The contract briefings...They suck.

[cubinator]

This is just one example; They're all like this. I think we all know about this, but I'd like to bring some greater attention to it. The important specifications of the contracts are fine. For instance, I can see how long it lasts, how much Science, Funds, and Rep I get, and where I need to go and what I must do. The only problem is with the briefings.

Quote

It seemed horrible for a worried-looking crew passing by FLOOYD Dynamics Research Labs, that we were getting nowhere near figuring out if a day on Kerbin was positively 6 hours long. It is true, though, that the amount of times there would be another unintended ignition was quite truly part of the reason. We now need your help.

Seriously, what the heck did that have to do with a temperature survey? A briefing should be able to tell me a little about what the agency wants me to do, such as this address to a very important organization by a very prestigious person:

Quote

I believe this nation should commit itself, to the goal, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.

The briefings in KSP are totally useless right now. They should really be improved so that they are actually straightforward and related to the contract, if not useful. If that can't be done easily, I suggest these briefings should be removed entirely until it becomes possible to do so. Otherwise, they're dead weight...which is not a great thing to have in a rocketry sim.

Edited April 17, 2016 by cubinator

[StrandedonEarth]

They're procedurally generated, and are supposed to come out sounding at least somewhat funny/amusing. I don't even bother reading them. They have better things to do than write a few hundred sensical briefings, so I can put up with nonsensical ones.

[Superfluous J]

I too don't bother reading them, which is bad because many custom contracts for Contract Configurator put real info in the summaries and I skip those too out of habit.

I work in a large company and see actual text in actual emails all the time that this text is attempting to ape, and I appreciate the joke. They get the feel correct for sure. For the record and if my boss is reading this, I never ever skip over all that text in company correspondence.

Edited April 17, 2016 by 5thHorseman

[cubinator]

1 hour ago, StrandedonEarth said:

They're procedurally generated, and are supposed to come out sounding at least somewhat funny/amusing. I don't even bother reading them.

 

1 hour ago, 5thHorseman said:

I too don't bother reading them, which is bad because many custom contracts for Contract Configurator put real info in the summaries and I skip those too out of habit.

My point is, if nobody ever reads them, then why should we have them at all?

1 hour ago, 5thHorseman said:

I work in a large company and see actual text in actual emails all the time that this text is attempting to ape, and I appreciate the joke. They get the feel correct for sure. For the record and if my boss is reading this, I never ever skip over all that text in company correspondence.

Ok, so the choppy useless feel is humorous and intentional? I can live with that, but it doesn't feel like the same kind of humor that's in, say part descriptions.

Quote

Manufacturer: Found lying by the side of the road

Quote

Manufacturer: Found behind the Clamp-O-Tron facility

Quote

You wouldn't even be able to tell if we didn't tell you it was made mostly out of scrap parts...oh.

Just my 2.

[tater]

Awful, like everything else about the contracts.

[Racescort666]

2 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

I work in a large company and see actual text in actual emails all the time that this text is attempting to ape, and I appreciate the joke. They get the feel correct for sure. For the record and if my boss is reading this, I never ever skip over all that text in company correspondence.

I wouldn't feel too bad. There are a few people I have worked with where they wouldn't read my email if it was longer than 2 sentences. If it had to be longer than 2, I'd basically have to have a bulleted list with highlights. 

Beyond the people who willfully don't read what I send them due to attention deficit, there are always people who fail to read what I send them due to incompetence. This is more frustrating.

[HebaruSan]

If CoherentContracts can mod the sentence construction, is it possible to just delete everything under the "Briefing" heading? I would find it no less usable if it started with Objectives. The expiration and duration would be gone, but I think I can count the number of times I've cared about those on one hand.

 

[tg626]

No offense intended, but I thought it was the result if an author who didn't have a full grasp of english...  some of them read a bit like engrish translations of Asian instruction manuals.

