Why are people against mods?

[Corona688]

5 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

Again... this is because you're not using it with RSS. The real Appollo LEM did SSTO... from the lunar surface to lunar orbit. That took over 3km/s of delta-V IIRC. So the part should have 3km/sec of dV. That SSTOs from kerbin in the stock system, but not RSS

Realism overhaul did not exist when they made that one, it was done for giggles.  When I told the author of the problem, he told me to fix it myself and leave him alone.

They are "balanced" to real life values.

Most KSP rockets get similar performance to RL hypergolics like hydrazine/nitrogen tetroxide mixes.  This also explains how they can be restarted so trivially.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Corona688

[OhioBob]

10 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

Again... this is because you're not using it with RSS. The real Appollo LEM did SSTO... from the lunar surface to lunar orbit. That took over 3km/s of delta-V IIRC. So the part should have 3km/sec of dV. That SSTOs from kerbin in the stock system, but not RSS

The lunar ascents actually took only about 1,850 m/s.

[KerikBalm]

My bad.... I guess it was the round trip that I was thinking of as being between 3-4k

[Kerbital]

Not me. I love mods. When I played KSP for the first time I nearly gave up the same day. Not enough content and major steep learning curve. Then I figured that there a tons of mods. Not stranger to other games mods, I jumped in and they save the game for me. Especially MechJeb. I'm too stupid and impatient. I usually have around 50 mods installed. I consider some of them absolutely necessary to enjoy the game.

[Leszek]

KSP is like Pizza.  Sure you can get the stock just sauce and cheese.  You might even like it that way.  But most people like to add toppings.

[Deddly]

On 12/11/2017 at 4:10 AM, carmenara said:

I had a very unpleasant experience on the so-called Official KSP Discord.

I'd just like to clear this up - there is no official KSP Discord. Wherever you were, it was a 3rd-party channel. The official channel is the IRC channel, which you can access by clicking "IRC Chat" at the top of the page.

[Corona688]

...and by official IRC, they mean Official IRC.  I saw Nova active there once.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Corona688

[Deddly]

Sure, the IRC channel is frequented by some of the devs/moderators/former devs. It's a nice place

[Francois424]

Answering the OP...  I don't think that it's being against mods as much and not being able to rely on them.

Most of the older folk playing KSP have lost a mod they loved because owner went AWOL, or plain out stopped supporting their mods...
Then there's also the problem of updates.  I love KSP updates personally (even tho I really feel they should expend the Kerbol system to continue representing our own Solar system's analogue), but each update can and usually breaks mods.
You get used to things, and if you're like me you also adjust mods so they fit your needs... say installing near future solar/propulsion but modifying ISP on the engines to not be too good and the likes.  To be redone when the mod updates.
Then there's essential mods like KER, which is so basic I rarely upgrade to a new KSP version until it's there (or just stay around Kerbin).
There's also some mods that glitches the game.  Something the owner didn't notice or cannot fix.

When a mod becomes part of the core game, and even better: when the mod owner(s) bring their jewels into the core game, it's always going to work, it's always getting updated at the same time than the core game.
As an example, if KSP would license OPM to become stock, I'd be the happiest guy on the planet for a while...  Or hire Galileo to rework existing planets/moons beside Kerbin and moons...  You know, get those incredible landscapes. 

However most popular mods have been continuously updated since 0.25/1.02, and we've been spoiled by their authors.  Maintaining a few relics from 0.23 myself and being an apprentice modder at best, I struggle each patch to keep them working... I know how long this takes to fix... another reason to 'hate' mods.

My 2 cents =)

[gunt3rgam3r]

I generally have two ksp installs that I play, my stock-alike campaign and my heavily modded one.  The big downside of the modded campaign is that it is more unstable then the stock one.  I do encounter more slowdown, crashes, and save game corruption in those saves, but that is the price of having real fuels, awesome animated parts, and full fledged bases with life support.  

I am just happy to have a game stock or modded that I still enjoy playing for over two years still getting updates!  As a lifetime gamer, I know how very rare that is.  Games seldom last that long before the developers abandon them, and then the sad choice is modded or vaperware 

[harrisjosh2711]

The only time I ever played this game without mods was during the demo. I really don't get the whole thing about making rockets out of junk found on the side of the road......... In what world can you send any living species on a multi year mission without life support? All organic beings require sustenance for survival. 

