SpaceHole

Well to defend myself maybe next time you add the poll and different wording from the start one never knows what peoples intentions are on the internet Anyhow i am what you would consider an expert if the aim of KSP is to crash into Muns and send Kerbals to no-return flights. Not to mention my newest Moon-Landing(lethal impact)-device that will actually explode when decoupling a stage in orbit without taking damage.

Again what is the point? So one player does nothing while the other player does the same as in singleplayer? Why even do such an extensive mod for that? You can achieve the same thing by streaming your video to your friend. I can hardly think of anything more boring than playing a kerbal in a craft i dont control just to be able to run arround myself 20 minutes later until i enter again to go back doing nothing for 20 minutes again. This would be utterly boring - maybe the first time not that much - but after that ... Also what would mission-control do? It has no purpose in KSP and if it should have one the whole game has to be drastically changed which would be a problem since if you create a new concept where you need to control 2 things at the same time while not beeing able to pause will just be annoying for single-player. Maybe im not very optimistic but until now most post of ppl that want KSP-MP probably didnt actually think their concepts trough.

This is not another mindless shooter ... There are no Skill-Levels What is "level of skill" in such a game even supposed to be?

Well some things come close to "infinite energy" at least from a human perspective - if we could use the energy of the sun better or for example use the inner heat of the earth etc.

What i dont understand is why people want MP in KSP in the first place. I can understand it for most other games but not KSP. - most of the time players will just block each other if one wants to timewarp - but not the other - any parts of both players will be in the other players memory - producing even more memory issues - players would probably have to have the same mods installed - there will be hardly any interaction not to mention chances are players wont even see each other because of the huge distances - even if you meet up it will not actually be that interactive or make huge sense you you would have all disadvantages for meeting up on purpose for no real reason? - flying together is not an option because controls dont require 2 players and would probably be chaotic anyway - building together would be chaotic aswell and slow - there is nothing to do for a second player and if you just want to build up a space-station together you can pretty much exchange saves From my point of view MP is about some sort of interaction - which is simply not what KSP is - there are neither elements that can be used by 2 players nor are there many elements that will make people interact and last but not least players will most of the time not even see each other. Maybe someone can explaint to me what the benefits of MP in KSP would be and why it would be fun for more than 1 forced encounter for 5 minutes of fun?

Yeah for KSP-standard textures. I doubt that this works so well for Mod-Textures? If it does it is not very effective (it seems to have a big effect on the standard textures yet it doesnt seem to work as good on mod-textures) Also many textures could be made way smaller without loss of resolution or actual visible quality. I have no idea how good this site is but just as an example: http://tinypng.org/

I doubt that will happen. You have to watch out and find a reasonable compromise between visuals and memory usage. Which is why im also wondering about if it wouldnt actualyl be better to have a very low-poly model to see it when you are flying while having an animated nice 2d-version as a menu which would probably also make load-times shorter?

Well you are wrong! Mars One - Plans will cost about 30 Billion Dollars (for more than one launch etc.) - 130.000,- already collected Needed: 30.000.000.000,- Donations: 130.000,- So they only need additional 29.999.870.000,- T-Shirt cost: 15 Dollars/shirt -7 dollars for transport and original costs Profit per T-shirt: 7 dollars Number of sales needed: only 4.285.695.714 World Population: about 7.106.000.000 So even if only about 2/3 of mankind would buy such a t-shirt they would have more than enough money not to mention that t-shirts have to be bought again once you grow bigger or it gets damaged. So in fact you can finance a Mars-Mission by selling T-Shirts. (yes - i am pretty bored ...) edit: oh snap i forgot taxes - lets just say they sell taxfree from some remote island without laws or taxes

Infinite Energy has already been invented: On the other hand couldnt "infinite" or "free" energy be produce rather "easy" by for example producing electricity underground with the energy (especially the heat) (for example with steam turbines) in the earth? (as soon as technology is advanced enough to get there and stay there without bigger problems ) And @OP as other posters said there is no such thing as "free" energy. You will probably use way more energy to do what you just said than the energy you get out of it. Not to mention that it is highly unlikely that you just found infinite energy by reading 1 wikipedia-article

