Wild Rant has appeared (logic is super effective) - Not everything needs to be realistic

[Azuratte]

STahp... Now I honestly didn't bother to read... most of everything.

BUT, serious here. A fuel PER DAY FUND, would make sense in some way (AS A TOGGLE). But now listen, a planet can only supply a fuel at a certain rate. I would personally be willing to play this way as long as the player couldn't effect this on Kerbin. Sure you could farm on Gile, but who kares. For the hardcore maybe there would be a certain amount of fuel available ((((((((FOR THE HARDCORE, DURRRR))))))).... This seems to be a simple ticker, and I for one would play it.

Az

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

When someone posts a suggestion for a mod or an optional feature (example - something in difficulty settings) and the goal of the mod is not to specifically recreate a realistic situation (FAR, DRE, Life Support) maybe the best first response isnt about whether this is "realistic" or not.

So? People want to know how realistic it is.

I agree with the OP, and with HarvesteR's comments. Above all, KSP is meant to be fun.

Yeah, all realism=not fun. This is completely not true, and is shown not to be true by the large amount of players who enjoy Realism Overhaul, and have fun in it. People wouldn't play fully realistic flight sims if they didn't have fun, would they?

Edited May 14, 2015 by RobotsAndSpaceships

[Superfluous J]

Yay this has become a "is realism fun?" circular discussion.

Realism is not necessarily fun.

Fun is not necessarily realistic.

Lack of realism is not necessarily fun.

Lack of fun is not necessarily realistic.

Some people find things fun that others don't.

People agree with others on some things, but not on others.

Nobody (but a masochist) wants a 100% fully real universe in any video game. If you think you do, get your mouse arm ready for Jeb's toothbrush mini-game and Bob's "Find a neighbor to take care of my cat" puzzles. And remember while you're controlling Bill at the grocery store, you need to get ground coffee beans because the grinder in the canteen is broken. You forgot to sit idle at your computer between 8am and noon on Tuesday, when the repair guy was supposed to show up, so the grinder will remain broken until next week, when you are taking time off work to make sure you're there. But that's okay, Val is on her way to Duna so you've got 67 more days until you need to do anything in the actual game anyway.

Nor does anybody want a 100% fully unrealistic game. If the rockets randomly turned into yellow submarines and the VAB melted into a puddle of water whenever there was an eclipse of Jool (because it switches places with Minmus every 17 days), it would get old pretty quick.

What everybody wants is something between total realism and total non-realism. And everybody - EVERYBODY - puts their mark in a different place.

[Lord Aurelius]

@5thHorseman

Excellent points, especially on the whole continuum between realism vs. non-realism. My mark can move daily depending on my mood.

@RobotsAndSpaceships

The point I was trying to make in my post (which got taken out of context) is that this is a game. We all want it to be fun (otherwise what would be the point in playing it?). For some of us, more realism makes it more fun, the opposite is true for others. Squad's done a pretty good job of balancing realism, and there's tons of mods available to push the game one way or the other.

As has been said, fun =/= realism. You can't directly compare them to each other. Sometimes I enjoy playing around with RSS+RO and all the extra challenge that brings, other times I want to build my sci-fi craft with antigravity and warp drives (or just use hyperedit to explore). I enjoy watching silly KSP videos by swdennis and others.

In the end, it's just a game. Play it in the way that is most fun for you, and don't worry about how others want to play the game.

[John FX]

I don't mind mods that are unrealistic, for example interstellar. I've not tried it but is sounds like you get FTL and other stuff.

I can imagine that would be fun.

The way I like to arrange my mods is fairly realistic because I personally find that fun. I don't see the point in moaning that a particular mod is or is not realistic, each to their own. Nobody has the right to say how others should play.

This is almost the reverse of the old mechjeb arguments where some would say it ruined the game for them and others would say an autopilot was realistic and eventually the thread dissolved into people just saying that nobody should dictate to other people how they should play or what defined fun and others doing pretty much that.

I can see arguments against making it stock but for a mod, it would introduce an interesting mechanic for a career game, especially if there were costs involved and you had to supply crew to the fuel depot.