[Kerbital]

1 hour ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

The only time I ever played this game without mods was during the demo. I really don't get the whole thing about making rockets out of junk found on the side of the road......... In what world can you send any living species on a multi year mission without life support? All organic beings require sustenance for survival. 

I'd also would prefer the game to be more serious. The whole Kerbal goofiness wears out quickly. One reason I like to run unmanned missions.

[Pwnstarr]

6 hours ago, Kerbital said:

I'd also would prefer the game to be more serious. The whole Kerbal goofiness wears out quickly. One reason I like to run unmanned missions.

Yeah this.I would love for Realism Overhaul to be its own game. 

Orbiter 2016 is scratching that itch for now. 

 

Edit: a stock functional MFD system in the cockpit view would do wonders for KSP. 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Pwnstarr

[Corona688]

More reasons:

Difficulty getting advice on ships or gameplay when there's only three people worldwide who will recognize that exact combination of part mods and gameplay mods.

Difficulty sharing ships for the exact same reason.

Parts which can't be used very creatively, like "most of a helicopter".

All of which are good reasons for me to not use mods.  Other people seem to do okay.  You guys have fun.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Corona688

[kerbalfreak]

I would have stopped playing many years ago if weren't for mods. Mods are way better than the stock game in almost every aspect. Gameplay, models, textures, balancing, realism, and, of course, fun. I simple deleted a lot of useless stock parts from my game.

I cry when I have to use the stock nuclear engine instead of the ones from Nertea (which does not include one equivalent for the stock, only bigger or smaller). I have some kind of pity of the people doing cringy bases or rovers with parts that don't fit together and are designed for rockets, instead of using the ones from Nils277. The lack of a life-support system is kind of unacceptable for me now...

The only possible negative point about mods is that you lack a standard to compare and share ships, achievements, missions, etc. 

[Kermagerd]

Well, it's just a matter of personal prefference. I love watching others play modded KSP, but i play vanilla myself because after 350 hours in game i have yet a lot of enjoyment left in vanilla KSP. I like to get the most of a game before installing any mods. I am also reluctant to install mods in any game because they can corrupt your install, your gamesaves and cause all kind of troubles, this is specially true with a game that still gets updated by the developers. 

But yeah, i think mods are good for all of us, even those who don't use them at all, since a free and active modding community gives developers a lot of good ideas and feedback on fixes, improvements and mechanics to implement in future updates, which is awesome.

[AviosAdku]

Personally, I don't play with many mods and definitely prefer stock although I always Install Texture Replacer Replaced for custom suits and differentiating the crew members and Kerbal Engineer Redux (using partless mode without crew skill mattering) to save time on Dv Calculations and for the information which it can display which is incredibly useful and nigh impossible to get in stock. However, I personally don't like playing with anything that changes the "balance" of the game.

As for why, I have a number of reasons. First of all, it gives me a standard reference frame when discussing the game and also means I only have to learn one set of rules and learn them well. Secondly, a number of mods basically are their own game within a game (KSP Interstellar is one of these) so in those cases, I feel the mod takes over the game and I'll neglect the stock game because I nearly compulsively have to use everything somehow in these situations. Thirdly, I like simplicity so dealing with just stock keeps it simple and more resistant to upgrades as well as being lighter on the system (something I obsess over for some reason). Finally however, I just don't want to repeat my experience with Orbiter.

For context, before I discovered KSP, I was really into Orbiter, however, as the simulator itself was so basic, add-ons were pretty much a necessity. As a result, I spent a lot of time searching for mods and, went a bit ... overboard. I spent almost all my Orbiter related time collecting add-ons (and I had quite the collection) and planning installations fitting with a specific theme and what scenarios to custom build and I think you get the picture. Basically, I barely spent any time playing as I spent all my time obsessing over getting the interconnected dependencies for the mods and trying to blend them into one consistent set for use, something that turned me off mods for the most part.

That said however, I don't look down on people who use mods (my favourite mission reports are rather heavily modded) I just personally prefer stock (or something functionally the same) for myself. For other people, they aren't me and what works for me won't necessarily work for them, everyone has different experiences and preferences. The main reason I may be more interested in a report or the like in full stock is because it is more relevant to my playstyle and ideas on display are more directly applicable to my gameplay.

