KSP 1.0 Reviewed by Rock, Paper, Shotgun

[Sandworm]

It was interesting to see that they panned over full career mode and pointed to science mode as "the Goldilocks zone". Squad needs to take that on board and rethink a bit.

Oh yea and the MOAR INFO thing... Yes please.

Taking that on requires a degree of humility Squad currently lacks. There are some very serious issues with KSP. Fearing the fanboys, reviewers are just starting to mention them. I am glad that RPS stepped out of the norm to admit some of KSP's fundamental flaws. I honestly think that a few truly critical reviews are needed to shock squad out of its bubble.

We players are also all in a bubble. If you have played KSP for months/years you have developed blinders to all the little bugs and ad-hoc planning. The lack of info, the horrid frame rates, the texture and modeling errors ... we take it all in stride without complaint. Just look at how quickly we all adapted to the memory leaks. They probably aren't even on squad's radar anymore. KSP needs objective outside reviewers to see what we cannot.

[RocketPropelledGiraffe]

I think one of the problems in stock is that most of the wanted information is already there, but not "easily available":

Generally when I'm talking about having more information, I'm talking about something like the following:

• Apoapsis
  
• Time to Apoapsis
  
• Periapsis
  
• Time to Periapsis
  
• Inclination
  

• Radar Altimeter
  
• Current TWR
  
• Total Delta-V
  

Orbital information is there, but you have to go to map view. You get relative inclination information when you target something, good enough for most purposes. Radar altitude is visible in IVA. Delta-v is coming at last.

In stock I find myself switching and jumping between all available views, especially when landing - tedious. What is needed in my opinion is an overview list of all the data, KER does a great job with its customisable windows: You don't need all the info all the time and playstyles do vary as well.

[fat4eyes]

I don't understand all the mechjeb hate. I would not have learned as much about KSP so quickly without mechjeb. I would still be turning my kerbin launches at 70km if I didn't try out mechjeb, would never have landed on a planet outside the Kerbin system, done a spacecraft rendezvous and docking and I would still be designing rockets that are WAY too heavy for what they're supposed to do. I would probably not even have tried the science or career modes because I would have been utterly frustrated by the difficulty spike of interplanetery travel.

Now I've sent probes all over the system and am working on building a manned exploration ship in orbit to explore Jool and it's moons. I could also now do most of what mechjeb does on my own (heck sometimes I HAVE to, since mechjeb has this tendency to shake really tall rockets apart during ascent), and can sometimes even do better than it. Mechjeb has smoothed the learning curve and showed me what was possible.

Mechjeb is also great for automating repetitive tasks. Getting to the Mun is fun the first time, but gets boring once you've done it 5 to 6 times to grind science and experience. Same for mining operations on Minmus. It's consistency is also great when you're optimizing vehicles. It makes rocket tests very easy to replicate.

I agree that there are parts of mechjeb that should be part of stock. The deltaV table during construction and flight for one. If there's any one thing that's given me the greatest insight into rocket design and flight in KSP it's the deltaV table. Understanding TWR and deltaV was the tipping point for me. It turned KSP from a game of just fooling around with rockets into an actual (if whimsical) spaceflight simulator.

Mechjeb is a great learning and automation tool and I do not understand why people dislike it. Progress is, after all, built on the work of others, not by reclimbing the same mountain over and over.

[TimePeriod]

What I can get from MechJeb, I can also get from Kerbal Engineer. Which is also, 200 x more simple and easy to use.

[Corw]

Wow, that was rather badly written review.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Generally when I'm talking about having more information, I'm talking about something like the following:

<picsnip>

• Apoapsis
  
• Time to Apoapsis
  
• Periapsis
  
• Time to Periapsis
  
• Inclination

I use these mainly during launch because I don't coast if I can help it, otherwise the map screen is fine because you're generally setting up a rendezvous or transfer, or figuring out where to land.

• Radar Altimeter
  
• Current TWR
  
• Total Delta-V

These are pretty crucial to have on the main flight screen, TWR especially during launch.

That is what I consider the bare minimum of information needed to get around in KSP or RSS purely from the flight screen. I could do without the vertical and horizontal velocities, the biome, and the stage delta-V breakdown, those are gravy from Engineer. The eight items listed above, though ... it's criminal to hide those behind another screen or omit them. When I'm launching I want watch the launch or the navball, not page back and forth to the map screen trying to line something up.

Actually, relative inclination is also pretty useful during launch.

I, on the other hand, never gave much thought to these numbers. Even when I had KER installed, I never used any of its in-flight functions, only making sure, at design time, that the total dV budget and TWR on the pad were correct.

