Kerbal Space Program DLC: “Breaking Gound” Grand Discussion Thread

[Loskene]

Jesus christ, have we already forgotten the entire mods-in-stock debate? I thought this was settled by now.

On 4/4/2019 at 4:19 PM, Loskene said:

That's kind of the point of these efforts, and for the guy who doesn't understand the excitement around stock implementation of mods, this is basically it.

The core features that we needed these mods for are now in the base game, will always work immediately after an update, and are integrated flush with the existing UI.

It does not, and is not intended to, completely replicate all of the functionality these mods provide, only the parts that most of us consider necessary. Meaning that these mods aren't made instantly redundant and you can still add them for additional, bonus functionality on top of what we're getting in stock now. Things like betterburntime, precisenode, KER and such are still useful in their own right, but they're no longer essential just to start a new game after an update without feeling like something important is missing.

This is the best way to add mod features to stock, imo. Take the core of what makes them useful and leave the "fluff" to the mod devs who specialise in it.

 

And another one from the last round of update hype, a reminder that if we're going to be given reasons to spend time on the ground on various planets, those planets first need a drastic quality overhaul. No offence but they really do look terrible in plain stock right now, and it's going to stand out like a sore thumb compared to the new scatter features which seem to completely lack terrain blending.

 

On 4/5/2019 at 11:38 PM, Loskene said:

A graphical overhaul would be a nice focal point for the next update, since they're doing a bit of housekeeping lately anyway. There's a lot they could do to add resource-light prettying options for those of us with better hardware, as well as optimisations to let potato players eke a little more spit n' polish out of the low graphics settings. The parts and skybox updates are nice, on average, but the planets themselves that we spend most of our time looking at are really showing their age.

Stock volumetric atmospheric effects (clouds and dust storms) that are embedded deep enough into the rendering engine that they run smooth as butter please. It's the one part of EVE I still have to turn down if I want a steady green light, and they look so damn nice.

This game can be seriously beautiful, while retaining its signature style, if you give it the chance.

 

Who needs videos to make a point? Just make good points and don't oversell it. I hope we don't have to have this exact conversation every time a new feature that previously existed as a mod is announced.

I'm keeping a secret dash of hope up my sleeve that the DLC screenshots don't include any imagery of the accompanying free 1.7.1 update, which will include the stock planetary visual overhaul that's obviously been in the works for months now :V

Edit: Did anyone else notice this?

This discussion thread's either had its timestamp messed with or it existed as a hidden post since February. Perhaps there is more to this announcement than meets the eye, if those screenshots are already 3 months out of date.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Loskene

[LoSBoL]

13 hours ago, Gameslinx said:

I kind of feel as if Squad has lost or is losing the connection to the community. From what I see, nobody was asking for part reskins. Shadowzone's video on technical debt, if I recall correctly, mentions that he never asked for that and the community surrounding his channel seemed to agree.

To my recognition there was a pretty big cry from the community to give KSP an art pass, Oil drums and placeholders where terms I've seen come allong quite frequently.
I'm a bit puzzled as to why you would think SQUAD has been losing connection with the community considering what people have been asking for (some for years and we gave up upon ever seeing), and what we've gotten in the last 2 years in the base game without costing a dime. A few examples that come to mind;

Ambient light adjuster
4K UI support
Struts selectable at both ends
Part variants
Personal parachutes
VAB switcher
Schmelta V indicator
Burn time indicator
New skybox
Orbital information without needing to switch to map screen
Fill command chairs in the VAB
Ability to use parachutes while in a command chair
Including Astroid Day in the base game
AGL meter
(unhidden) navball in map view
Ability to remove helmets
Easier to use maneuveur node editor
Multicore support (within their possibilities by giving each vehicle their own Physics thread)
Ram leakage fix
Landingsite(s) in map view
Steam workshop
Steam cloud save
localization, opening up the game to virtually the whole globe

I could argue SQUAD has been more in touch of what the community has been asking then they ever were, maybe we'll see an pass on the current planets in the future, considering stranger things happend which were not expected to ever happen (like a Delta V indicator integration and Steam Workshop) 

[Superfluous J]

8 minutes ago, Loskene said:

have we already forgotten the entire mods-in-stock debate? I thought this was settled by now.

We have to rehash the oldies every once in a while. It's what aging communities do.

Next up, is MechJeb cheating?

[Loskene]

2 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

We have to rehash the oldies every once in a while. It's what aging communities do.

Next up, is MechJeb cheating?

I guess I expected more than a month's reprieve from the same tired lines, normally we get at least two unless someone's particularly determined to be a stick in the mud. Fool me twice, shame on me.

And please don't kick that hornet's nest or we'll just have to set the house on fire and run 

[VoidCosmos]

1 hour ago, Loskene said:

Edit: Did anyone else notice this?

This discussion thread's either had its timestamp messed with or it existed as a hidden post since February. Perhaps there is more to this announcement than meets the eye, if those screenshots are already 3 months out of date.

I had noticed that too 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Nigel Cardozo

[VoidCosmos]

@SQUAD please make a feature to allow us to take the jetpack out from a Kerbal on EVA 

 

[Starhawk]

53 minutes ago, Loskene said:

This discussion thread's either had its timestamp messed with or it existed as a hidden post since February. Perhaps there is more to this announcement than meets the eye, if those screenshots are already 3 months out of date.

This is a result of the process of merging the various discussion threads into a single topic.

Happy landings!

[Guest]

19 hours ago, Gameslinx said:

Please let me know if you agree or disagree

I disagree.

I really like this DLC and in general the direction KSP has been going -- taking the best bits from popular mods and putting them into stock. I'm especially thrilled about stock robotics and the possibility to finally make stock propellers that aren't incredibly fussy. If they'll also manage to finally fix surface interactions so bases stay where they put, and optimise surface installations so they don't completely kill the framerate, I'll be really super happy. This will obsolete some mods but then that frees up energy for making other things.

I would also like to express my thanks and appreciation for the hard work you (and other modders) have done and are doing to keep KSP worth playing well past the point most games would have died.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Guest

[linuxgurugamer]

3 hours ago, Nigel Cardozo said:

@Gameslinx It's not worth $15. Either Squad has to add more features or decrease the price of it.

Your opinion is valid, so you don't have to buy it.

But, why did you have to quote the ENTIRE OP to express your opinion?

And, did you read my post and others which referenced it?  If they dont' charge enough, then they will go out of business, and at that point, there will be no more updates to the game.

[Loskene]

37 minutes ago, Starhawk said:

This is a result of the process of merging the various discussion threads into a single topic.

Happy landings!

Hopes dashed once more, unless @SQUAD are really looking to surprise me on the 30th.

[VoidCosmos]

24 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Your opinion is valid, so you don't have to buy it.

But, why did you have to quote the ENTIRE OP to express your opinion?

And, did you read my post and others which referenced it?  If they dont' charge enough, then they will go out of business, and at that point, there will be no more updates to the game.

1: I have no problem. I will buy it!

2: I didn't know that there was a way to quote a post.

3: I didn't notice your post

[linuxgurugamer]

3 minutes ago, Nigel Cardozo said:

1: I have no problem. I will buy it!

2: I didn't know that there was a way to quote a post.

3: I didn't notice your post

Ok.  So, if you hit "quote" at the bottom of a post, the entire post is quoted.

In order to only quote a little bit, select the part you want to quote, and a little popup will show saying "Quote selection", click that and only the selected part will be quoted.

[Pthigrivi]

Just to reiterate a few things from the last couple of pages,

1) A robust system of surface features with cryovolcanoes and more that’s fully integrated with the science system is not something any mod I’m aware of has tackled, and if done right the implications for gameplay are more significant than anything since 1.0. 

2) Robotics are also one of the longest requested game features, one that will explode the level of complexity and creativity in craft design for everyone including the sandbox crowd, and one that even IR after years of work has struggled to pull off smoothly. If anything warrants a stock treatment it’s this. 

3) There are further hints at deeper game mechanics around surface deployment and inventories and science management. We’ll have to wait and see more but this is also pretty significant and exciting.

4) In the broad scheme $15 just isn’t that much for all the hard work that seems to have gone into this, and will probably result in more hours of enjoyment than any other $15 purchase I can think of. We should all be collectively ecstatic Squad is still so committed to developing KSP and actively raising revenue to do so rather than resting on their laurels or closing up shop. 

 

Ive been constructively critical in the past and remain constructively critical about game elements I think could be improved going foreword, but in the last year I’ve seen Squad make some of the best moves possible both in vanilla updates and this new DLC and I couldn't be happier to reward them for it. 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Pthigrivi

[Klapaucius]

9 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

 

2) Robotics are also one of the longest requested game features, one that will explode the level of complexity and creativity in craft design for everyone including the sandbox crowd, and one that even IR after years of work has struggled to pull off smoothly. If anything warrants a stock treatment it’s this. 

I'm just thinking of all the weird airplanes I can build. New levels of bizarre in my designs (cue Vincent Price-like evil laughter).

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, LoSBoL said:

To my recognition there was a pretty big cry from the community to give KSP an art pass, Oil drums and placeholders where terms I've seen come allong quite frequently.
I'm a bit puzzled as to why you would think SQUAD has been losing connection with the community considering what people have been asking for (some for years and we gave up upon ever seeing), and what we've gotten in the last 2 years in the base game without costing a dime. A few examples that come to mind;

Ambient light adjuster
4K UI support
Struts selectable at both ends
Part variants
Personal parachutes
VAB switcher
Schmelta V indicator
Burn time indicator
New skybox
Orbital information without needing to switch to map screen
Fill command chairs in the VAB
Ability to use parachutes while in a command chair
Including Astroid Day in the base game
AGL meter
(unhidden) navball in map view
Ability to remove helmets
Easier to use maneuveur node editor
Multicore support (within their possibilities by giving each vehicle their own Physics thread)
Ram leakage fix
Landingsite(s) in map view
Steam workshop
Steam cloud save
localization, opening up the game to virtually the whole globe

I could argue SQUAD has been more in touch of what the community has been asking then they ever were, maybe we'll see an pass on the current planets in the future, considering stranger things happend which were not expected to ever happen (like a Delta V indicator integration and Steam Workshop) 

...and people thought the Take Two buy out would be the end of all things.

