Andem Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 3 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said: right now, IVA has no function at all beyond seeing what the kerbals are seeing. You cannot roam your vessel in IVA. Right now, this cutaway "feature" is 100% USELESS. 100% WASTE OF DEVELOPMENT TIME. This is a feature that, frankly has no worth what so bloody ever. It just shows that, in all honesty, their developmental priorities are SKEWED in the absolute WORST direction possible. I say this, because right now, we have other things that need attention, fixing bugs, fixing other issues. not implementing the most pointless feature ever. NOW, with that said, IF this is some hint at being able to move around in IVA come 1.1 then, I will publicly retract my dissonant statement, but, until such a thing is 100% swear on a bible in court under oath proven, then, i am utterly dismayed at the fact they have wasted time on frivolity over actual needed work. Torches are to my right, pitchforks to my left. I'm not saying this to be inflamatory, but, really? Honestly, did people freak out this much when they added IVAs? While it may be a small cosmetic thing, people are going to enjoy it, or thry simply won't use it. SQAUD is a team, not a single hive mind that can only focus on ond thing at a time. In all likelyhood one of the Devs needed something new to do and posed it as a feature. It's not going to shatter the game, and any bugs involved with it will be accrpted by the time 1.1 is released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourist Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) 13 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said: right now, IVA has no function at all beyond seeing what the kerbals are seeing. You cannot roam your vessel in IVA. Right now, this cutaway "feature" is 100% USELESS. 100% WASTE OF DEVELOPMENT TIME. This is a feature that, frankly has no worth what so bloody ever. It just shows that, in all honesty, their developmental priorities are SKEWED in the absolute WORST direction possible. I say this, because right now, we have other things that need attention, fixing bugs, fixing other issues. not implementing the most pointless feature ever. NOW, with that said, IF this is some hint at being able to move around in IVA come 1.1 then, I will publicly retract my dissonant statement, but, until such a thing is 100% swear on a bible in court under oath proven, then, i am utterly dismayed at the fact they have wasted time on frivolity over actual needed work. Torches are to my right, pitchforks to my left. Exactly my friend, but you have not gone far enough. All the textures, colors, and graphic frivolities are completely unnecessary for gameplay. What we need is a simple wireframe model, operating in a simple wireframe representation of Kerbol. I mean, jeez, why are they wasting time on Kerbal expressions, suits, etc at all, when a stick figure would easily suffice. Please hand me one pitchfolk please.... but one of the simple two pronged ones... I'm not one of these big city dandies needing three prongs. Edited March 11, 2016 by Tourist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razark Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 20 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said: ... 100% USELESS. 100% WASTE OF DEVELOPMENT TIME. ... no worth what so bloody ever. ... developmental priorities are SKEWED in the absolute WORST direction possible. ... most pointless feature ever. ... wasted time on frivolity... Seriously, and as someone that isn't thrilled with this feature, have you read your own forum signature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kujuman Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 my thoughts on this IVA on external views are (1) some IVAs are STUNNING, especially mod ones. But IVA is hard to do anything in: I could see turning this on while doing a burn or something just for kicks :-) (2) it seems like something that is a dev step towards transparent windows--a way to test that IVA orientations are correct and such. Easy to just make a dev thing in the public release (like the aero debug lines :-) ... Just no thermal men leak please :-P ) (3) if textures are revisited for the new shader possibilities in U5, that seems like a reasonable time to mod the textures to have actual windows--only have to touch the texture once then (4) clouds, aero visuals, emissives, flags on certain parts, water being blue, the kerbal eye gap bug, the new (at the time) VAB and SPH internals, the kerbal workers in the VAB and so forth are all just visual enhancements that could be or are in the game. Some are more resource intense than the others, but they all contribute to the game (and who knows, maybe the IVA pics sell KSP to more people to enjoy :-) ) point is, Kerbal Telemetry Simulator could have the same physics as KSP, but it sure would feel different :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullMetalMachinist Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 33 minutes ago, Tourist said: Exactly my friend, but you have not gone far enough. All the textures, colors, and graphic frivolities are completely unnecessary for gameplay. What we need is a simple wireframe model, operating in a simple wireframe representation of Kerbol. I mean, jeez, why are they wasting time on Kerbal expressions, suits, etc at all, when a stick figure would easily suffice. Please hand me one pitchfolk please.... but one of the simple two pronged ones... I'm not one of these big city dandies needing three prongs. Heck, why even have a flight view? If you add the ability to stage from the map view everything you need to do can be done in the map view with the nav ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoloYolo Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 