own thread. Resources as they were designed are not happening. We knew that already. That's all that was said. Nothing I heard indicated that they weren't going to look at resources again. It just got moved from necessary game system to neat feature to be added when all the necessary game systems are done. I 100% believe the reasons they gave for why they went the way they did. I do not at all believe the "evil business" conspiracy theories people are coming up with. This is not EA. This is not a large gaming studio. This is a small team of people who we have way more access to than fans of games normally do. I 100% believe what they are telling us is their motivation is in fact their motivation.