So, in short (can I ever write a short explanation of anything?) I personally prefer the stock parts and mechanics but I fully recognise and accept that other people have different preferences and use more significant mods or none at all. As long as the differences are kept civil, I can hardly see a problem.

Sincerely
AviosAdku

[Superfluous J]

On 12/8/2017 at 12:48 PM, harrisjosh2711 said:

I really don't get the whole thing about making rockets out of junk found on the side of the road.

 

On 12/8/2017 at 2:36 PM, Kerbital said:

I'd also would prefer the game to be more serious. The whole Kerbal goofiness wears out quickly.

 

On 12/8/2017 at 7:40 PM, Pwnstarr said:

Yeah this.I would love for Realism Overhaul to be its own game.

I'm exactly the opposite. The goofy parts perfectly offset the seriousness of the actual gameplay. I don't really care when I'm designing a rocket that the text says it was found on the side of the road, so long as it works as if it was machined to perfection in a high tech factory. If anything, the added smile when I come across a new one or one I've not noticed in a while is *better* than sterile descriptions pulled from a tech manual.

(Though I do like actual information on part descriptions. "A vaguely wing-shaped board" could be replaced with something actually describing the part a bit)

[NSEP]

Im not the biggets fan of goofyness. I dislike the 2.5 meter decoupler and refuse to use it. Sure, a little funny text like 'found lying by the side of the road' is fine to me. But if there never was a part overhaul and KSP stayed a cartoon-like game even to this day, i would have modded it till it crashed,

Im thinking of making a Realism Overhaul like game but im not a game dev (yet) so its just an idea.

[Corona688]

Another problem:  Mods which want to take over your game, difficult to impossible to install in your current save.

[Ty Tan Tu]

I suppose it depends on which Mods you are talking about.

The early Mods in England were really very much akin to the American Beatniks, although somewhat more snazzily dressed. They were into Jazz and R&B. Granted the street fights, and out right riots, that broke out between the Mods and the Rockers in England in the early 60's were ugly, so I can see why some might have turned against the Mods back then. But that is ancient history. I think we can all agree that the Retro-Mods of the late 60's and 70's, that brought us bands like The Who and the Jam, were pretty cool. Let's face it, Quadrophenia is the ultimate Mod opus.

Perhaps a lot of the prejudice against Mods stems from a misunderstanding of the later Skin Head Mods of England that is confused with the American Skin Head phenomena of the 80's. The English version of Skin Head Mods grew up in ethnically mixed neighborhoods and were into Third World Rock like Reggae. They were very inclusive - unlike the American version.

Or are we talking about different Mods?

[KSK]

On 11/12/2017 at 11:50 PM, AviosAdku said:

For context, before I discovered KSP, I was really into Orbiter, however, as the simulator itself was so basic, add-ons were pretty much a necessity. As a result, I spent a lot of time searching for mods and, went a bit ... overboard. I spent almost all my Orbiter related time collecting add-ons (and I had quite the collection) and planning installations fitting with a specific theme and what scenarios to custom build and I think you get the picture. Basically, I barely spent any time playing as I spent all my time obsessing over getting the interconnected dependencies for the mods and trying to blend them into one consistent set for use, something that turned me off mods for the most part.

I can relate to that thinking. I don't have the personal experience but there are so many KSP mods out there now that I can easily see myself spending way more time trying to find just the right combination of mods than actually playing with the game. Hence I play vanilla with KER and... um that's about it.

I've got nothing against mods personally. I do get a bit irked at folks who assume that modded is the only way to play and the minority who seem to assume that it's the players job to mod the game and that Squad should be providing a skeleton game only and leaving everything else up to the modders. That always struck me as being overly generous with other people's time.

Finally, I get a bit more than irked at the pat  'there's a mod for that' response that  almost invariably gets trotted out on any gameplay discussion thread.

[NSEP]

On 13/12/2017 at 7:08 PM, Corona688 said:

Another problem:  Mods which want to take over your game, difficult to impossible to install in your current save.

You mean Realism Overhaul?

[Corona688]

Planetary mods which change Kerbin.  Things like that.  Things which work hard to make themselves incompatible with other things.

[FrostedShoe]

I won't use mods I think are overpowered, mainly because I like a challenge. I use MechJeb to create and execute manoeuvres, auto warp too and execute my own manoeuvres, and any docking job that is boring and routine. 

I can't see a problem with other people using mods, in fact is always interesting looking at all the creative things people come up with.