This list is a great counter to my past pessimism.  I've actually been pretty impressed by Squad recently, and that's saying something.

[Klapaucius]

@klgraham1013 For us non coders, can you explain what multicore support is in the KSP context?

[Loskene]

37 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

@klgraham1013 For us non coders, can you explain what multicore support is in the KSP context?

It makes certain things run faster since the calculations can be performed simultaneously instead of one at a time, letting people with multi-core processors take advantage of the (usually unused) additional threads. In KSP I think this just applies to craft physics.

[VoidCosmos]

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Ok.  So, if you hit "quote" at the bottom of a post, the entire post is quoted.

In order to only quote a little bit, select the part you want to quote, and a little popup will show saying "Quote selection", click that and only the selected part will be quoted.

Oh okay. I

I can make a f35 c with those robotics

[ZooNamedGames]

7 hours ago, micha said:

Given that's your take on this, why make such a big case about it? People will either buy it or they won't, and depending on how many people do either will give Squad an indication as to whether it was a waste of their time or not.

Personally I'll definitely buy it if only to ensure the game keeps getting updates, including the free ones which benefit everybody.

And for people who can't or won't buy it, it seems that at least part of the update is available in the form of mods.

Because we want to make sure any future DLCs won’t just be a compilation of mods that we suddenly have to pay for. I would prefer something original- something mods CAN’T do. There isn’t anything new or original here.

[Frozen_Heart]

Really don't understand people saying it's pointless as mods have already done it.

 

At this point there is almost nothing mods haven't done. By that logic we should just pack it up and end KSP development.

[KerikBalm]

My two cents: I'll be spending my 15 CHF on it (or maybe 15 Euros, we'll see what the price is on steam when I'm in Switzerland).

Regarding the mod comparison: Mods are made by the community to fulfill the desires of the community... If they gave us something that wasn't similar to what a mod had done, the odds are that people would look at it as a useless feature, or it would have a lukewarm reception (which is how I feel about the mission editor.. a big... "meh"). So if its similar to what a mod has done: GOOD

Of course mods haven't done certain things because of stock limitations... a DLC that can get around that and do what people wished mods could do would be great. Also many mods are a bit buggy, if they can make a less buggy stock version of a mod: GREAT.

Another criticism of KSP has been that there's nothing to do once you land, this aims to address that, by encouraging you to go out exploring around your landing site to find surface features (probably will be used more than the monolith hunting mechanic). I'm also guessing that the "robotics" will aid in the deployment of stuff on the surface, and the construction of surface bases. (also some sort of kerbal inventory system for deploying small things?)

Making the planets prettier would be nice, but it will still not solve the issue. You'll have a prettier landing location to do nothing at.

I also suspect these features are more than simple terrain scatters, and do things mods couldn't really do (particularly if we're going to see plumes from cryovolcanoes). A previously mentioned rover science mod just had one drive to randomly generated points. At the very least this seems to be linking science to the feature.

There may be other differences between the features and terrain scatters that we haven't seen yet. Judging by my limited expertise playing around with terrain scatter settings for a couple of my mod planets, if the way they are placed/defined is changed, it could be an interesting thing for modders.

Anyway, this seems more interesting to me than the making history expansion, so I think its a step in the right direction...

But we'll see how easy those robotics are to actually use

[Starhawk]

26 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Because we want to make sure any future DLCs[...]

I am unclear on who the 'we' in the above statement refers to.

28 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

I would prefer something original- something mods CAN’T do.

I am curious what sorts of things you are thinking of here.

Happy landings!

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Because we want to make sure any future DLCs won’t just be a compilation of mods that we suddenly have to pay for. I would prefer something original- something mods CAN’T do. There isn’t anything new or original here.

Like what?  There is very little that mods can't do.

[Chris_2]

13 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Like what?  There is very little that mods can't do.

A thing that mods can't do is making extra money for Squad, so they can continue to develop the base game and the KSP franchise. Only because of that reason we all should buy the DLC. Take my money, Squad!

[ZooNamedGames]

42 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Like what?  There is very little that mods can't do.

I made a list a while back. I don't feel like reiterating for each time someone trips across my thread comment in this thread.

2 hours ago, Starhawk said:

I am unclear on who the 'we' in the above statement refers to.

Anyone who agrees with the concept of the DLC not being the best, which based on the thread, is a number that can't be marked as negligible.

2 hours ago, Starhawk said:

I am curious what sorts of things you are thinking of here.

As I said above, I made a list before the thread got merged.