Clouds, life support, realistic solar radiation, supernovae, Independence Day invasions, galactic collis... NO!

[Adenosine Triphospate]

Can we tune down the "suggestions" please?

So before you type out a detailed explanation on why KSP needs a very specific, never before seen mechanic implemented immediately, could you please read the following? I am open to criticism; however, I would appreciate you take into account the following first.

Squad needs to add this feature!

Squad is not simply a secretary who notes down our every wish and complies it into a nice little spreadsheet for the next update. Suggesting rather wild additions to the game without any reasoning does not provoke new ideas nor benefits the community.

If you're asking for black holes, for example (not that I've seen it anywhere...), how would Squad make, debug, test and more importantly add it to the game? What purpose would it serve? How would it interact with players to create balanced gameplay? How would it improve on aspects of the game without seeming like an out of the blue (out of the black?) addition? The problem is of course that by stating 'add black holes' this doesn't satisfy any of the criteria above. If it were added, everything would revolve around it (haha ), imagine the patch notes: 'Fixed symmetry bug; Added COM and COL indicators available during flight; Added all consuming object that literally ends the Kerbol system's existence'. If you say 'that's not how I intended a black hole to be added' that's my point exactly, you need to explain how a new feature would behave... etc. Unless you have justified why it would be a good feature (essentially the questions above) then you've just told the community to create another game entirely.

Clouds, better terrain, good looking planets

Equally, suggestions that have already been mentioned in the forum several times since the Stone Age don't need to be mentioned again! I'm aware that clouds would look great, and more things to do besides science, but if you haven't brought anything new to the table, there’s no point in listing a feature suggested to death already. It's great to discuss how certain new biomes could be added to existing celestial bodies, under 'Extend the campaign' for example, but not repetitive one sentence comments.

"There's a mod for that"

A cliché in this forum, however, this is because can be true! A lot of the suggestions in this forum exist in mods. Although, as many of you rightfully point out, many mods simply should be stock. Some sort of transfer window indicator is an example, as well as the recently added manoeuvre mode. This is because they tick the criteria mentioned earlier, they enhance the gameplay experience without disrupting the balance of the game itself, and would benefit all players in every circumstance. Unfortunately, there’s a murky area in which additions that do significantly change the balance and the gameplay itself have to be judged (usually subjectively) whether or not it should remain out of KSP as a mod, or added as the centrepiece of a major update.

For example, real solar system or realism concerning life support and usable lifespans of parts are generally accepted to be too extreme for stock KSP, as they harm the casual nature of KSP which the vast majority of KSP players (particularly newer ones) appreciate, whilst balancing or adding parts, or realistic aerodynamics (By which I mean nosecones actually having an effect -and other essential properties such as lift- in early versions of KSP you would be better off without nosecones because drag was not calculated properly) is crucial in creating an environment that loosely teaches the real world physics without appearing to daunting and is fun to play. Mods should provide an alternative play style to the experienced players who need it, whilst stock has all the vital components to make the game enjoyable.

The area in-between these two can fall under the category of DLCs. The mission builder is a good example, although a lot of the content within DLCs could easily be added to stock (the parts, like engine plates) and arguably should be. However, Squad is a company, it makes sense commercially to include better parts (wolfhound) as well as new features behind a paid extension. You can’t have everything, I guess. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by Adenosine Triphospate
Changed titles to blue, less offensive

[k00b]

re: bolded red section one... : i think this is a "game suggestion" section of the forum (i.e. "moaning about kerbals forums" topic's ONLY as you have done above...), would be better of in the KSP Discussion; although unusure as again not infact being about the game... (you are seemingly suggesting kerbals close sections of their forums because you are angry or something (which is ironic...) ??? (hard to tell)

anyway here you go:

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/forum/32-ksp-discussion/

but regarding your other red, bolded points - guessing; i think because it's a "computer game" and some people just want to have "fun" playing on said game as opposed to routing about on the internet and causing performance lag on GPU's / filling up HDD's etc and obviously take-two have alot more resources and developeres and make things better, put simply.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fun

regards.

Edited May 27, 2019 by k00b

[James M]

2 hours ago, k00b said:

re: bolded red section one... : i think this is a "game suggestion" section of the forum (i.e. "moaning about kerbals forums" topic's ONLY as you have done above...), would be better of in the KSP Discussion; although unusure as again not infact being about the game... (you are seemingly suggesting kerbals close sections of their forums because you are angry or something (which is ironic...) ??? (hard to tell)

anyway here you go:

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/forum/32-ksp-discussion/

but regarding your other red, bolded points - guessing; i think because it's a "computer game" and some people just want to have "fun" playing on said game as opposed to routing about on the internet and causing performance lag on GPU's / filling up HDD's etc and obviously take-two have alot more resources and developeres and make things better, put simply.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fun

regards.

You mad? 

[RatchetinSpace]

I sympathize with a lot of your complaints.

Many suggestion topic posts have low effort implementation. The classic example is: "plz add multiplayer thx squad" - without any context or surrounding framework on how that might possibly work. 

I will disagree slightly about repost topics. Reposting ideas gives a current-affair look into how the community feels about a particular suggestion, and keeping it on the front page makes it more visible and in discussion. 

[klesh]

I disagree.  This is a suggestions forum.  People make suggestions, thats how it works.  No one is forcing you to click on these threads and read them   

When I go to my car dealer and say “I wish it did x, y, and z” I dont need to provide him schematics and engineering on how to accomplish, for instance, a better motorized adjustable driver’s seat; I just suggest it and leave the design and engineering up to them.  

Just because a suggestion was made 3.5 years ago in a thread thats long since gone doesn’t mean thats not a valid suggestion today for someone who’s just started playing.  

There is an entire cadre of KSP players to which “use a mod” is not an effective answer to everything because their platform doesn't support mods.

 

[rextable]

15 hours ago, k00b said:

re: bolded red section one... : i think this is a "game suggestion" section of the forum (i.e. "moaning about kerbals forums" topic's ONLY as you have done above...), would be better of in the KSP Discussion; although unusure as again not infact being about the game... (you are seemingly suggesting kerbals close sections of their forums because you are angry or something (which is ironic...) ??? (hard to tell)

anyway here you go:

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/forum/32-ksp-discussion/

but regarding your other red, bolded points - guessing; i think because it's a "computer game" and some people just want to have "fun" playing on said game as opposed to routing about on the internet and causing performance lag on GPU's / filling up HDD's etc and obviously take-two have alot more resources and developeres and make things better, put simply.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fun

regards.

Erm, what?

 

 

[rextable]

I'm somewhere between klesh and you

As RatchetinSpace says, "reposting ideas gives a current-affair look into how the community feels about a particular suggestion" and that's a fair point imho.

Where I do agree with you is with thoughtless or way-beyond-the-scope-of-KSP suggestions. Galaxies, multiplayer, aliens and yes - black holes - are good examples. This is a bit tedious because they're just never gonna happen. However, as klesh says, no one is forcing me to read these threads.

Personally, I really enjoy reading posts where someone has taken the time to express their thoughts on how x or y suggestion could be implemented (I did this recently over on the New KSC Building suggestions thread). Some of these are comical WTAF pie- in-the-sky nonsense - which is fun to read. There are also some very measured, well thought out and ingenious ideas out there too. So, please keep those coming people. 

 

 

[klesh]

Don’t get me wrong, a thorough, thought out post that has actual understanding of how the game works under the hood (man, I’m really getting my money’s worth out of the car analogy) is a much better read.  Probably has a far greater chance of implementation as well.  Bug reports on the tracker often provide the exact .cfg fix required to solve a longstanding issue.  I’m just trying to be less harsh in life on people that I disagree with or who don't live up to my often unrealistic standards of excellence.  Its easier on my blood pressure, and the other guy’s feeling to just click away than it is to care about something you have no control over happening.  

[Adenosine Triphospate]

19 hours ago, k00b said:

but regarding your other red, bolded points

Fine, I agree. In hindsight, red probably wasn't a good colour, changed it to blue.

19 hours ago, k00b said:

 i think this is a "game suggestion" section of the forum (i.e. "moaning about kerbals forums" topic's ONLY as you have done above...)

Yes, thats right, its a game suggestion forum. I've commented on how suggestions can be made more meaningful, that is, by having suggestions on how it would benefit the game itself, how it would wither introduce a new concept or extend on existing ones. Okay, you could (derogatorily) call it a 'moan', but overall, it states on how to improve the quality of suggestions in this forum, and voices my opinions (yeah I admit a bit self righteously) on DLCs and mods.

 

20 hours ago, k00b said:

some people just want to have "fun" playing on said game as opposed to routing about on the internet and causing performance lag on GPU's / filling up HDD's etc and obviously take-two have alot more resources and developeres and make things better, put simply.

What? The 'fun' argument is invalid here. Yes, we play KSP have fun, but that doesn't mean that in can't be improved. How does asking for a better quality of suggestions inhibit anyone's ability to enjoy the game? Could you be like @klesh or @RatchetinSpace and provide meaningful comments please?

Improvement Definition

By the way, my long topic doesn't affect your GPU, because that deals with graphics, not text.

Graphics processing unit

Nor does it affect your hard disk drive directly, unless you've saved it into a word processor (I am honoured if you have )

Secondary Storage

 

[Adenosine Triphospate]

Thanks for interesting analogy and comments @klesh.

44 minutes ago, klesh said:

 I’m just trying to be less harsh in life on people that I disagree with or who don't live up to my often unrealistic standards of excellence.  Its easier on my blood pressure, and the other guy’s feeling to just click away than it is to care about something you have no control over happening.  

Yeah, I agree, I could have been less rant-y in the post, after all, if it does bother me so much, I don't have to see it, as you said. Ultimately it doesn't really effect me in the long term, only perhaps my sanity satisfaction in the forum.

5 hours ago, klesh said:

When I go to my car dealer and say “I wish it did x, y, and z” I dont need to provide him schematics and engineering on how to accomplish, for instance, a better motorized adjustable driver’s seat; I just suggest it and leave the design and engineering up to them.  

I see where you are coming from, after all, we are not game designers so we don't have to think EVERYTHING through logistically rather, we should provide a more vague area of improvement.

However, I don't really see that as the case. In the car dealer case, the consumer doesn't know how to reduce piston friction in the engine or the best type of coolant. All the consumer sees is the mileage and fuel expenditure, among other things. Gaming is a little more complex than that. In some ways, we collectively have a better understanding of the game itself than the developers, as we collectively cover the different play styles and know what needs fixing/changing as we've experienced it on a day to day level. The fact that we play it for entertainment is probably the reason why some of us know KSP it inside out. A good proportion of drivers probably don't know how a combustion engine works. Therefore we should be able to provide justified reasoning to add certain features based on personal experience. One FPS I play is literally community driven, most new content is designed, coded and uploaded by the community to the workshop, all the developers do is choose the most voted for and design thematic updates, as well as tweak the names to make them more witty.

6 hours ago, klesh said:

 There is an entire cadre of KSP players to which “use a mod” is not an effective answer to everything because their platform doesn't support mods.

Yes, stock KSP should be completely playable by itself without mods which enhance quality of life (and other things). Mods only serve to provide different play styles such as ultra-realism. Unfortunately, that means that console players miss out on that route 

[Guest]

In my view this kind of meta-discussion is unlikely to add anything of value. Let a thousand flowers bloom and the mods take care of the weeding.