That... never really stopped me from achieving things. I got eyeballing rendezvous down to an art. I can land next to another object on a planet's surface with a reasonable dV overhead. I'm just not treating the game's rocket science as rocket science. I'll never pilot an actual spacecraft (especially since it's all automated anyway), and I'll never need to use all the numbers that are required for it IRL, so why bother with them? The analog feedback from the trajectory on the map view, and generous overengineering to dampen the efficiency problems that approach entails, are enough to make flying spacecraft in KSP a much more enjoyable, much less by-the-numbers affair.

[Wallygator]

Snip... Just look at how quickly we all adapted to the memory leaks. They probably aren't even on squad's radar anymore. KSP needs objective outside reviewers to see what we cannot.

Memory leak... Hmmm... OS X players unite!!! I'm gonna check where my torch and pitch fork are...

Yes, I totally agree with you in your overall post and underscore the memory leak issue. Harrumph!

One thing that I do always remember though, is that Squad is actually a rather small team, with the architects also laying bricks. I'm not surprised that many things fall out of sight. You can't work both at a strategic level and tactical level all the time without loss of effectivity. They might consider further consider expanding their in-house coding capacity, and allow the core visionaries and creatives to focus on thinking instead of building.

[Rune]

Generally when I'm talking about having more information, I'm talking about something like the following:

http://i.imgur.com/56ttr9k.png

• Apoapsis
  
• Time to Apoapsis
  
• Periapsis
  
• Time to Periapsis
  
• Inclination

I use these mainly during launch because I don't coast if I can help it, otherwise the map screen is fine because you're generally setting up a rendezvous or transfer, or figuring out where to land.

• Radar Altimeter
  
• Current TWR
  
• Total Delta-V

These are pretty crucial to have on the main flight screen, TWR especially during launch.

That is what I consider the bare minimum of information needed to get around in KSP or RSS purely from the flight screen. I could do without the vertical and horizontal velocities, the biome, and the stage delta-V breakdown, those are gravy from Engineer. The eight items listed above, though ... it's criminal to hide those behind another screen or omit them. When I'm launching I want watch the launch or the navball, not page back and forth to the map screen trying to line something up.

Actually, relative inclination is also pretty useful during launch.

Well, an accurate variometer (the stock one is crap with its logarithmic scale, no difference between 100 and 150m/s) is kind of a must to refine ascents, especially on SSTOs. But I concur on everything else: Ap, Pe, Time to Ap, inclination, acceleration (I'd rather have that than an arbitrary TWR dependent on the planet), and deltaV readings at least for current stage are all a must. Add those, and put a variometer you can actually read, and I'll uninstall KER and make do without its handy "time to node burn" to count down my burns. Also, KERs idea of only having those reading available to engineer-equipped ships is a truly great one. I love it! Right now all kerbals have a function in my ships, unless is substitute the pilots with expensive (and currently tech-limited) probes.

Rune. Time to Ap is the way to nail a gravity turn, every time and with every TWR. CRUCIAL.

[Troubletcat]

I'll never pilot an actual spacecraft (especially since it's all automated anyway), and I'll never need to use all the numbers that are required for it IRL, so why bother with them? The analog feedback from the trajectory on the map view, and generous overengineering to dampen the efficiency problems that approach entails, are enough to make flying spacecraft in KSP a much more enjoyable, much less by-the-numbers affair.

I agree with you 100% on this, and that's my playstyle as well, but there are a lot of people on this forum who enjoy meticulously crafting/planning everything down to the smallest detail, and that's valid too. I think adding some of the information given by KER to the game as an optional setting is the best way to go here.

I don't ever want a stock autopilot beyond the "hold this heading" stuff currently in the game, though.

I didn't care for the review itself. I don't think you should use mods when reviewing a game. It's pretty clear to me that the author used MechJeb's autopilot instead of taking time to actually learn how to fly, and flying your rockets is a big part of the game. If somebody prefers flying with an autopilot and finds that more enjoyable that's 100% fine and valid, but I don't think it's appropriate for a review of a game to rely on a user-made mod to remove a good chunk of the gameplay.

[KerikBalm]

Memory leak... Hmmm... OS X players unite!!! I'm gonna check where my torch and pitch fork are...

? I'm an OSX player with only 4 gb of memory, and these heat bars don't cause me any problems/crash my game. Was this sarcasm?

As for the review.... something I've never used is apparently essential?

The most I've used in Kerbal Engineer... though I havent used it in 1.0-1.02 yet.

