What happened to The Barn?

[ChickenNugger429]

The (initial) barn was scrapped primarily because;

1) It was a shoddy modelling job with excruciatingly awful textures

&

2) It just didn't make sense for kerbals who are somehow competent enough to build very functional and well designed rocket components, but somehow resort to using a poorly constructed barn with rusty caravans and an observatory made out of scrap metal plates.

The argument that the barn should have stayed because it was more "kerbal like" just doesn't cut it. Kerbals are a lot more competent than they're generally made out to be.

As mentioned many times before, yes, tier 0 buildings will be coming back but the general design is more geared towards, as Maxmaps in the past put it, an "abandoned military facility". So I'm expecting it to be inspired from a V2 Rocket facility. (I remember seeing a nice model of a V2 Rocket facility on a wikipedia article, but alas I cannot find it).

[Alshain]

Wait, there are actually people who want the barn? The one that looked like being clicked together in half a day from a five year old assets library?

As opposed to the boring tier 1 & 2 buildings we have now. Abso-freaking-lutely.

What we have now (other than tier 3, which has always be beautiful) looks like they just gave up and drew a bunch of squares. No thought or effort to them at all.

[FlowerChild]

2) It just didn't make sense for kerbals who are somehow competent enough to build very functional and well designed rocket components, but somehow resort to using a poorly constructed barn with rusty caravans and an observatory made out of scrap metal plates.

That doesn't mean it's your space program personally making the components. In fact, it's suggested throughout the game that they come from external manufacturers.

I think the whole idea of starting with an amateur or hobbyist rocket launch facility and building up from there suits the game just fine, and doesn't need to imply any incompetence with regards to the Kerbal species as a whole, just about your particular space program when you're getting started.

[Bloody_looser]

We do plan to bring the "Tier 0" buildings back in the future. I'm sure that when that time comes closer we'll see some pictures

That's great, tier 0 is a must. I bet that people, saying "3 tiers are enough, omg #burythebarn" stuff, never actually played the career.

Community whinestorm destroyed tier 0 back then, and it's not good at all.

I'm really looking forward to tier 0 buildings, and don't care how they look.

Also, lack of the runway and SPH in The Barn really pleased me.

[BlueCanary]

Do you think Tier 0 will come with some appropriately Tier 0'y parts, like little 0.625m srbs, maybe corrugated iron or rusty or something?

[Fearless Son]

2) It just didn't make sense for kerbals who are somehow competent enough to build very functional and well designed rocket components, but somehow resort to using a poorly constructed barn with rusty caravans and an observatory made out of scrap metal plates.

The impression I got was that the space center facility was a piece of real-estate the Kerbal Space Program bought "as is" from some far older use that had long since past and become dilapidated. The odd construction and metal patch jobs were just to repair the old facilities to a marginally usable state on a tight budget. Once the program starts getting more funding, those older buildings are demolished and replaced with more modern facilities.

[tkw]

remember i see this i saw the barn on imgur it was scraped when update released

Edited August 7, 2015 by tkw

[SickSix]

Yup. For those that play a lot of career, there's a noticeable big gaping hole in the building progression where the barn was obviously supposed to go.

If you take a look at stuff like the launch mass limit and part count upgrades, they jump from tight to almost immediate irrelevance in no time, indicating there's a level(s) missing there. Internally, the building upgrade system even recognizes more levels than we currently have and has values defined for them.

I personally don't care what they look like, I'd just really like to see that progression be more fleshed out (as it was intended to be) from a gameplay perspective.

Exactly this!

There are clear 'skips' in the building progression and I just want 'a' barn because it's perfectly 'kerbal'.

[yardpup01]

The impression I got was that the space center facility was a piece of real-estate the Kerbal Space Program bought "as is" from some far older use that had long since past and become dilapidated. The odd construction and metal patch jobs were just to repair the old facilities to a marginally usable state on a tight budget. Once the program starts getting more funding, those older buildings are demolished and replaced with more modern facilities.

I agree with this. I think the difference of opinions comes down to how people interpret the nonexistent canon of the game. Do you think KSC was started by a few Kerbals big on ideas, but short on cash? You probably liked the barn concept if not the actual modelling. Do you think KSC was started as an effort of the entire Kerbal society with the full backing of said society? You probably hate the barn.

Similar to this: did they by the land as-is and tier-0 was minimally altered by the kerbals, or did they design and build tier-0? I think people object to the idea that the Kerbals built the barn rather than bought it.

At least, that's what I've interpreted from the numerous debates.

[razark]

Bring in a tier 0. Fine. But dump the stupid "craptastic" theme.

The game starts off with what is in essence a Mercury or Vostok level spacecraft. It doesn't fit with the barn. It doesn't belong at a space center made of trash, covered in trash, and decorated with more trash. The whole "Kerbals are dumb and build crap and it goes boom!" thing is tired. It should die.