Since i wasnt able to find a topic about this yet - i thought i may post it. Just found this trailer and its really very well made. Yet this made me wonder, i also just recently saw a documentation about space-exploration - what made me wonder is the different public-image that NASA was able to create for example with the voyager missions. Have people lost interrest in space-exploration or have agencie simply failed to do proper public-relations? I mean it cant be that hard to make space travel interresting again for a broad public. Just look at things like Mars-One or Space X they get huge public resonance. Some people probably dont think its that important but by making space-exploration interresting for the broad public funding will also grow. So what do you think has changed? I really dont understand why space-programs arent supported way more these days. Especially thinking about how much money is spent for pointless things. (BTW. great trailer)

Not knowing what the actual problem is - isnt that actually a problem for terraforming ... ? (that was the whole point of my question)

So i wonder what would happen to mars weather? Once we started terraforming - how do we stop it? How did mars become like it is now in the first place? But most importantly by doing such things to a planet we pretty much destroy a lot of potential research. Not to mention that talking about terraforming a planet we have yet to visit personally is a bit ... Sorry but you seem to simplify terraforming way too much. Also if can terraform already - why do we fail to stop "simple" things like global warming? Why cant we still not anticipate weather for longer periods of time or even change weather?

I wouldnt say that most seem rather deogranized or organized like international organisations. Also while i would see a lot of things wrong with the army doing so - space exploration and science is a completely different thing. Also isnt even NASA pretty much a huge percentage of private companies working with them? Also especially if they were government - we pay taxes anyhow what would be the argument against "giving them more "free" taxes for a specialized purpose?

Since this is also about design i was thinking about adding some trees. I have no idea about game design but i have one idea which at least from my point of view seems reasonable? - small 2d Tree-Images that will adapt to the point of view of the player with maybe small stretching etc. to make them seem less 2d - should take almost no processing power yet make the game look way better? (especially the Space-Center looks kind of boring)

When i started to play the game i actually thought action groups were the staging .. Yes great idea it would really be great to be able to do so - this would also help a lot when something fails - one could for example include the stut-down engine command in the next stage so getting rid of a stage early would be no big problem. Also please combine this with a Time-Delay option in Action-Groups for elaborate "Abort" systems etc.

Im not sure what you are talking about now - but im assuming its about Mars-One. I can only speak for myself my point is not what you just said but reality. I pretty much think its impossible that this Mars-One thing is more than a marketing stunt, a fraud, or some new reality show hoax. (De Grote Donor, Space Cadets etc.) And even if it would be real just because it exists doesnt mean not supporting it makes me "against the general idea" behind it. Lets be honest here there is no way in hell i would trust some random guy that makes this up 30 billion dollars and counting. I would actually support such a thing (minus the big-brother-part etc. which kind of smuts space exploration ...) if big and trustworthy organisation would do it. To be honest i really dont understand why big Space-Agencies havent tried crowd funding yet. I would be more than willing to send them my money (and i am actually someone who normally never does that ...). Well its actually gladly not even a discussion outside of the USA. I can just hope that this will stop here - because it was moving in a direction of climate-change-denial which is frightning.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2013/05/29/can-mars-be-terraformed-nasas-maven-mission-could-provide-answers/ Everything i find about terraforming sounds more like science fiction than reality - may you provide links with actual concepts beyond 2 sentence-statements? As i said we dont know how to exactly and what will actually happen.

It is a scientific concept - but still science fiction. Not to mention that we dont have the technology and probably cant actually estimate the consequences of doing such things. Since you seem to dissagree - do we have the capabilities to terraform a planet in a specific way while having control over it? - no - do we have the capabilities of getting the equipment there for terraforming a planet in a decent ammount of time? - no - do we know what will happen on mars when we randomly try to terraform? - no Beeing able to change the ammount of oxygen on a planet which will take forever without knowing what will happen is something i would consider science-fiction. We also know how to reach the speed of light - eventually - by simply accelerating - still its science fiction.

