Has anyone else not bothered with career mode?

[nsgallup]

I never played career after a brief and unpleasent try out in .90, but i thought I'd give it another shot in 1.0 and i love it now.

[Yuming]

Never tried it beyond a 10 minute test. I still have plenty of things to do in sandbox, and every update adds to my to-do list.

[kurja]

I'm considering giving up. It feels like such a grind with uninspired contracts. IDK how long it'll be until more fun ones come around but so far it's just "gather data from space around kerbin" or "test this part (which I don't even have)"

That's the thing - you get the part for free for testing. I always see what contracts are available, and how can I combine them with new science, so that every mission I do is basically a contract-funded science mission. Parts testing can be very useful!

[stevehead]

The problem with career mode is the fact that you are not in control of the direction of your space program. I want to be able to decide, design, and manage mission plans and only use contracts such as the satellite contracts for additional funds on the side. If I want to focus on Jool exploration before Duna, then I should be able to decide on that and plan a set of objectives that will grant funds based on reputation, and not have to wait for the game to randomly generate the contracts that I desire. The game is called Kerbal Space Program, and I want to be running a space program, not be a freelancer grinding random contracts to get the funds to do what I want to do.

With that said, I play the game in two ways:

1) Pure sandbox, and I artificially set my own restrictions and goals.

2) The same as above in Science mode. But, I cheat in enough science to unlock all tech tree nodes, then zero out my science. I then use science gained as a simple scoring system and use the science archives as a record of what I have done.

Edited May 2, 2015 by stevehead

[Superfluous J]

BTW Career mode is a terrible idea for a new player. I think Science mode is perfect for teaching. The last thing you want while learning gamified rocket science and orbital mechanics is massive, game-ending penalty for failure.

[regex]

BTW Career mode is a terrible idea for a new player. I think Science mode is perfect for teaching. The last thing you want while learning gamified rocket science and orbital mechanics is massive, game-ending penalty for failure.

This, very much this.

[wossname]

I am trying very hard to ONLY play career mode in KSP 1.0.x. I'm finding it to be a grind. Not pleasantly so.

Before 1.0.0 the career mode was way too easy. A skilled player could literally earn enough science points to buy the entire tech tree in two or three launches (Scott Manley did a good youtube series on this).

However in KSP 1.0.x the difficulty pendulum has swung back in the other direction, and been nailed, glued and welded there. I don't really know what to think about this though, ambivalence is my main reaction to the current career mode.

I like to have goals to reach for and I like to follow a story or at least a progressive path toward something worth working towards.

I enjoy sandbox too but it somehow seems aimless and lonely and ultimately goal-less. But I do like making massive space stations and de-orbiting them for no reason. Sandbox is splendid for experimentation and making utterly insane things.

Feels like the latest release of KSP has set the difficulty curve higher for career mode than many players (new or old) are likely to be interested in. I hope that in the long run this isn't the case, since the career mode is a very promising gameplay dynamic, but it *still* needs a lot of fine tuning.

[Dizzle]

In 1.0+ I've only played career so far. I'm liking it a lot, gives a nice sense of progression. I'm about to start a sandbox though, since I'm up to resource mining contracts and have no idea how to build for them.

[Frank_G]

Since its introduction in, what was it .21?, i always played career. Career mode is a fun opener and you run through the tech tree in no time. Also i like getting a reward for my missions, earning enough to make my dream missions come true. Financing a permanent base on Duna with orbital station, spaceplanes and stuff is quite a challenge.

[FlyingPete]

The problem with career mode is that it often firces you to build bizzare and unrealistic crafts to perform bizzare and unrealistic missions to meet bizzare and unrealistic requirements. Real space programs don't earn money from their own missions, they get money from the government and lose it on their own missions.