And before someone posts the same pictures and "But look at what Goddard started with!" or the "Look at how NASA started with V2s in New Mexico!", take a look at those pictures. Goddard was building his own rockets. They were primitive technology, not orbital spaceships. Yes, the US was launching those V2s out of temporary buildings. Fine. But they were rather well taken care of professionally built buildings. They weren't covered in rust, or falling apart, or have silly cartoon looking patches holding them together. And again, they weren't launching Mercury capsules. And they sure as hell didn't scatter rusted out cars and other junk everywhere they could.

Starting the game at an early, make-shift space center is a great idea. It just needs to drop the trashed-out "joke", and it needs to make sense. Launching small suborbital sounding rockets from a barn makes sense. Vostok? No.

[Hcube]

Bring in a tier 0. Fine. But dump the stupid "craptastic" theme.

The game starts off with what is in essence a Mercury or Vostok level spacecraft. It doesn't fit with the barn. It doesn't belong at a space center made of trash, covered in trash, and decorated with more trash. The whole "Kerbals are dumb and build crap and it goes boom!" thing is tired. It should die.

And before someone posts the same pictures and "But look at what Goddard started with!" or the "Look at how NASA started with V2s in New Mexico!", take a look at those pictures. Goddard was building his own rockets. They were primitive technology, not orbital spaceships. Yes, the US was launching those V2s out of temporary buildings. Fine. But they were rather well taken care of professionally built buildings. They weren't covered in rust, or falling apart, or have silly cartoon looking patches holding them together. And again, they weren't launching Mercury capsules. And they sure as hell didn't scatter rusted out cars and other junk everywhere they could.

Starting the game at an early, make-shift space center is a great idea. It just needs to drop the trashed-out "joke", and it needs to make sense. Launching small suborbital sounding rockets from a barn makes sense. Vostok? No.

THANK YOU.

That's where the barn problem is (in my opinion) : why are we starting with the Mercury program ? If we were starting with sounding rockets and V2s, (aka starting with probes and .625m engines), the barn would fit per-fect-ly into the game, and the announced military-kinda-revisited-barn stuff would fit even better. But even though, the "craptastic" (as you wonderfully say ) theme should be dumped at all costs and sent to Dres.

[cantab]

why are we starting with the Mercury program ?

One word: Jeb.

[Goddess Bhavani]

THANK YOU.

That's where the barn problem is (in my opinion) : why are we starting with the Mercury program ? If we were starting with sounding rockets and V2s, (aka starting with probes and .625m engines), the barn would fit per-fect-ly into the game, and the announced military-kinda-revisited-barn stuff would fit even better. But even though, the "craptastic" (as you wonderfully say ) theme should be dumped at all costs and sent to Dres.

This!

I would like a stock option for unmanned start, with sounding or model rockets and trailer parks. But make it an option, so anti-barn activists can start instead with Mercury rockets while pro-barn enthusiasts like me will spend weeks and weeks driving pickup trucks, having tailgate parties and launching model rockets all over the place until random science is achieved.

Infact that's how I start off my craptastic -1000 rep, no money careers. With a sounding rocket mod

[mythbusters844]

Bring in a tier 0. Fine. But dump the stupid "craptastic" theme.

The game starts off with what is in essence a Mercury or Vostok level spacecraft. It doesn't fit with the barn. It doesn't belong at a space center made of trash, covered in trash, and decorated with more trash. The whole "Kerbals are dumb and build crap and it goes boom!" thing is tired. It should die.

And before someone posts the same pictures and "But look at what Goddard started with!" or the "Look at how NASA started with V2s in New Mexico!", take a look at those pictures. Goddard was building his own rockets. They were primitive technology, not orbital spaceships. Yes, the US was launching those V2s out of temporary buildings. Fine. But they were rather well taken care of professionally built buildings. They weren't covered in rust, or falling apart, or have silly cartoon looking patches holding them together. And again, they weren't launching Mercury capsules. And they sure as hell didn't scatter rusted out cars and other junk everywhere they could.

Starting the game at an early, make-shift space center is a great idea. It just needs to drop the trashed-out "joke", and it needs to make sense. Launching small suborbital sounding rockets from a barn makes sense. Vostok? No.

Completely agreed. It'd be even more interesting if you started out with a horizontal assembly building with rails that went to the launchpad and you later progressed to a proper VAB with crawlerways.

remember i see this i saw the barn on imgur it was scraped when update released

Yeah, it was. It's why this thread was made .

Edited August 8, 2015 by mythbusters844

[The Yellow Dart]

We do plan to bring the "Tier 0" buildings back in the future. I'm sure that when that time comes closer we'll see some pictures

Yay!