Well it might be funny but in case of Mars-One it could actually destroy the lives of those. Just think about them getting rid of everything they have on this planet - breaking up with their wives etc. Maybe even going insane depending on how far it goes. I wouldnt want to see that since its pretty cruel. Also i read about the experiment - are there any documentaries or good written reports on it?

I dont really understand why one would assume what the op assumed even after reading the whole thread. It is rather clear to me that the higher the stupidity bar is - the dumber the Kerbal. But i have to admit those 2 stats seem to be rather bad for purposes later on. Courage: - Kerbal will endure more extreme situations and not freak out - therefore stay prodcutive (if this will ever be implemented) Stupidity: - Kerbalw ill endure more extreme situations since he wont actually realize how dangerouse they are - therefore stay productiv within the limits of his mental capabilities Which is why those 2 stats seem to be a bad choice for me because they probably have similar effects yet courage will have a big advantage. Also Badass seems to be a rather similar attribute aswell since its a probably a mixture of courage and stupidity. I think Intelligence and Stupidity would have been a better choice because this would have forced you to choose between doing stuff perfect but failing in extreme conditions and failing at stuff while beeing able to carry on no matter the situation. As it is now the best Kerbal will have high courage, low stupidity and be a badass. I dont see the point in beeing fearless due to stupidity when the Kerbal is courageous in the first place.

Did you actualyl look up thos comapnies? Most of them are rather small and will probably also profit from the media-hype. It is pretty obvious that this is probably some hoax-hype-show like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grote_Donorshow Funding is completely unrealistic. Laws are a great problem - you cant send people without an option to get back. If somethign goes wrong all the money would be gone and i doubt anyone would want to watch people desperately fighting to survive somewhere where no one can help them. Not to mention the technology is not there. Just look at the global NASA plan for space exploration: http://www.space.com/22443-nasa-global-space-exploration-roadmap.html Mars is planned for later than 2030 - in cooperation with european space-programs. It should be obvious that no private company has either the knowledge nor the funding to do it at this point. I heard about this quite some time ago and it was pretty clear to me that it was not real. 3 Years to go until the first unmanned launch and not a single piece of hardware was seen ... Not to mention basic things like - a few people on mars - videotaped 24/7 in small rooms with very limited contactd home and actually no way home. You cant select those people with videotapes you need excessive testing and psychologists etc. (on the other hand people going nuts or become suicidal probably is what people would enjoy to see this days ...) BTW: at the moment they have got 132.000 Dollars - which have already been spent Also what will happen when viewer-quotes drop - will they be left there to die since no one will pay the money to send them the equipment they need? (obviously there is nothing invented yet that will work for that long) What will probably happen: - turns out their were naive and fail - turns out it was a big scam - turns out it was a marketing-stunt - turns out there will be a show about people who only think they will go to mars I wonder what will happen.

I actually agree with this but i think carreer-mode is neither the bet nor the only way to stop this from happening. Hmm on the other hand - well lets just say i will look into what they will actually do with it. Still i see a lot of things that cold go wrong

Well the problem i see there - by limiting the parts you can use - and the money you can use - wont this more likely lead to less creativity and less experimenting? I do understand what you want and i also would probably like parts of that yet i doubt things beyond bigger and longer missions will add much more to the game. I actually believe that limiting the game both with research and money and longterm responsiblity will actually harm gameplay. On the other hand some random events like a Kerbal building and flying his own rocket - stranding on a planet requesting for help with an emergency signal that gives XY time to rescue him would probably add some nice challenges. Well we will see what they do. Is there a real concept of the carreer mode out yet?

The problem is - people doing such things actually wont think that far ahead especially when they are acting emotional. Not to mention that i think that many of them probably will be rather young.

Sorry but you cant differentiate that easily. For example - if a company A produces Product XY. Company A says XY can do ZZ. Vendor B just sells the product XY. Consumer C actually refere to the thing company A said. Anyhow this will lead nowhere since law is pretty different depending on where you live. And i probably should say that i have no idea how law works in other countries but i am pretty sure that it will be rather similar at least in most countries of the european union. Still i dont understand why you are constantly trying to attack me as i mentioned above. Also no an EULA ist most of the time meant to be part of the "Sales-Pitch".