I do tend to ignore/decline most of the 'test part' contracts. Especially if it's something like 'test the large SRB on a Kerbin escape trajectory' or something else nonsensical. Sometimes I'll collect a couple of the simpler part testing contracts though and combine them into one launch. People like SSTL do this in real-life with micro satellites.

Sometimes the contracts are pretty close to what you wanted to do anyway- I was planning on putting a space station around Minmus to aid exploration there, when a 'build a new station around Minmus' contract came up. All it needed was a station with slightly more crew space that I'd originally planned.

[Herbin]

I love career mode. I like progression. I am one of those people that loathes sandboxes that don't make you work for your toys.

[Majorjim!]

Yup I haven't touched career mode since it was introduced. I have zero desire to grind to unlock parts.

Oh and to those who play it because they like the feeling of progression, my progression is in my building. As in, I progressively get better at it.

We all make our own rules don't we.

[eddiew]

I haven't since 1.0 because I'm waiting for the mods I like to catch up For now, just sandbox, but career soon because I enjoy a progression game that lasts ages ^^

[Chruschtschow]

I like career mode. It puts constraints on my play, so I have to leave my comfort zone now and then to try something else. And I even like it in the latter stages, when you have everything researched and have lots of money, because even then I try to be careful and efficient in my designs.

[Col_Jessep]

I liked science mode when it was new and career when it was introduced but it got old. Now I'm back to sandbox and a new, better challenge: learning to adapt to all the new features and building planes again. (Squad, pls give us more light-weight structural parts that don't mess with aero, thx!)

[Torham234]

I love the career mode. I have been playing it almost exclusively, apart from some initial testing when I was waiting for KER to update. For me, its so much fun getting science and progressing towards better parts. I have just put a big orbital research facility on orbit around the Mun. In sandbox, there would be no real reason for it to exist, apart to simply "be".

[Hotblack Desiato]

career (science) mode was nice when it was introduced. it forces to think that you don't have everything available.

but now I came up with a better mode (for me): I have limited access to the KSC, first cheated in science for unlocking the techtree, only a few launches (1-3) and then, everything has to work space-based (with EPL, MKS/OKS/Karbonite, TAC-LS and civilian population), and remove the cheated in science points. it's resource-limited, but not with money but with fuel, rocketparts, kerbals (AND their skills) and science points are just trophy-points.

[Johnman]

I started playing four years ago and I don't know how to play career. I gave career mode a shot, but sandbox is the only thing I know.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I haven't played career since .25.

[Curveball Anders]

I play both sandbox and career (and science before that).

When I play sandbox I set my own goals and my own limitations, but career is also fun because is forces outside my own choices and comfort zone.

And besides, I often learn better solutions in career since I don't have infinite funds and tech.

[John FX]

I like both. I have a few saves on each install, one just for challenges, one for my 'real' sandbox game and one for a really hard career game with mods to make it harder to force me to do as much as I can with the lowest tech parts I can.

[OrbitusII]

I make an attempt to get into career mode with each update, but it's not really my thing. I'll check it out when I finally get the chance to play, but I'll probably head back to sandbox after an hour or so in career mode.

[tgruetzm]

I like the idea of career, but it always ends up being tedious to get the parts I want to do the missions I want. I'm wondering if anyone has tried this: start new career, modify persistence file to get enough funds/science to unlock everything, then max out the science to funds strategy. Would the science earned generate enough funds to run your space program without doing contracts? I do like some contracts, but in general I like to do what I want but I'd like to have some funding constraints too.

I plan on trying this tonight, but was wondering if anyone else has tried it.

[Wesreidau]

I play career with no respawn or revert and my science gains at 250%. I hate science. Its fun but grindy, so I just reduce my grind requirements. Call me "that guy" but its boring. I imagine I'll mod in a "Gemstones" resource to mine and keep Fort Grissom operating in the black if tourism can't pay for the life support deliveries.

[HafCoJoe]

I did career mode before they added funds. I basically unlocked all the stock parts and then when the next update came our I switched back to sandbox.