[AlamoVampire]

career mode as a whole had a whole LOT of POTENTIAL, but, Squad flushed that potential away honestly. The problems with Career mode, in NO PARTICULAR ORDER:

1. No reason to play it past the initial novelty.
2. Contracts are not logical.
3. Contracts are not linear.
4. Contracts make no sense.
5. Career Mode has no redeemable story.
6. Career Mode has no real reason to become invested in it.
7. Career Mode has no real reason to be a mode as it currently stands.
8. What reason do I have to play a mode like "Career" when it is poorly put together with no over arching story line, lack of emotional investment, lack of linear or cohesive thought?

Seriously explain to me number 8! I have a story arc going in Sandbox mode that has me emotional invested in my creations, has a linear and LOGICAL progression to it, reasons to launch certain craft certain ways. Career mode lost its novelty for me on day 1 when it FIRST ARRIVED so many updates ago. I keep thinking career mode will improve and I am consistently let down time and time and time again by a mode that is so poorly polished and thought out. 

I am not saying anyone should not play it, if you enjoy non linear, non logical thought processes being provided then, by all means have fun, but, not for me. I tell people who ask me about KSP if its a good game, I tell them this:

Kerbal Space Program is a delightful game with some heavy caveats. First, be prepared to get frustrated and addicted to it. Second, avoid career mode, its not a well done mode as it isnt linear, logical or gives a reason to invest time into that mode, Start with Sandbox first, its your best bet. It gives you all the parts and stuff at the get go. Great mode to learn in. If you want something more meaty, then go to science mode, but again, career mode isnt all that great. Its too illogical and non linear.

 

Maybe once all the big bugs are taken care of, and the engine change is done and behind us, they can redo career mode to address all 8 points above, but, till then, ugh.

<gets off soapbox, picks it up, wanders off>

[regex]

5 hours ago, cubinator said:

The briefings in KSP are totally useless right now.

Welcome to career mode.

Seriously, I actually read a few of them again tonight, was wondering why anyone bothered spending time programming that in the first place.  It's barely chuckle-worthy and then you ignore it forever.

[Blaarkies]

On 4/18/2016 at 6:16 AM, AlamoVampire said:

...
8. What reason do I have to play a mode like "Career" when it is poorly put together with no over arching story line, lack of emotional investment, lack of linear or cohesive thought?
...

I feel the same way about sandbox though. I have no use for space stations, fuel depots, mining, cost efficient launch vehicles...since i can always just add MOAR BOOSTERS! It feels silly building an interplanetary ship in orbit because I can just launch that from the ground. It seems a bad idea to even look at the reliant or flea engine when there are so many better engines to use. Who would use the sputnik probe, or folded solar panels when there are RTG's? Early jet engines quickly become the slow boring choice...

But in career mode, we must solve a problem without infinite power. This makes every fund count, we want to re-use as much of the space station as possible, we can never afford to let a kerbal die even if we hate him, we need launch vehicles under a certain launch mass and cost, with bad early tech engines. It is a very forced way for the player to think outside of the box...kind of like the struggle NASA had with the first Mercury missions where Titans Atlas's blew up left and right?

This isn't meant as an attack, none of the 3 game modes are superior to any other. I just wanted to point out that a lot of the stuff you mentioned fits perfectly when the perspective is reversed.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Blaarkies
thanks for regex correction

[regex]

4 minutes ago, Blaarkies said:

kind of like the struggle NASA had with the first Mercury missions where Titans blew up left and right?

Correction, Mercury was launched on Atlas, Gemini on Titan.

[HebaruSan]

31 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

1. No reason to play it past the initial novelty.
2. Contracts are not logical.
3. Contracts are not linear.
4. Contracts make no sense.
5. Career Mode has no redeemable story.
6. Career Mode has no real reason to become invested in it.
7. Career Mode has no real reason to be a mode as it currently stands.
8. What reason do I have to play a mode like "Career" when it is poorly put together with no over arching story line, lack of emotional investment, lack of linear or cohesive thought?

This is the same 1 or 2 things repeated several times. "Are not logical" and "make no sense" are synonyms. A story is a reason to be invested, and a reason to be invested is a reason for it to be a mode. In #8 you repeat the same words as in 3 and 5-7. "No reason to play it" is an overall conclusion based on the other points, not a fixable flaw.

