The community is dying!

[Yellowburn10]

Well,

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99508-Just-me-or-these-forums-dying?highlight=forum+dying

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/109876-Is-KSP-dying?highlight=forum+dying

Like vanamonde said, the forum seems goes through a general active-non active cycle, as shown by the dates the posts were created.

[basic.syntax]

Confirming that EVE is dying.

how did EVE get involved in this discussion? Not disputing your statement though, 'tis the cold truth.

Where were you when EVE was kill?

I think this is a clever way of pointing out... that it hasn't. Yet. Despite a new forum thread saying as much, every 3 months. Some players wish it were dead, or quit, because they don't like some change or other. I hope KSP will be as lucky as EVE is, to have development still going on after 10 years. It may not be the "development" that some like, but it's clearly not dead.

EVE Online changes some rules that were working perfectly fine, every so often, to break stagnancy, shake things up... depending on the change, it causes outcry in some circles. For a completely different reason, KSP 1.0 changed the Aero rules, and accomplished the same thing: gave a lot of "old-timers" new things to learn and try, and gave birth to a few "why is my rocket flipping?" threads.

I think KSP 1.1 on Unity 5 will do it again. It's a bigger overhaul, than .90 to 1.0. The entire UI, Wheels, and Asteroids (confirmed by devnotes) are going to be completely new and refreshed. Joint strengths had to be looked at. The tiniest change has repercussions that we notice, due to how KSP craft are made up of hundreds of parts held together by the physics engine. "Everything old, will be new again."

The community can't die yet, it has too much to live for

Edited June 21, 2015 by basic.syntax

[Lord Aurelius]

Like vanamonde said, the forum seems goes through a general active-non active cycle, as shown by the dates the posts were created.

I wouldn't be surprised if the peaks of activity occured on Tuesday afternoon/evening right after the devnotes.

[Dman979]

Well, I doubt that there will be anything close to our record for a few months. Most of the western world is on summer break right now, and isn't checking their online stuff as often.

Also, 500 posts! Whooo hooooo!

[boxman]

I agree. something that is parked, be that a ground base or a station/craft left in orbit is only physically affected if it's engines are fired up, it's rotated or something crashes (or docks) into it. The level of physics simulation on "parked" craft should be dynamically scalled. I think this is a case of KSP forgetting that it's a game and instead trying to be a physics simulator. Games fake it! So much of game design is about faking the real world, not actually trying to replicate it as it is, because that is just too computationally costly. I don't think KSP fakes it enough.

I dont think that is a solution either, since that could mess up alot of interesting things you can do now using mods. Like if you for example have something on a freely moving ball bearing, then the game think the vessel is static/not moving.

But it really should be something you can toggle.. Just simply right click a vessel and have a option to make it physicsless.

[Champ]

Squad is failing hard on their PR, and I (as well as most of the community) feel it is because they are getting ready to sell out.

Source ?

I (and most of the community) think you should not be talking about what I (and most of the community) think or feel, without strong evidence.

[r4pt0r]

Source ?

I (and most of the community) think you should not be talking about what I (and most of the community) think or feel, without strong evidence.

Well I for one have those same fears. time will tell.

[Mikki]

"Never start believing others believe the same as you. Dont believe anything at all and start using your mind. When you start using your mind you can begin to live as a normal person as most other people do...

Normal behavior can be described as carefull to yourself and others. Nothing is dying, anything is dying. Sorry, but this Thread should be closed for good reason. Its annoying." Mikki

[zekes]

don't worry, at least I'm back.

The community has been dying since mid-2014, in my opinion. People really stopped caring, and by 2015 I was going on facebook or other places to show my craft. It's just bone dry here on the fourms.

[Yukon0009]

But then again a quiet forum is better than an overflowing, bursting, utterly obnoxious one full of Pewdipie fans.

[katateochi]

I dont think that is a solution either, since that could mess up alot of interesting things you can do now using mods. Like if you for example have something on a freely moving ball bearing, then the game think the vessel is static/not moving.

But it really should be something you can toggle.. Just simply right click a vessel and have a option to make it physicsless.

yes, you're right about free moving part thing. ok so I'd refine my previous to include it detecting any movement in a craft, be that the whole craft in motion or just a part of it, any user input and any external force (ie being bumped into by another craft, or being pushed by the engine exhaust of another craft). I think it should be an automatically controlled thing, I'm not so keen on the idea of it being manually set because you may not be able to switch it on quickly enough in certain situations, ie; coming into land right by a physics-disabled craft and you mess up and crash into it, or approaching too fast on a rover and crashing into it, in those situations it should automatically switch the physics back on just prior to the crash.