I'm no game developer but this is a pointless feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andem Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Yes, we definitely need to turn ksp into dwarf fortress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drillgorg Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 What is wrong with you guys? Ungrateful! This is the best feature I've seen in KSP in a long time. By far my favorite new feature in 1.1. Keep rockin' it SQUAD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andem Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Drillgorg said: What is wrong with you guys? Ungrateful! This is the best feature I've seen in KSP in a long time. By far my favorite new feature in 1.1. Keep rockin' it SQUAD! I wouldn't go THAT far, but I don't think hunting down SQAUD with pitchforks and shotguns is justified in any way... Edited March 11, 2016 by Andem Thimbs-- Damnit, I meant Thumbs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pthigrivi Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Man I leave this place for a second and it turns into 1790's France. Just chill for second. This is a pretty simple cosmetic change so the game feels more spatially complete. Its cool I promise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andem Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 1 minute ago, Pthigrivi said: Man I leave this place for a second and it turns into 1790's France. Just chill for second. This is a pretty simple cosmetic change so the game feels more spatially complete. Its cool I promise. Heh, I was thinking Tsar Nicholas's coronation, with pretzels being replaced with bugfixes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 What does Squad think this is, a GAME!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangle Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 44 minutes ago, Andem said: Yes, we definitely need to turn ksp into dwarf fortress. I agree. Finally, giant centrifugal habitats will be cooler! "WEEK 7: Three Kerbals died of dysentery." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourist Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, FullMetalMachinist said: Heck, why even have a flight view? If you add the ability to stage from the map view everything you need to do can be done in the map view with the nav ball. Now you're onto something. But you still don't seem to see the big picture. Anything you can do with a navball and map view, you can do with graph paper and a calculator. Edited March 11, 2016 by Tourist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andem Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 5 minutes ago, Tourist said: Now your onto something. But you still seem to not see the big picture. Anything you can do with a navball and map view, you can do with graph paper and calculator. Better yet, two rulers, a stylus, and an unpaved lot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HvP Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 I like it. No complaints here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvath85 Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) Good lord. The first fluff piece leaks from a new major release (something that, with Unity 5, would have taken *up to* 10 development hours) and y'all jump all over how unnecessary it is. Ungrateful. Couple points here. 1. This is a game. A vast majority of players play it as just that...a game. Not a lifestyle. A vast majority of players will never see this forum. They will not see all the drama, but what they *will* see is a cool, pretty looking feature that gives people playing the *game* something to look at. 2. As stated, in U 5 this took maybe 10 hours to do. There are times in the development cycle where, say I'm a graphics/models developer. I have nothing to do. I may be waiting on a different department to finish something, or I just may be done with my queue of issues. Would you rather a developer sits on their hands while waiting for something to do, or does something simple and productive (it's basically just overlaying a transparency plane)? This community went sooooo downhill these past couple weeks as 1.1 got closer. I understand the hype but you're expectations are rediculous. "Don't do this, it might break that." That's not how you develop software. Bash SQUAD for doing a 1.1 pre-release and not just going release, then bash them for trying to add new features, because it might cause bugs (when the pre-release is there to hammer out the bugs). That makes sense. Flame me all you want, I don't care, but the whiners on this forum about "it better not mess up my game" absolutely ruin this forum. I started actively posting only a week or so ago, but I browsed the forums for years. I really hope no one new tries to come to these forums over the next few weeks looking for input before buying the game. Embarrasing. Y'all need to chill out and wait for the release before you bash the people who pour everything into the GAME you're PLAYING. Edited March 11, 2016 by Korvath85 Typos - prevent additional flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regex Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Man, this thread got hilarious fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andem Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Yup, so much for staying on topic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbart Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said: right now, IVA has no function at all beyond seeing what the kerbals are seeing. You cannot roam your vessel in IVA. Right now, this cutaway "feature" is 100% USELESS. 