I've been saying this for years... now someone other than Squad is realizing it.

[Fengist]

One of my biggest complaints about KSP has been the lack of things to do. Once you get where you're going, there's really no point in being there and nothing to do when you do get there. The planets are lifeless, the science is a gooey joke and the only reason to be on the surface of a planet is to say you've been there or drill for ore so you can reach further destinations and do... what? I can't even begin to calculate the number of rockets, aircraft, rovers and bases that I've created in the past few years only to scrap them entirely when the 'mission' was complete? Why? No point in them existing.

But Squad has been too busy adding useless things, like heat and silly pointy aerodynamic overlays that serve no purpose other than eye candy, rather than providing a continuing source of entertainment.

Well, someone was listening.

Astroneer

And guess what they're comparing it to?

MSN Article on Astroneer

If fear if Squad continues their ostrich approach to immersion that it's going to be just like many of the games we remember, like Age of Empires. It may define a genra of games but if they don't wake up, it's going to quickly become another dust collector on the shelf.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Fengist

[Yukon0009]

Yes. This.

[Majorjim!]

Yes a thousand times THIS!

We too have been saying this for years. Squad there is absolutely nothing of worth or excitement to do once you land on a planet!

We can only hope they will dedicate some time to this once the finished game is finished.. I wouldn't hold your breath though.

[Yukon0009]

The only real thing keeping me in the game now is RSS/RO. Squad, you seriously need to look into this. Maybe a dumbed down (or full on, I'm happy) version of KAS/KIS would be really good.

[dom700]

Oh look, someone made Clonk Extreme.... *yawn*

[Azimech]

Interesting and only logical this would happen, but KSP is unique in it's class, has a huge head start and has an ever growing community.

If Squad uses them well, their resources will grow, and they'll be able to invest more.

And although space exploration is fun for a while, I see the editor as it's most important part, and I would love to see a parallel product focused on engineering.

This year, I've spent 95% of my time designing and testing stuff, I hardly touched career mode. And I know there's a growing number of people who are bored with space exploration but recognize what a side project can become in the future: an excellent tool for teaching science and engineering to kids.

Imagine a product where teams design and build their own engines, gearboxes, frames and suspension, then race each other.

[Harry Rhodan]

If fear if Squad continues their ostrich approach to immersion that it's going to be just like many of the games we remember, like Age of Empires. It may define a genra of games but if they don't wake up, it's going to quickly become another dust collector on the shelf.

The defining game for Astroneer seems to be Minecraft and not KSP. That's no competition but a completely different game while KSP will continue to occupy its small niche that most of the gaming world doesn't care about.

[Kobymaru]

But Squad has been too busy adding useless things, like heat and silly pointy aerodynamic overlays that serve no purpose other than eye candy, rather than providing a continuing source of entertainment.

I highly, *highly* disagree with your definition of useless things. Heat is a very real problem in space, and KSP has always been about making stuff hard, because it's hard in real life and then letting the player figure out solutions.

Pointy aerodynamics overlays are a consequence of realistic aerodynamics, which I appreciate a lot. The previous souposphere was ridiculous, and now I actually have fun building planes and aerodynamic rockets instead of pancakes. Pancake rockets are stupid, diving head on into an atmosphere with thousands of m/s in excess velocity and then surviving this is even more stupid. Thanks to Squad for heat, thanks to Squad for Aerodynamics.

One of my biggest complaints about KSP has been the lack of things to do. Once you get where you're going, there's really no point in being there and nothing to do when you do get there. The planets are lifeless, the science is a gooey joke and the only reason to be on the surface of a planet is to say you've been there or drill for ore so you can reach further destinations and do... what? I can't even begin to calculate the number of rockets, aircraft, rovers and bases that I've created in the past few years only to scrap them entirely when the 'mission' was complete? Why? No point in them existing.

I kind of agree with you here - but Squad has limited ressources (no, money alone does not make you omnipotent in developing games), and their focus was a different one. I kinda liked that focus, but I would agree that "having something to do" once you are there would be a nice cherry on top.

Astroneer

And guess what they're comparing it to?

MSN Article on Astroneer

Concept art on a website is not a game. Show me a demo, then we can talk. Let's see what Squad comes up with, before this thing even reaches alpha.

Especially this quote from the article makes me sceptical:

The game is still in early development, and it's only poised to hit Windows PCs (via Steam) at an undetermined point in the future.