I think you could trim this down to one point: "Contracts do not make up a linear story." If they did, then they'd be logical, linear, and make sense, career would have a story, you'd become invested, it would have a reason to be a mode, and you'd have a reason to play it (covering #1 and #8).

I'll second the hope for a career overhaul; the antenna changes in 1.2 might be a step in that direction (a form of progression that doesn't rely on contracts). I almost wish SQUAD would look into licensing the core engine and name to a third party that knows how to design experiences, like Blizzard or Valve or Bethesda, either for a sequel or some DLC. SQUAD gets license fees, licensee gets game sales, we get a career mode that really works well, everyone's happy.

[Mr. Scruffy]

Yes, i suggested Squad to lend the licence several months ago. Have KSP 2 from a third party, and then Squad could take it back and make 3, if they feel like it. BTW, i feel, that i got my money´s worth at this point out of KSP: I´d be okay with work on non-free content and overhauls be started, if that would speed up developement and increase overall quality of the franchise more quickly. I admire Sqaud for what they achieved so far, so dont get me wrong please. But it feels like the franchise has reached a point, where it could benefit from experienced long-term pros taking over for a while*.

On topic: I never bother to read contract-descriptions, either and wish for a story for KSP. Maybe whoever did X-Com would be a good contractor for KSP2?

*I cant look into Squad-members´ heads´, but i can imagine that after having worked on the same project for years on end, some of the initial enthusiasm gets lost - all the while fullfilling the demands of the community gets ever more difficult and the list of things-to-do gets longer, instead of shorter, with items to implement and existing stuff to overhaul.

[Starwaster]

10 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

They're procedurally generated, and are supposed to come out sounding at least somewhat funny/amusing. I don't even bother reading them. They have better things to do than write a few hundred sensical briefings, so I can put up with nonsensical ones.

^^^ This ^^^^

Seriously, people need to stop obsessing over the procedurally generated briefings. THEY ARE PROCEDURALLY GENERATED. 

Maybe a real briefing in a contract proposal wouldn't read like that, but they capture the same spirit of a bunch of blah blah blah that you would have to sit through to get to the actual details of the contract.

[Kosmognome]

5 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

career mode as a whole had a whole LOT of POTENTIAL, but, Squad flushed that potential away honestly. The problems with Career mode, in NO PARTICULAR ORDER:

1. No reason to play it past the initial novelty.
2. Contracts are not logical.
3. Contracts are not linear.
4. Contracts make no sense.
5. Career Mode has no redeemable story.
6. Career Mode has no real reason to become invested in it.
7. Career Mode has no real reason to be a mode as it currently stands.
8. What reason do I have to play a mode like "Career" when it is poorly put together with no over arching story line, lack of emotional investment, lack of linear or cohesive thought?

Seriously explain to me number 8! I have a story arc going in Sandbox mode that has me emotional invested in my creations, has a linear and LOGICAL progression to it, reasons to launch certain craft certain ways. Career mode lost its novelty for me on day 1 when it FIRST ARRIVED so many updates ago. I keep thinking career mode will improve and I am consistently let down time and time and time again by a mode that is so poorly polished and thought out. 

I am not saying anyone should not play it, if you enjoy non linear, non logical thought processes being provided then, by all means have fun, but, not for me. I tell people who ask me about KSP if its a good game, I tell them this:

Kerbal Space Program is a delightful game with some heavy caveats. First, be prepared to get frustrated and addicted to it. Second, avoid career mode, its not a well done mode as it isnt linear, logical or gives a reason to invest time into that mode, Start with Sandbox first, its your best bet. It gives you all the parts and stuff at the get go. Great mode to learn in. If you want something more meaty, then go to science mode, but again, career mode isnt all that great. Its too illogical and non linear.

 

Maybe once all the big bugs are taken care of, and the engine change is done and behind us, they can redo career mode to address all 8 points above, but, till then, ugh.