100% WASTE OF DEVELOPMENT TIME. This is a feature that, frankly has no worth what so bloody ever. It just shows that, in all honesty, their developmental priorities are SKEWED in the absolute WORST direction possible. I say this, because right now, we have other things that need attention, fixing bugs, fixing other issues. not implementing the most pointless feature ever. NOW, with that said, IF this is some hint at being able to move around in IVA come 1.1 then, I will publicly retract my dissonant statement, but, until such a thing is 100% swear on a bible in court under oath proven, then, i am utterly dismayed at the fact they have wasted time on frivolity over actual needed work. Torches are to my right, pitchforks to my left. Haha, excellent piece of parody on all the hate a simple feature (likely with 0% effort by Squad) manages to create in the forum here. For a second I thought you were serious, but then you went so over the top... still, good job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buster Charlie Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, AlamoVampire said: Right now, this cutaway "feature" is 100% USELESS. 100% WASTE OF DEVELOPMENT TIME. This is a feature that, frankly has no worth what so bloody ever. I was going to say this looks like a fun and enjoyable bonus feature, but after that statement I realize how wrong and stupid I was to think I might gain gaming enjoyment. I'm glad you set the record straight. On a related note I would like to point out other features that are particularly 100% useless waste of developers times: All textures, and models - The simulation uses a hitbox to detect collisions so we really could play the core rocket simulation with just flat shaded collision meshes instead of higher polycount texture mapped meshes. All sounds - This possibly required hiring a Sound guy, or at least buying stock sound effects, all resources that would be better served at fixing bugs instead of frivolities. Lighting and shadow maps - If you need to represent the dark side of a planet for solar panels, then I suggest vertex lighting was good enough for the 90's it's good enough for today, and it saves a lot of time for bug fixing. Planets that are hard to get too or too easy to get to: Why bother put all this effort into a planet that is too hard to get to, if nobody can get there easily, then it's a waste of time because you'd be better off working on something everyone can enjoy! Also planets that are too easy to visit are 100% useless because they have no challenge and nobody will want to go to a planet that's too easy to go to! Career mode - Why are you taking time away from my Space Plane simulator to try and build a game mode!?! Science Points - Why is this even needed if we have sandbox mode? Seriously, waste of time! Get rid of the tech tree... WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE DIFFERENT SIZED FUEL TANKS! YOU SHOULD ONLY INCLUDE THE ONES THAT ARE USEFUL! WHY HAVE STUFF I DONT USE! WHY!!!!!!! !!ONE!! Edited March 11, 2016 by Buster Charlie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlamoVampire Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 3 hours ago, razark said: Seriously, and as someone that isn't thrilled with this feature, have you read your own forum signature? cherry pick much? if you had actually read the entire thing, you would have caught a very key line: NOW, with that said, IF this is some hint at being able to move around in IVA come 1.1 then, I will publicly retract my dissonant statement Ignoring that line makes your statement make sense, however, NOT ignoring that line makes you sound like your cherry picking. My dismay at the cutaway thing is based on squad deliberately not telling us the ENTIRE story around this one feature. I can only react based on what Das Valdez found and was permitted to say. There is 0 context to it, 0 explanation to it, so, my dismay is based on a lack of information, hence me saying, now for the SECOND TIME: IF this is some hint at being able to move around in IVA come 1.1, then I will publicly retract my dissonant statement. Razark you seem have always seemed to me to be a good person, I trust we now see eye to eye on at least an understanding of my side of how I am seeing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor9 Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 24 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said: [snip] My dismay at the cutaway thing is based on squad deliberately not telling us the ENTIRE story around this one feature. I can only react based on what Das Valdez found and was permitted to say. There is 0 context to it, 0 explanation to it, so, my dismay is based on a lack of information [snip] @AlamoVampire I'm not directing this at you, I'm bringing up this portion of what you said to offer a (hopefully neutral) observation of my own to this thread. To everyone on both sides of what has apparently turned into a hot debate: Can we please all chill out about the cutaway preview image. Like what @AlamoVampire stated, we don't know the entire story, this all is only based on a few static images that were published shortly after the 1.1 update entered experimentals. We have no context or explanation beyond these few images. Since this is one of the very few previews we have seen, let's not loose our minds over it and incite flame wars on other forum users, when nobody has any accurate idea of what the whole of the update will be like. I know I'm not a moderator, but I don't understand the drama over such a small little thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frybert Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 "Everything wrong with" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regex Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 13 minutes ago, Raptor9 said: I don't understand the drama over such a small little thing. It's manufactured, just roll with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts