New Demo is too hard.

[Whirligig Girl]

No gimballing engine, no steerable winglets, no fairings, no LV-909! What's the point in even having a Mun and Minmus if you can barely get off the planet?

I tried the demo, for science reasons, and it's just too hard. Remember, I'm a seasoned player. I played with RSS, 6.4x, Jumbo32, I've done Jool, Duna, all the Moons, and probes on Moho and Eve, and a whole lot in between. I'm no newbie. So why is the demo too hard for me to play, when it is made exclusively for newbies?

Refer to this video.

The demo is bad, but the game is fantastic, overall, a loss of sales.

Edited May 13, 2015 by GregroxMun

[thereaverofdarkness]

Yes, I think the demo should include some of those basic parts. Another thing it can do to increase sales is show people some of the parts the full version has. But ultimately, Squad seems to be focusing their effort on developing the game and letting us, the fans, sell it for them. That's probably a good move. But just the same, tossing in the list of parts you gave above would probably help more than it cost.

[NWM]

The main point, the newbie want to make a Mün mission.

There is only short tanks - making the rocket less rigid. (FL T-200 is the max)

There is no short engine for the landing stage!

There is only minimal stabilizing devices...

Only few parts are needed for making it addictive:

FL T-400, LV-909, AV-R8, Advanced Inline Stabilzer.

[Whirligig Girl]

The main point, the newbie want to make a Mün mission.

There is only short tanks - making the rocket less rigid. (FL T-200 is the max)

There is no short engine for the landing stage!

There is only minimal stabilizing devices...

Only few parts are needed for making it addictive:

FL T-400, LV-909, AV-R8, Advanced Inline Stabilzer.

And I would also have the inline RCS fuel tank, and the 1.25m fairings. Maybe just a few more structural parts, like the cubic-octagonal, and DEFINITELY the tricoupler and bicoupler. Those are some of the best parts for a nee player! Tricouplers, and Bicouplers are the most fun way of making big rockets.

[ElitePineapple]

No gimballing engine, no steerable winglets, no fairings, no LV-909! What's the point in even having a Mun and Minmus if you can barely get off the planet?

I tried the demo, for science reasons, and it's just too hard. Remember, I'm a seasoned player. I played with RSS, 6.4x, Jumbo32, I've done Jool, Duna, all the Moons, and probes on Mun and Eve, and a whole lot in between. I'm no newbie. So why is the demo too hard for me to play, when it is made exclusively for newbies?

Refer to this video.

The demo is bad, but the game is fantastic, overall, a loss of sales.

I'm brand new to the whole concept of KSP, after watching a few Scott Manley videos I was really hyped for the demo. I can't even sustain an orbit with the parts provided, my rocket achieves altitude fine and is fairly stable but my final stage runs out of fuel when making maneuvers. Adding more fuel just makes the whole build too heavy and unstable. Squad need to add a more efficient engine to the demo.

[tater]

I have not played the demo, but a Mun landing should be possible, I think, it's a good hook for new players.

[Whirligig Girl]

I have not played the demo, but a Mun landing should be possible, I think, it's a good hook for new players.

Demonstrating the new demo to a teacher at school, I managed to put Val Kerman on the Mun and, using RCS and remaining fuel, along with jetpack, got her to Munar orbit. It was with a giant rocket, too. Way more than a Mun rocket ought to be. Really, all we need is fairings, LV-909, LV-T45, steerable winglets, and a large rocket fuel tank.

[NWM]

The fairing is not necessary. But the current set is not fits for newbies - it is impossible to make a rocket to handle easily, just a real nightmare...

[Sky_walker]

Maybe just a few more structural parts, like the cubic-octagonal, and DEFINITELY the tricoupler and bicoupler.

There's no need for either of them. Through all my time in KSP I never build a Mun mission with either tri or bi-coupler, and I have few dozens of Mun landings done. Structural parts are helpful mostly with larger landers, for basic first-time attempts there's no need for them either.

No gimballing engine, no steerable winglets, no fairings, no LV-909!

These are definitely a good suggestions.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Sky_walker

[Whirligig Girl]

I like the tricouplers and bicouplers. Yes, they're not the most useful, but they are really fun to use, and they feel like old school rockets. They're some of the few aerodynamic structural parts, and they were in the old demos.

Speaking of which, the proper pointy nosecone would be nice, I have grown to hate the old nosedome.

[sal_vager]

I tried the demo, ended up using the rcs to steer/stabilize my ascents, worked better than I expected actually.

Though the demo really should have the 45

[Captain Sierra]

Back when I played the demo, We had basically the full line of 1.25m engines and tanks. We had the AV-R8 winglet (the steerable one) and a fixed fin. We had the RD-10 booster, a small radial decoupler, and a stack decoupler, fixed ladder, and short extendable ladder (Oh and fuel lines, fuel lines are life). This was the old 0.18.2 version demo.

It was enough:

Why they reduced it I cannot fathom. The existing quantity of parts was sufficient to get people to the Mun, but you definitely had to work for it. No 45, no 909? no Mun.

[oriramikad]

Back when I played the demo, We had basically the full line of 1.25m engines and tanks. We had the AV-R8 winglet (the steerable one) and a fixed fin. We had the RD-10 booster, a small radial decoupler, and a stack decoupler, fixed ladder, and short extendable ladder (Oh and fuel lines, fuel lines are life). This was the old 0.18.2 version demo.

Why they reduced it I cannot fathom. The existing quantity of parts was sufficient to get people to the Mun, but you definitely had to work for it. No 45, no 909? no Mun.

Without those parts, I doubt I could have gotten to the Mun. The monstrosity I built for a Mun-and-back mission couldn't do a proper Hohmann transfer without either blowing up in-atmosphere or running out of fuel when transferring orbit. So I just flew straight up when the Mun was overhead.

Now I have to try out the new demo. A week of unsuccessful rocket launching awaits me. =-=

[Nowhere]

I have been playing the demo (v1.0.0.813) for a few weeks now. Using the sandbox I've managed to land and safely return to/from both the mun and minimus. It's a shame the career options are so limited, the weight limit and parts limit make mun landings impossible (although I've managed a collision). I'm now deciding if to go for the whole game... just gotta convince the wife.

[Sovek]

My two cents after watching Daniel's spiel on the whole thing....

Squad should scrap the idea of a demo alltogether. While this is no AAA game, its got a MASSIVE following on Youtube, and Steam, Reddit, ect. Squad doesnt need the demo OR spend massive amounts of money in marketing just to make sales. The people who have already bought the game are saying "Yes, Buy this game, it is worth it" (more so back when I bought it in .18 than now, but still).

Right now there are over 27K reviews on steam. 26K of them are positive (wow... words fail me), 626 are negative, and of those, they are expecting AAA quality (from a team who don't have the funds/manpower to do so), Do not understand that many bugs are in the process of being worked on, Do not understand physics, Is not their cup of tea. And some of those negative reviews still give praise to the game as a whole but something kills it for them. The Meta Critic score is pretty good too, 88.

The reaction I'm getting from the demo (havn't played the new one) just makes it feel... underwhelming compared to the actual game, and its got enough of a following on Youtube so that anyone curious as what the game ACTUALLY looks like and what can be done with it (both stock and modded) put the demo to shame.

I say retire the demo as I'm afraid this is a case of lost sales due to a demo. I mean I think it would be nice... but it simply fails as an actual representation of the game.

[pandaman]

I think there is a place for a demo version.  Reading reviews and watching videos is not the same as 'having a go'.  Had I not got the demo first I quite likely would not have decided to commit my limited cash to the full version.

But it is important that the demo is exactly that, it needs to showcase the main features, and illustrate how the game works, to give potential customers enough of an experience to decide if they may like it.  With notes that indicate what extra stuff is in the full version.

It's not like an FPS where you can get the first 'mission' as a demo and you know whether it's your type of game or not, this game is far deeper. A well crafted demo/basic tutorial could be a great asset.

[Spaceception]

On 1/16/2016 at 4:48 PM, Sovek said:

My two cents after watching Daniel's spiel on the whole thing....

Squad should scrap the idea of a demo alltogether. While this is no AAA game, its got a MASSIVE following on Youtube, and Steam, Reddit, ect. Squad doesnt need the demo OR spend massive amounts of money in marketing just to make sales. The people who have already bought the game are saying "Yes, Buy this game, it is worth it" (more so back when I bought it in .18 than now, but still).

Right now there are over 27K reviews on steam. 26K of them are positive (wow... words fail me), 626 are negative, and of those, they are expecting AAA quality (from a team who don't have the funds/manpower to do so), Do not understand that many bugs are in the process of being worked on, Do not understand physics, Is not their cup of tea. And some of those negative reviews still give praise to the game as a whole but something kills it for them. The Meta Critic score is pretty good too, 88.

The reaction I'm getting from the demo (havn't played the new one) just makes it feel... underwhelming compared to the actual game, and its got enough of a following on Youtube so that anyone curious as what the game ACTUALLY looks like and what can be done with it (both stock and modded) put the demo to shame.

I say retire the demo as I'm afraid this is a case of lost sales due to a demo. I mean I think it would be nice... but it simply fails as an actual representation of the game.

Hey! The Demo is only thing I can play!

[artwhaley]

My suggestion for demo - make the whole game playable for four or six hours, then have it limit itself after that!   Not a complete shutdown... but...  perhaps after that time you get a reduced set of parts available for new launches?  Or you can't do any new launches, but can finish flying out any missions you had in progress when time ran out?  

I know i was definitely hooked after a few hours in the game...

 

[Spaceception]

2 minutes ago, artwhaley said:

My suggestion for demo - make the whole game playable for four or six hours, then have it limit itself after that!   Not a complete shutdown... but...  perhaps after that time you get a reduced set of parts available for new launches?  Or you can't do any new launches, but can finish flying out any missions you had in progress when time ran out?  

I know i was definitely hooked after a few hours in the game...

 

Not the last part, but yeah, I'd like to screw around with stuff like Ion engines and Nuclear engines and RTGs for a while.

[Jimbodiah]

A demo is a way for people to check out what they are buying. I've skipped a lot of games on Steam as I was not sure I would like them, and since there was no demo is just opted out of spending €30-60. I bought KSP none-the-less.

[m_sporkboy]

I never played the demo, but if I was going to select parts for it that a newbie should be able to get to the mun, I'd include a small crew pod, parachute, the longest 1m tank, terrier engine, rockomax decoupler, medium rockomax tank (size down from orange), and the skipper.   Maybe a set of fins.  Plus the medium landing legs.  I'd also modify the crew pod to have a huge electric charge capacity.

[sevenperforce]

I started playing the demo, and I'm trying to figure out a few things.

The limit on launchpad mass and part number is killer. I can't make orbit.

Also, are liquid-fueled rockets notoriously difficult to control, or is it just me?

[Sanic]

12 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

I started playing the demo, and I'm trying to figure out a few things.

The limit on launchpad mass and part number is killer. I can't make orbit.

Also, are liquid-fueled rockets notoriously difficult to control, or is it just me?

Are you using engines with gimballing?

[sevenperforce]

29 minutes ago, Sanic said:

Are you using engines with gimballing?

The only engines available in career demo are the LV-T3 and the RT-10.

[Sanic]

4 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

The only engines available in career demo are the LV-T3 and the RT-10.

That's your problem. There are no steerable fins and no gimballing. There is basically no way to control your rocket besides reaction wheels.