The craft mass display was already a big improvement... sometimes I check my dV for a stage by looking at mass before/after emptying tanks, and doing... MATH

But... that's a bid tedious to tweak all the fuel tanks over and over again, even ignoring the math part.

Its also a bit tedious to switch to/from map view to see time to apopapsis, what my apopapsis is, etc...

Then switch back and forth from IVA view to look at the radar altimeter...

Kerbal Engineer should definitely become integrated.

Mechjeb... I've never needed it yet, never wanted it yet, not essential. I've gone everywhere except 3 of the moons of Jool (val, bop, pol).

I do use transfer window calculators though.... that would be nice too

[Guest]

As far as the use of MechJeb goes, I personally used it back when I was a wee little rocketeer in the v.19 days. MechJeb allowed me to fly missions I couldn't have attempted until I had learned about flying rockets. (I find a background as a commercial pilot did little to prepare me for flying rockets into space.) As I used MechJeb to get around, I was able to observe it in action and that, combined with other knowledge I was able to pick up around the internet (thank you Scott Manley!) allowed me to begin flying my rockets manually.

Nowadays I hand fly everything I make, but I certainly don't look down on people who need some help to get around space. The reviewer made an important observation: rockets have been automated since the days of Yuri Gagarin. That is entirely true, in fact the Mercury astronauts made known that excessive automation wasn't their cup of tea, and successfully petitioned the rocket engineers to add more manual controls to the spacecraft.

The engineers were trying to make it so the astronaut had nothing to do, and we were just riding in this thing. - Lowell Grissom

It took some time to convince the astronauts that we wanted to use their talents to make the machine better. - Chris Kraft

- When We Left Earth, The NASA Missions

Back to MechJeb, even after I stopped using it to fly around space, I still needed the mod to provide information that the game's U.I. didn't give me. Thrust-to-Weight, Radar Altimeter, Docking Port Alignment, and Delta-V statistics are all good information to have when you are manually flying a rocket. What kills me about the game is that there is an actual radar altimeter, but you have to constantly switch back and forth from IVA mode in order to use it. When you're trying to land on the Mun, that sort of information should be easily available, not hidden away from the player.

I think the Rock, Paper, Shotgun review did a good thing to bring these concerns to light. Not everyone who plays this game is a steely-eyed rocket jock, tearing across the cosmos, hunting for heaven. Most of us just want to fly some rockets into space without a whole lot of hassle.

In that vein, may I be so bold as to make some suggestions?

1. Display the Radar Altimeter readout on the main screen when the NavBall is set to surface mode. Why do I have to switch to IVA, pan the camera, and zoom in on a small instrument to use this function? When I'm 100 meters up, trying to kill my vertical velocity, and eyeball the landing site, the last thing I need to do is wrestle with the game U.I. The use of the IVA mode should be an option, not a necessity.

2. Delta-V stats and Thrust-to-Weight information should be displayed in the Engineer's Report section in the SPH and VAB because that's what an engineer's report is for. Look at any modern Pilot's Operating Handbook, written by the engineers, and you can find all of that useful information, because the first rule of safety is to eliminate guesswork. This could also be tied into the building upgrade function in career mode so when you upgrade the SPH and VAB, first Thrust-to-Weight, then Delta-V stats are made available to the player.

3. Docking Port Alignment should be displayed on the Navball, or on a separate interface, when the controls are in Docking Mode. That will give players a good reason to actually use the Docking Mode, instead of simply ignoring it's very existence.

The sun has orbited the earth roughly four times since some version of KSP was available....

That was a joke about the fact the reviewer knows nothing about space, and I found it humorous. Grow a sense of humor.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Guest
Spelling Error and Misquote

[KSK]

We players are also all in a bubble. If you have played KSP for months/years you have developed blinders to all the little bugs and ad-hoc planning. The lack of info, the horrid frame rates, the texture and modeling errors ... we take it all in stride without complaint. Just look at how quickly we all adapted to the memory leaks. They probably aren't even on squad's radar anymore. KSP needs objective outside reviewers to see what we cannot.

Ehh - that cuts both ways. If you've played KSP for months and years you've also had plenty of time to fixate on the bits of the game that you don't like. Outside reviewers are (presumably) coming to the game fresh and see the whole thing rather than a grab-bag of personal pet peeves and soapbox issues. As for 'taking it all in stride without complaint' - I'm not sure which parts of the forum you've been posting on. The complaints are generally constructive but they are very definitely there.