<gets off soapbox, picks it up, wanders off>

1. I completely disagree. There are several paths you can take through a career, and you can make each playthrough feel different. If you then add modding, the possibilities are literally endless

2. Disagree. Yes, the "World First" contracts need some overhaul, and should offer a better storyline. but overall, I don't think that they are illogical.

3. What would the point of maiing them linear be? ot would only make #1 worse. If you always get contracts in the same order, you remove a lot of potential for challenges and different playthroughs. It reduces replayability.

4. Disagree. Care to explain why they don't make sense to you?

5. Does it need one? If there was only one storyline, it would reduce re-playability a lot. Why would you want each play-through to be the same? Contradicts #1.

6. Completely disagree. Sandbox has no reason to get invested in. In sandbox, i have everything, and have unlimited funds. It is not challenging at all to do things in sandbox. Career gives me a far greater sense of achievement and satisfaction. Building things on limited technology and funds adds much value to the game for me.

7. Completely disagree.

8. See above

 

I think there are players who prefer the sandbox, and players who prefer the career. You seem to be the first, I am the latter. But you seem to hate career mode for being career mode, and that simply is not constructive. there are a lot of problems with career mode, and a lot of things that can be improved, but simply questioning the modes existence doesn't solve them. And if you are not interested in contracts/funds/science progression, then no matter how the mode is changed, you will never like it.

 

I don#t even understand why being non-linear is bad. it gives choice and reasons to replay the mode, which is what your first complaint was...

[KSK]

10 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

They're procedurally generated, and are supposed to come out sounding at least somewhat funny/amusing. I don't even bother reading them. They have better things to do than write a few hundred sensical briefings, so I can put up with nonsensical ones.

Respectfully, I disagree.

It's attention to that kind of detail that turns a good game into a great one. For better or for worse, Career mode is built around the contracts system, so anything that improves the 'look and feel' of the contracts is only going to enhance Career mode as a whole.

Procedurally generated doesn't have to be a synonym for rubbish. At the very least, if they can't make sense, make them funny. And if they can't be funny, make them varied. The current briefings are neither funny (although admittedly this is subjective), nor varied.

[Starwaster]

2 minutes ago, KSK said:

Procedurally generated doesn't have to be a synonym for rubbish. At the very least, if they can't make sense, make them funny. And if they can't be funny, make them varied. The current briefings are neither funny (although admittedly this is subjective), nor varied.

Just so. Humor IS subjective. Personally I find them hilarious. Not everyone will or can no matter how the briefings are structured/restructured. So there's really not much point in complaining that they're not funny.

[monstah]

13 hours ago, cubinator said:

They should really be improved so that they are actually straightforward and related to the contract, if not useful. If that can't be done easily, I suggest these briefings should be removed entirely until it becomes possible to do so. Otherwise, they're dead weight...which is not a great thing to have in a rocketry sim.

This is gold.

[Mikki]

Contracts are written Kerbal-style. Pretty much like real life...

"The absurdity of a nutty spaceprogram, come and join our bizarre company"

What else? KSP is not ESA or Roscosmos, maybe more NASA

[Knaapie]

34 minutes ago, Mikki said:

Contracts are written Kerbal-style. Pretty much like real life...

"The absurdity of a nutty spaceprogram, come and join our bizarre company"

What else? KSP is not ESA or Roscosmos, maybe more NASA

Lal, they should write all the contracts in comic sans !!  yaaay !

 

[Guest]

Random nonsensical flavor text strikes me as both useless and unfunny. If they're not going to fix it, they should get rid of it.

[Kerbart]

9 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

career mode as a whole had a whole LOT of POTENTIAL, but, Squad flushed that potential away honestly. The problems with Career mode, in NO PARTICULAR ORDER:

1. No reason to play it past the initial novelty.
2. Contracts are not logical.
3. Contracts are not linear.
4. Contracts make no sense.
5. Career Mode has no redeemable story.
6. Career Mode has no real reason to become invested in it.
7. Career Mode has no real reason to be a mode as it currently stands.
8. What reason do I have to play a mode like "Career" when it is poorly put together with no over arching story line, lack of emotional investment, lack of linear or cohesive thought?

In an amazing coincidence, KSP offers multiple modes to play in! If you don't like career, don't play career.

Now, since we're in critique mode, there are various issues with the list you present, which would entice people, less educated and patient than those that posted in this thread, to misunderstand it.

• You're using numbers, not bullets. That means that the order in which things appear is important. And yet... they do not form a coherent list, with an overarching storyline or emotional investment, or cohesive thought (aside from "contracts suck"—but why the list then).
• Most of the arguments "make no sense," "are not logical," "are not linear, "no reason to play" are stated as opinions. They might be facts but there's no argumentation added to them, which makes checking—and thus accepting as such—those facts next to impossible.
• The list is either repetitive or follows circular reasoning. In a shell: “I don't like it, because it sucks. Why does it suck? Because I don't like it”

Now, for some of the points you brought up:

Career Mode has no redeemable story/no reason to become invested in/no reason to be a mode.
I'm not sure what redeemable is supposed to mean. Should I get cookies when I reach certain goals? Neither does Sandbox by the way. Or any mode in KSP. Does that make KSP a bad game? As for “a story”; personally I’d like to play the role of Kerbart Kerman, the role model of Elon Musk. My personal goal is to develop a profitable space program so I can turn my profits into a foundation for exploring the Kerbin universe. Others play Career mode with other stories. Or no story at all, just as a challenge mode.
Recently there was a thread on the forum, basically asking why the Reliant and Swivel engines exist. When pointed out that they are extremely cost effective, the answer was "I don't play career mode. I don't care." Yes, but others do. The constraints (limited technology, limited funds) Career provide can stimulate some people's creativity in ways Sandbox doesn't for them.

Contracts do not make sense (in about ten variantions)
I don't get it. It make perfect sense to me. Rescue Kerbals and earn money. Put stuff in orbit and earn money. Go places and earn money. The reasoning why? Well, yes, there's room for improvement. To be honest, I rarely ever read the gibberish at the top of the contract. For me a contract is "Build a space station that can hold five Kerbals in Mun Orbit. It needs to have an antenna, a docking port and it can generate its own power." What doesn't make sense there?

 

[Kerbart]

3 hours ago, KSK said:

It's attention to that kind of detail that turns a good game into a great one. For better or for worse, Career mode is built around the contracts system, so anything that improves the 'look and feel' of the contracts is only going to enhance Career mode as a whole.

Procedurally generated doesn't have to be a synonym for rubbish. At the very least, if they can't make sense, make them funny. And if they can't be funny, make them varied. The current briefings are neither funny (although admittedly this is subjective), nor varied.

I agree, and it shouldn't be that hard. Already there's a template in place, it's just tremendously lacking. Instead of the random gibberish, the text for a satellite contract (thermometer, goo pod) could look like this:

Introduction:
Ever since Jinglefrod Kerman discovered a new radiation belt between [PERIAPSIS] and [APOAPSIS] km above [PLANET/MOON], Kerbal scientists have been wondering about it's energetic properties.

Mission brief:
Flood Dynamics has graciously offered to sponsor a science mission to investigate said energies and for that reason we're asking to to put a satellite in orbit to measure the temperature, in order to find out more about the energy distribution in the radiation belt. Since we don't know how dangerous the radiation is, we will also send in some goo to see how it is affected by it.

The underlined words can be picked at random, and for each contract type there could be four or five paragraphs to pick from. Rescue a Kerbal? Easy to come up with a dozen different background stories why Dingleberry Kerman was left in a Mk 1 capsule in LKO. The system can even be made moddable (all you need to do is provide a text file with some prescribed tags), opening a whole new avenue of modding to a very talented part of the community (given what we see at the mission reports) that perhaps feels left out right now when it comes to making mods.

[max_creative]

Yeah, and both @Kuzzter, @Parkaboy, and a ton of other people know this, what ever you do, do NOT "land" in the water! I think that a splash down should count as a landing or the contract should say "Do not splash down"