A startup with a great game idea posting concept art and ideas, without a specific time frame? Yeah, I think I've heard that story a few times.

[WOODY01]

It does look interesting. It seems this is focused on doing stuff on the surface and not getting there like KSP.

So in the Astroneer it looks like you will not be designing your own vehicles to get there or even if you will travel there. Seems more like you will just select a planet from a list and begin building. Just judging by the concept art and vid.

I would love to see a merger of the two concepts, KSP could really use some interesting things to do once you get to a planet or moon.

[WWEdeadman]

The defining game for Astroneer seems to be Minecraft and not KSP.

This.

Seriously, as someone who has 266 steam hours on KSP + at least another 300 on modded non-steam installs, Astroneer doesn't look all that interesting to me. It looks more like a cross of Take on Mars and Minecraft. I can't see this be competition for KSP in any way.

Sure, having any sort of actual things to do on Planets and Moons once you landed there, would definitely be a good addition to KSP. However, I don't see it as a crucial thing that needs to be added ASAP.

Edited October 8, 2015 by WWEdeadman

[Yukon0009]

Astroneer probably isn't the same type of game as KSP, but more of what a KSP 2.0 might look like with the original spirit of KSP (these are kerbals, not humans) added in maybe.

[Mister Dilsby]

One thing I do not see in any of the Astroneer art: a single rocket launch. Looks like getting to the planet is assumed, and maybe you construct stuff there starting from a delivered base. Could be a VERY interesting game if Astroneer included all the rocket stuff from KSP or (my preference!) if KSP incorporated some or all of the in-situ part building stuff from Astroneer. Though I shudder to think how big the persistence files would be in that eventuality...

[J.Random]

Looks like a discount "No Man's Sky".

[Gilph]

The OP original point is very valid, regardless of the other programs and their capability. The "game" part of KSP needs an awful lot of work.

I started in July, and started with career mode, because that was the "game" part. It was a good lesson on how to balance funds, progressively create larger and more expensive things, go back and simplify things once you learned some lessons, etc. Cheap contracts forced you to optimize, or you lost money. You can play hard mode, have addons for realism, and things to make it a challenge. All of that was wonderful.

But, the base part of KSP relies too much on outside add ons to make it fun in the long term. They are trying to fix the issues with contracts, and that is great and sorely needed. But I agree they seem to prioritize the wrong things. Making heat a complicated model that needed to be fixed constantly was not good. Adding this communications relay part is not terribly interesting. There is actually no use to create a base at all for 95% of what we do, and the lack of a KAS type capability makes it really annoying. As another said, we delete our orbiting stations to replace with new ones for contracts, which is silly. Mining ISRU has been the only decent long term objective and people have had very creative implementations, but that should be enabling you to do something else.

If version 1.1 was just the Unity5/64bit upgrade, I would have been very happy with that. No sense in building a bigger castle in a swamp. But, once they create a stable base, they should start concentrating on some things that make this engaging to play in the long term.

Gilph

[sal_vager]

Is their anything to Astroneers other than pretty pictures and a video yet? A demo perhaps?

While it looks very nice, it looks like (yet another, seriously the market is getting flooded) minecraft game just with an extra-planetary setting, with no indication that there are any orbital mechanics.

While it is understandable that you want more to do in KSP when you get to places, I think it's a bit preemptive to suggest this game is any more like KSP than Space Engineers or Starmade.

Moved to the Space Lounge.

Edited October 8, 2015 by sal_vager

[UnionPacific1983WP]

I agree with the OP.

One of the main reasons I haven't played KSP in a while is... "I've landed on a moon of Jool. Now what?" Sure, if you're dedicated enough you can set up a whole big base with an orbiting space station, but relatively few people can actually do that, or actually have time and dedication to do so. Another reason is the stock game runs kinda slow around KSC, but maybe that'll be fixed in 1.1 or when I get hardware upgrades for my PC.

[Champ]

The OP original point is very valid, regardless of the other programs and their capability. The "game" part of KSP needs an awful lot of work.

Sorry, i dont get what you call the "game" part of the game. For me, designing and flying rocket is the game. In my opinion, KSP is basically a mix between LEGO and Orbiter

I started in July, and started with career mode, because that was the "game" part.

Carreer and science mode aren't the "game" part ?

But, the base part of KSP relies too much on outside add ons to make it fun in the long term.

Modern games are like this : a common platform, which anyone can tweak to his desires, depending on what he likes.

What I like is not necessarily what you like, and is not what others like. Some like maximum realism, some others don't bother. Some enjoy designing spacecraft, but not flying them (mechjeb ?). People have been complaining for years about the "soup" atmosphere, but Fengist apparently thinks it is "silly pointy aerodynamic overlays that serve no purpose other than eye candy". I guess you can see what i mean : everyone is different, and everyone likes different things. If squad makes the game perfect for you, they will make the game totally uninteresting for other people. How can they make everyone happy ? The only way is to provide the basic platform, and let the modders tweak the game how they like it.

They are trying to fix the issues with contracts, and that is great and sorely needed.

For you (and for me). Not for the people who prefer Sandbox.

Adding this communications relay part is not terribly interesting.

This is your opinion. Some people seem to like it. If you don't like it, be happy : it will be optional. Yes, they could have used this time to make something YOU like more, but hey, they have other customers to satisfy.

There is actually no use to create a base at all for 95% of what we do, and the lack of a KAS type capability makes it really annoying.

I don't remember Squad saying the game should not be used with mods. In fact, they seem to encourage people in using mods (Modding mondays, for example).

You can have the features you want, and i can have the features i want, what is the problem ?

As another said, we delete our orbiting stations to replace with new ones for contracts, which is silly.

As you said, this is being fixed.

Mining ISRU has been the only decent long term objective and people have had very creative implementations, but that should be enabling you to do something else.

For me, ISRU is not an objective, it's an asset. It is a way to do what you want to do.

[RainDreamer]

This feels less about building rocket than about being planet exploration. If that is the case, I feel like No man's sky is a better choice for that style. I enjoy KSP for the insane contraption I can build and the mission I can do, and although I sure would enjoy more things to do on a planet, I feel like KSP is just going to fine tune the creation aspect it started out first before it going to other things.

[Randazzo]

There is nothing like KSP. I do agree that the planetary side of things is lacking, but there's still no comparable experience out there.

It's not perfect, but I think they did an excellent job of hitting just the right balance between realistic and fun. You can never please everyone at once though, and that's to be expected.

Bottom line is KSP is an amazing gaming experience, but it is what it is. That game in the OP is something else entirely, "the other half" of the equation, perhaps. Of course, we still don't know if it sucks or not.

[Dodgey]

There are other planets in KSP? Since when? In all seriousness the point is that for a lot of people (me included) the building part of the game is 99% of the experience. As Champ said the scope of KSP is so big that it would be impossible for Squad to satisfy the majority of the players on any single topic (aside from performance). Personally KSPs reliance on mods is not a weakness but instead a strength as it brings the community together.

[Champ]

"I've landed on a moon of Jool. Now what?"

"We decide to land on Tylo, not because there are plenty of things to do there, but because it is hard"

John Fitzgerald Kerman

Edited October 8, 2015 by Champ

[Camacha]

But Squad has been too busy adding useless things, like heat and silly pointy aerodynamic overlays that serve no purpose other than eye candy, rather than providing a continuing source of entertainment.

If you are claiming that heat and aerodynamic mechanisms and anything that can make something so complex much more visual and easier to understand, you seem to be missing a large part of the point of the game.

The same goes for goals. If you want to take base X from enemy Y, play another game. The universe is big and empty, and so is the Kerbal solar system. We are alone with ourselves in this world and we will just need to make something out of it. If anything, KSP is a beautiful metaphor for the futility of existence No one tells mankind what our purpose is, we will need to create our purpose ourselves.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Camacha

[Flymetothemun]

It looks like a pretty cool game; I might just get it. Seems like a LOT more fun than KSP.

And yes, I do agree with the sentiment above that there isn't much to do in KSP. All I'm using it for nowadays is a glorified flight simulator, and I only ever fly one plane.

[LordFerret]

Pretty pictures. But, too many squares and triangles (as stars?!?) for me. Where are the ships? Who reads or believes anything coming from MSN anyway?

Someone else in here posted a video of a new upcoming game where you do fly spaceships and land on planets and collect science, play different roles, etc, all within an endless as-played-added-to generated galaxy. Seemed like a GTA5 goes to space thing. Wish I could remember the name. That game looked seriously cool.

[Robotengineer]

Looks like a pretty version of the Galacticraft mod for Minecraft. If it has real orbital mechanics, with real rocket science, I might try it.