As for the memory leaks - I can't speak for Windows users but I refer you to this ongoing thread for OS X.

[Mr. Scruffy]

The principles of the game could comfortably be taught in a high-school science classroom

Sadly, apparently they are not, though.

That´s a real problem for KSP. There are players -some with the ´right´ background, others without- who find the realism in KSP gamebreakingly lacking. While, otoh, there are people to whom the basic stuff KSP does model is completly alien and they feel like hitting a brick-wall instead of a learning curve, when playing it. In that sense, KSP is a bit like a grade-school teacher who -with good reason- expects, that the pupils´ parents have already tought them some basic social skills before they got to school, yet finds this not to be the case (with is of course not the pupils´ fault). When, almost 50 years after the first moon landings, some people in industrailized countries (and there are probably more of them, than many of you would like to believe!) still dont know weather the sun or the moon is bigger, the complexity and realism that KSP offers must sadly be recognized as the be about the maximum that is marketable, it seems.

EDIT

...it requires patience, learning and the mental fortitude of an entire buddhist monastery to plan a mission...

Jeez! Seems like everyone has ADS these days - everyone who is not a monk, anyways.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Mr. Scruffy

[regex]

Also, KERs idea of only having those reading available to engineer-equipped ships is a truly great one. I love it!

I turn that crap off right quick, annoys the hell out of me.

Time to Ap is the way to nail a gravity turn, every time and with every TWR. CRUCIAL.

This is very true.

My point was mainly that information should be centralized, not scattered to the four winds. It's telling that KSP already includes the majority of information that I want, it's just ... everywhere I don't want it to be. That's bad design/presentation. Just like Harv hiding the time for rendezvous burn readout behind another screen and a hiding widget; no, it's not "right there when I need it", it's more like "Here's a new tool, enjoy! Oh, I'm going to hide it away somewhere you never look in the first place when you need it."

Why do I have to switch to IVA, pan the camera, and zoom in on a small instrument to use this function? When I'm 100 meters up, trying to kill my vertical velocity, and eyeball the landing site, the last thing I need to do is wrestle with the game U.I. The use of the IVA mode should be an option, not a necessity.

Yep, hit the nail on the head. We're not starved of information because it's missing, we're starved of information because it's not presented well.

[Wallygator]

? I'm an OSX player with only 4 gb of memory, and these heat bars don't cause me any problems/crash my game. Was this sarcasm?

As for the review.... something I've never used is apparently essential?

The most I've used in Kerbal Engineer... though I havent used it in 1.0-1.02 yet.

The craft mass display was already a big improvement... sometimes I check my dV for a stage by looking at mass before/after emptying tanks, and doing... MATH

But... that's a bid tedious to tweak all the fuel tanks over and over again, even ignoring the math part.

Its also a bit tedious to switch to/from map view to see time to apopapsis, what my apopapsis is, etc...

Then switch back and forth from IVA view to look at the radar altimeter...

Kerbal Engineer should definitely become integrated.

Mechjeb... I've never needed it yet, never wanted it yet, not essential. I've gone everywhere except 3 of the moons of Jool (val, bop, pol).

I do use transfer window calculators though.... that would be nice too

@kerikbalm - No not sarcasm, just situational humour. I'm an OS X user and I get crashes reliably every 10 minutes - I now keep my pitchfork and torch more handy :-)

As to the review - I too felt it was good. All I was pointing out was that the reviewer did not seem to think full career mode was the best bit.

[BrainiacBlue]

Rock Paper Shotgun has reviewed KSP! They were positive (though found mods necessary to really enjoy the game). The review can be found here:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/05/13/kerbal-space-program-review/

[michaelsteele3]

Give them a few days. They deserve a break.

[regex]

I see you didn't look around the forum for this post first... A Kerbal dies every time you post a duplicate thread...

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/121183-KSP-1-0-Reviewed-by-Rock-Paper-Shotgun

[sal_vager]

Mergenated.

[vixr]

I see you didn't look around the forum for this post first... A Kerbal dies every time you post a duplicate thread...

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/121183-KSP-1-0-Reviewed-by-Rock-Paper-Shotgun

So, THATS what is doing it...All this time I thought it was my lame piloting skills!

[MacroNova]

3. Docking Port Alignment should be displayed on the Navball, or on a separate interface, when the controls are in Docking Mode. That will give players a good reason to actually use the Docking Mode, instead of simply ignoring it's very existence.

I used docking mode all the time in .90 and prior. I actually liked how space bar would switch between rotation and translation, and I could keep my hand on the mouse for camera rotation. No idea why they changed it.