If combined with Kerbal Construction Time then there would be pressures to getting enough fuel on time and I can see that would be fun or at least interesting and challenging, which a lot of people find fun.

That's my view, if more information is desired then see 5th horsemans post. It seems to cover the main points

[michaelsteele3]

That's actually not a bad idea. Where DO kerbals get all that fuel and oxidizer? Having to make a fuel depot at the KSC before it goes into your rocket. I like that.

As for the gist of the topic. Uhh... It comes with the genre. KSP just happens to be a type of game where you can actually look at every aspect and judge it off of the real world.

Other then that... Sounds like you got one more reason to stay away from reddit. I personally can't stand the place.

@Theend3r - I don't know if done right it could be petty cool. Because that's a major aspect. And right now LF/O could be kerbal farts for all we know. The most significant aspect that makes rockets work is more or less just a magical substance in this game. I'd welcome something that makes the fuel more hands on and practical.

Additionally... Squad should look into more realistic fuels. Not to the extent of Real Fuels of course, but something more then what we have.

One of the funnest parts of RSS/RO is just that. Playing with different fuels.

Oh for the love of...

[micr0wave]

realism .. someone did a jool mission yet without touching the timewarp ?

[vixr]

I signed up with squad...not NASA

[KatzOhki]

Yay this has become a "is realism fun?" circular discussion.

...

Nor does anybody want a 100% fully unrealistic game. If the rockets randomly turned into yellow submarines and the VAB melted into a puddle of water whenever there was an eclipse of Jool (because it switches places with Minmus every 17 days), it would get old pretty quick.

...

It has a bit, but I would definitely play an Acid Trip mod like that for giggles!

I had a bit of a thought today on this. I don't know if anyone here follows legal discussions, but one of the official terms used in law (you know, courts and stuff) is "reasonable person." For example, "would a reasonable person expect their car to stop when applying the brakes." You can almost translate reasonable person into a concept of "average person" and I think if you apply this logic to KSP you might see where some of the difficulty in tuning the realism aspect of KSP comes from. You can expect a reasonable and average person to have a certain perspective on "fun and realism" when it comes to video games. But then since KSP is inspired by somewhat of a scientific concept (explore and study the solar system) you can expect that the audience of this game includes a lot of people very concerned with scientific realism. I think that's the difficult bit really, is understanding what the audience really is. (Are the realism-lovers a vocal minority or not?) And then balancing public opinion with what the creators of (let's call video games "art") their creation want it to be.

Maybe I'm not helping. Just a thought.

Again, if anyone wants to make an Acid Trip mod please let me know. Rave mod would be good too (replace music with techno and program all the lights to blink in cycling colors).

[roguelycan]

Darn you forum. I told you to email me when people commented. I just thought this thread died.

- - - Updated - - -

By the way everyone, great comments. To the mention that my topic thread was a little condescending I didnt mean it that way. Was a little hot when I created it but wasn't trying to incite anything.

If we were talking about permanent features then the realism over fun discussion is warranted because its addition will affect everyone regardless of game mode. When you are talking about optional features, or mods, then it makes less sense to just give a blanket "I dont like this idea" because even if its introduced you could just simply ignore it. If you dont like the idea of a Limited Fuel (or whatever) option in difficulties then just leave it off.

Now ideas on how it could be better or different are typically welcome ideas.

- - - Updated - - -

Changed the title to something hopefully seen as a little more fun.

[Gerandar]

realism .. someone did a jool mission yet without touching the timewarp ?

my eeloo mission will arrive in 11 years I'll be in my mid 30's by then but by god will it be worth it.

[roguelycan]

Im calling it now. You miss the soi change and fly by.

[MacroNova]

To the mention that my topic thread was a little condescending I didnt mean it that way. Was a little hot when I created it but wasn't trying to incite anything.

Changed the title to something hopefully seen as a little more fun.

That was me, and I love the new title!

[roguelycan]

Lol figured that would make it sound more fun than angry.