I love the idea of really starting at the bottom. The only problem I would have is with the look and design of the building itself, as others have said. I would like a real barn, not that monstrosity that is neither a barn nor a VAB. I would like to see something that, as Fearless Son said, looks like it was there when they got the land and didn't have the budget to build something for their purposes yet. Also, the appearance of the old barn just raised lots of questions for me, like why is it so tall if the lowest tier has a height limit far below that size? And since it is obviously supposed to look vaguely like it was there beforehand, what with the presence of silos, etc., why does it have a VAB-like door on it? and what farmer would ever have a barn that tall?

I think what we should have at tier 0 is a mishmash of old world and space age things. A real red, wooden, large-but-appropriately-sized barn that actually looks like a barn with perhaps a hastily added rocket-shaped 2nd door above the main door to allow a small rocket to be rolled out vertically. Next to it could be some modern, spherical fuel tanks that would have to be added. As for the rest of the stuff in that imgur album, I'd say it goes a little to far. We get the point that it is the bottom tier. We don't need loads of trailers and wrecked cars and an observatory that would be more at home in a Zelda game. Designers...Make it work!

[Whirligig Girl]

Just with more fire damage and green swimming pool water.

Fixed that for you.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, I'm curious where it went too.

Hahahaha! Those buildings not only don't really look like something you'd find in a space center, they're also pretty...bad. Reminds me of when this happened:

http://i.imgur.com/I6OaQ95.png

Also reminder that 1 person (bac9) made a better set of buildings in the same amount or less time than three hardworking people at Squad did over the course of more than half a year.

Yeah, Kerbals clip through parts of the floor in VAB interior, there are floating paint marks, and a few see-through holes in the door of the VAB, a whole plenty of other failures in the space center design. And I have to say I don't like the blue/brown color scheme. It would have made more sense for Tier 1 or 2 to resemble the Bac9 models of the island runway.

But compared to the early pics of the Barn, what we have is great.

[SpacedCowboy]

I'm sorry but the barn thing is just ridiculous. "Here comes Jeb on his John , oops, Jeb Deer tractor. Oh' sorry Jeb, we forgot to tell you, despite the fact that we have basic rocketry, the "wheel" has not yet been invented! * wheels disappear and tractor turns into a "Rove Mate" * ( Green Acres theme in background )

[pincushionman]

Put me in the "barn isn't so bad" camp - as a concept. The artwork did seem to me to be more cartoon than the style of…well, everything else in the game. But I can totally go for the bunch-of-guys-and-gals-with-bigger-ideas-than-budget aesthetic it appears they were gunning for - it seems to fit the game (or a game, really) better than a this-is-a-realistic-history-of-rockets! take. Though I agree a whole upgrade cycle of uber-small, less-capability-than-Stayputnik parts to complement that tier would not be a bad thing for career.

And I thought the last mention in a devnotes might have been that Tier 0 may become more of an industrial park look. Which is okay, I guess.

Oh, and thanks for chiming in, Kasp - it's good to see that you guys still do check on the pulse, even if only intermittently.

And one last thing - i'd be totally down with #bringbackthebarn…as a ground scatter on grasslands! We need more signs of life, man.

[Slam_Jones]

I liked the barn. Granted, after taking a second look at it, the textures could use a lot of work, but overall I really like the concept.

Also, ^^ barns as terrain scatter = genius

Edited August 8, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Goddess Bhavani]

I liked the barn. Granted, after taking a second look at it, the textures could use a lot of work, but overall I really like the concept.

Also, ^^ barns as terrain scatter = genius

Is it too much to ask to add cows, roads, random outhouses, windmills, huge tracts of farmland, and herds of sheep at the same time

[Broax]

Well... Apparently I haven't been receiving any notifications on this thread and had no idea it had 5 pages worth of replies including one from Kasper... I'm baffled!

Just to clarify some replies:

I don't necesseraly want THE barn but A barn (as someone put it).

The concept is not totally stupid. I remember someone once posted an early NASA photo (which I can't find... ) and it kinda looked like a barn...

Most of all I just think it lends itself to the whole Kerbal thing. Starting with glorified water rockets on a barn and ending exploring the universe.

That being said, I'd love to see the barn make a comeback! I'm real glad to see Tier0 is planned!

[martinborgen]

Barn goes well with whole "found by the side of the road" thing

[mythbusters844]

Well... Apparently I haven't been receiving any notifications on this thread and had no idea it had 5 pages worth of replies including one from Kasper... I'm baffled!

Just to clarify some replies:

I don't necesseraly want THE barn but A barn (as someone put it).

The concept is not totally stupid. I remember someone once posted an early NASA photo (which I can't find... ) and it kinda looked like a barn...

Most of all I just think it lends itself to the whole Kerbal thing. Starting with glorified water rockets on a barn and ending exploring the universe.