(sorry for totally off-topic discussion)

[boxman]

yes, you're right about free moving part thing. ok so I'd refine my previous to include it detecting any movement in a craft, be that the whole craft in motion or just a part of it, any user input and any external force (ie being bumped into by another craft, or being pushed by the engine exhaust of another craft). I think it should be an automatically controlled thing, I'm not so keen on the idea of it being manually set because you may not be able to switch it on quickly enough in certain situations, ie; coming into land right by a physics-disabled craft and you mess up and crash into it, or approaching too fast on a rover and crashing into it, in those situations it should automatically switch the physics back on just prior to the crash.

(sorry for totally off-topic discussion)

Might as well make it automatic but with a toggle to override it

[includao]

They need to fix the Garbage Collector, 64bits client, physx, implement Unity 5 correctly and help modders to expand this game. I have the anecdotal impression that people spend too much time trying to fix crashes and mod issues in this game. Yes, the stock game is great for awhile, but most people spend most of the time playing this game because of the mods. Mod support, performance and stability should be key issues

[katateochi]

They need to fix the Garbage Collector, 64bits client, physx, implement Unity 5 correctly and help modders to expand this game. I have the anecdotal impression that people spend too much time trying to fix crashes and mod issues in this game. Yes, the stock game is great for awhile, but most people spend most of the time playing this game because of the mods. Mod support, performance and stability should be key issues

The garbage collector is something that Unity has to fix and (if I understand things) Unity 5, while doing some things to improve it, will still be using the same GC. BUT there is quite a bit on the unity forms about how to circumnavigate the issues with the GC by being more mindful about the creation and destruction of objects. That is what Squad needs to focus on (super dull and hard work, but it needs doing).

[KAP1985]

>the community is dying

I knew there was something my doctor wasn't telling me

[Camaron]

"Most users ever online was 5,907, 1st May 2015 at 11:16"

That wasn't too long ago. Dying? Hardly.

[Frank_G]

Oh it died, or was said it was, again... But... All the veterans are still here, together with lots of fresh members. Both the community and the game are far from dying. Its just another phase between two hype waves. That is no mountain...

[Starwhip]

"Most users ever online was 5,907, 1st May 2015 at 11:16"

That wasn't too long ago. Dying? Hardly.

And it was just days after the release of 1.0, so it is expected to have so many users online.

I don't think it's dying. In fact, compared to other places this forum is insanely active. I'll admit that the rate of activity has decreased slightly but there are still new threads and new posts by the minute.

Nothing to worry about.

[Two]

Guessing the state of the game by the amount of people in the forum, is like guessing the amount of people in your country by counting the footprints in your backyard.

There are millions of reasons why people are currently not playing the game (if they actually do), for example the recent Witcher 3 release. Then there is summer (notice that hot, bright thing on the sky where you can't land on), another reason why people might just not sit in their room playing KSP. And then the recent update isn't fully rolled out yet, so in a week numbers might already be much different again.

[-RanZ-]

I don't come here much anymore because of the amount of over moderation. Threads that I may want to read or post about get moved to dead sub forums that no one posts in so unless I am really bored I hardly even browse here anymore

[Yemo]

Well, it is not only the forums.

You can also take a look at ksp related twitch and youtube activity.

But I guess it is working as intended/expected given the post 0.90 decisions/actions by squad.

[Hotblack Desiato]

9. Ark Survival Evolved became early access last week. The game, far different from the usual survival fare, is awesome. You can play it as single player,local, but you cannot pause the game when you are running it. (You risk being eaten by a carnivore.)

grrr.... thank you

another game, I just need to try because it sounds so interesting ;-)

[pxi]

*Steps away for 2 days, comes back to 29 pages of 'unread threads'*

Yep, totally dead.

[vixr]

This...

How many online forum members does it take to change a light bulb?

1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed.

14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently.

7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs.

27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs.

53 to flame the spell checkers.

41 to correct spelling/grammar flames.

6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb"...another 6 to condemn those 6 as ....-retentive

2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp".

15 know-it-alls who claim *they* were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct.

156 to email the participant's ISPs complaining that they are in violation of their "acceptable use policy".

109 to post that this group is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb group

203 to demand that cross posting to hardware forum, off-topic forum, and lightbulb group about changing light bulbs be stopped.

111 to defend the posting to this group saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts *are* relevant to this group.

306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique, and what brands are faulty.

27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs.

14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's.

3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group.

33 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too".

12 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy.

19 to quote the "Me too's" to say "Me three".

4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ.

44 to ask what is a "FAQ".

4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"

143 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs".

1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again....

[Sawyer7as]

I didn't use MechJeb to change the lightbulb.