That being said, I'd love to see the barn make a comeback! I'm real glad to see Tier0 is planned!

I agree that the concept is pretty funny, but they way they pulled it off was terrible. They could've gone with the classic american red barn design, but they did this instead:

Also, what the hell? A green door???

Full album if you don't feel nauseous:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Also, here's a relevant Reddit post pointing out the flaws of the barn.

Oh, and concerning the post I linked to above, I found bac9's comment here, and it's obvious that Squad didn't listen to him at all when they made the tier one and tier two buildings, especially the dirt runway and crawlerway:

Look at that transition between the dirt and the grass...

God, that crawlerway is a terrible model.

[Broax]

I agree that the concept is pretty funny, but they way they pulled it off was terrible. They could've gone with the classic american red barn design, but they did this instead:

http://i.imgur.com/c7b3Kpl.jpg

Also, what the hell? A green door???

Full album if you don't feel nauseous:

http://imgur.com/a/G2sUx

Also, here's a relevant Reddit post pointing out the flaws of the barn.

Oh, and concerning the post I linked to above, I found bac9's comment here, and it's obvious that Squad didn't listen to him at all when they made the tier one and tier two buildings, especially the dirt runway and crawlerway:

http://i.imgur.com/q40sozx.png

Look at that transition between the dirt and the grass...

http://i.imgur.com/MzAJ5xL.png

God, that crawlerway is a terrible model.

I agree that these models weren't that good (personally the thing that bugged me the most was actually those green textures on doors and such)... But the whole concept seems funny to me... I reminds me of a post on the city lights mod where someone asked why we have city lights before cities and someone replied "it's the kerbal way!"...

[mythbusters844]

I agree that these models weren't that good (personally the thing that bugged me the most was actually those green textures on doors and such)... But the whole concept seems funny to me... I reminds me of a post on the city lights mod where someone asked why we have city lights before cities and someone replied "it's the kerbal way!"...

Good point, but I feel that these paragraphs by Bac9 from his KSC blog are relevant.

It’s not Kerbal? *shrug* For some reason some people like to think Kerbals are sloppy engineers only capable of producing inherently broken designs held together by duct tape. To them, proposing something prim and proper like a NASA VAB could be built by Kerbals is ridiculous. Well, I disagree. Take a good look at the parts: at the LV-N engine, at 3-man pod, at the landing legs, at ion engine. Those are cleanly executed pieces of impressive technology. Kerbals are indifferent to safety precautions and are very excited about explosions, yes, but they make an impression of extremely capable and very competent engineers. Sure, we know they probably turned a construction crane into a vomit carousel or raced on bulldozers in the process, but I don't doubt for one second they can build buildings similar to real ones, and I don't think it would be out of character for them. Plenty of other stuff like engines is fairly close to how our human rockets look. It's unfair to mistake Kerbals for Orks from a “Certain Universe With 40k In The Name,†or to expect them to build sloppy duct-taped huts.

Overall, I'm convinced the obsession with disasters and perception of Kerbals as worthless engineers only caring about explosions is destructive for the game. KSP deserves much more than being a glorified disaster simulator where rockets falling apart and crews being killed is the prime entertainment and the only expected result. The achievements of players who strive to be successful, who create beautiful, well-engineered, reliable designs, should never be devalued, and the opinion that going to space is impossibly hard deserves to be crushed and disproved over and over again. Kerbals are capable engineers and it's up to the player to utilize their technology well.

This same mindset is harming the game in many other areas as well. The bugs of the physics system aren't there because we thought they would be fun and don't deserve to be defended as some players surprisingly do. The achievements of reaching orbit, landing on another body or even establishing a permanent base somewhere should not be perceived as something impossibly hard and unreachable for anyone but hardcore players. Everything is possible if you are willing to learn and there is no reason to restrict yourself to playing a disaster simulator with rocket cars or insta-exploding space planes. Justifying that to yourself by creating a certain mental image of Kerbal engineers competency might make the game better for you but I’m striving for a greater Kerbal good.

Now, I'm not opposed to having fun at all. For instance, I have nothing against the KSP trailers made by our Pixar-tier magician Daniel Rosas which often depict Kerbals ignoring safety and having good fun. Part of the charm of KSP is the opportunity to take enormous risks, ignore established paradigms and experiment freely, which can often leads to great successes and interesting stories to tell. That is not clashing in the slightest with the fact that you have nice, cleanly made, technologically impressive spacecraft parts available to you, or well-built buildings to assemble your creations in - all without any sign of duct tape, rust or sloppy welding. So, basically, I feel objects in the game should continue to be clean and well-built to be consistent with the existing art style, and I'm convinced reinforcing the widespread opinion of Kerbals being incompetent is very harmful for the game. So there you have it.