Jump to content

Am I alone in thinking that the Kerbals themselves can be a bit overrated?

mcwaffles2003

By mcwaffles2003
in Prelaunch KSP2 Discussion

 Share

How important are the kerbals to the game itself? (please pick closest to where you most comfortably align)  

170 members have voted

  1. 1. How important are the kerbals to the game itself? (please pick closest to where you most comfortably align)

    • 1 - They are a detriment to the game itself and the game would be better without them
      3
    • 1.5
      1
    • 2 - Unnecessary, but non-detrimental
      2
    • 2.5
      10
    • 3 - They add flavor to the game and it would feel empty without them but the game would still be fun
      43
    • 3.5
      35
    • 4 - Without them the game would have value but I most likely wouldn't still be playing it if they weren't there
      26
    • 4.5
      14
    • 5 - Absolutely essential, they are the core focus of the game and without them KSP is utterly worthless
      36

Recommended Posts

pandaman

pandaman

Posted
Posted

If not Kerbals, as we know them, then another 'spacefaring species' would be needed. 

Humans would work fine of course, but that would lack the 'charm' and feel like the game should be more 'historically' accurate in it's setting and style, rather than 'influenced by it' as it is now.  Nothing at all wrong with that, and I can see the appeal, but as it is there is a design freedom that comes with the 'fantasy' setting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcwaffles2003

mcwaffles2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, jimmymcgoochie said:

How many people remember the name of the first probe landing on the moon? No Googling (or other internet search engine of your choice-ing) allowed.

 

 

...anyone?

  Reveal hidden contents

Luna 9, if you didn’t know

How about the name of the first manned landing on the Moon?

 

And that’s why Kerbals are necessary in the game. While probes, landers and rovers can do some pretty incredible things these days, putting humans on another planetary body-and bringing them back- remains the single greatest technical achievement in human history; it’s an order of magnitude more difficult than a probe, which doesn’t need food, water, air, precise temperature and pressure conditions to complete its mission, plus almost all probe missions are one way trips whereas every crewed mission needs to come back home again.

So is this why we normally have to land kerbals on the mun before we even get a probe core to even work with? Does using kerbals even present a significantly greater level of difficulty?

Also, I don't get this argument, at all. Did you specifically pick the moon landing and not first to orbit because everyone actually knows what sputnik is? 

Who here can name the first probe to land on mars?

Who here can name the first probe to leave the solar system?

46 minutes ago, jimmymcgoochie said:

Sure, I could throw all manner of probes and rovers around in KSP, but it’s not nearly as challenging or interesting as flying a big, heavy, inefficient pod around with a little green alien in the corner of the screen clinging on in terror or gawping in awe- often within seconds of each other!

Taking kerbals isn't really any more difficult though... in stock theres no need for life support, you can't lose comms with kerbals like you can with probes..

Quick question, which is harder:

  • landing a kerbal on the back of the mun
  • landing a probe on the back of the mun

So that kinda kills half of that argument...

  

34 minutes ago, Souptime said:

we need kerbals! we need kerbals!

That's great, care to give your reason as to why?

16 minutes ago, pandaman said:

If not Kerbals, as we know them, then another 'spacefaring species' would be needed. 

Humans would work fine of course, but that would lack the 'charm' and feel like the game should be more 'historically' accurate in it's setting and style, rather than 'influenced by it' as it is now.  Nothing at all wrong with that, and I can see the appeal, but as it is there is a design freedom that comes with the 'fantasy' setting.

This.... I can understand and agree/empathize with. I dont really hope for KSP to become the most hardcore realistic gritty space sim, I like it's lightheartedness that invites failure and pulls you back up to try again. Orbital mechanics and rocket science is difficult with a steep learning curve, it's nice to have something lighthearted about the game reminding us that it's just that... a game, have fun.

Edited by mcwaffles2003
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pandaman

pandaman

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

.... I dont really hope for KSP to become the most hardcore realistic gritty space sim, I like it's lightheartedness that invites failure and pulls you back up to try again. Orbital mechanics and rocket science is difficult with a steep learning curve, it's nice to have something lighthearted about the game reminding us that it's just that... a game, have fun.

This exactly.  ^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcwaffles2003

mcwaffles2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, pandaman said:

This exactly.  ^^

Funny thing is... I used to get this vibe more so when a lot of the parts looked like refitted oil drums from a scrap yard. Kinda wish early career KSP kept this and maybe the art style of the  parts in the game could evolve as the KSC itself got more and more upgraded. As your program builds up it could slowly look more and more believable. So at the start of the whole thing the game is max silly/ridiculous and by the end everything you have could look really streamlined, HD and professional like the skins have become. It could kinda symbolize a new players growth within the game going from someone whose blindly tinkering with a new toy to someone who can plan relatively very complex and nuanced missions. This could also serve to be more inviting to new players really reminding them at the start not to take this game too seriously and as they look ahead to where they can get they can think to themselves "I'm gunna make a rocket even cooler looking than that".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Souptime

Souptime

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

That's great, care to give your reason as to why?

Without the kerbals KSP would lose its personality, it would just be another space simulator. without kerbals the endless joy of it would be sucked out, yes you can have probes but what about manned missions? probes are old, humans are new! its much more impressive using humans or their equivalent to send out on missions. removing kerbals entirely would remove nearly 25% of the games content, like flavortext, part descriptions and the sort

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Le Lynx

Le Lynx

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Oneiros said:

i actually wonder if the cartoonish kerbals are the reason this game isn't taken seriously as a spaceflight sim outside the gaming community.

That's why my friends don't want to play...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcwaffles2003

mcwaffles2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, Souptime said:

Without the kerbals KSP would lose its personality, it would just be another space simulator.

I keep hearing this but I dont understand it. The ONLY other space sim I know that exists that is in any way similar to KSP is simple rockets 2. In my opinion that game is just very unfinished, lacks a lot of content, and has no where near the depth of simulation that KSP has. So please, if you can name another space flight sim that allows me to build and fly complex modular rockets with similar ease to KSP please tell me what it is, because when I hear "another space simulator" I'm left asking "what other ones even exist?"

10 minutes ago, Souptime said:

yes you can have probes but what about manned missions? 

Those exist, I personally dont fly them as much but it's not like I'm advocating getting rid of kerbinned flight here.

12 minutes ago, Souptime said:

probes are old, humans are new!

Umm... this is factually very incorrect, obviously, and is also meaningless.

13 minutes ago, Souptime said:

its much more impressive using humans or their equivalent to send out on missions.

Is it really? Why?

It is no harder and in some aspects... it's even easier. Go land a manned capsule on the back of the mun , now go land a probe on the back of the mun. The probe was harder, wasn't it? You had to send a relay along with the probe and keep it in high orbit with line of sight to both your probe and Kerbin simultaneously while your manned craft could just land.

16 minutes ago, Souptime said:

 removing kerbals entirely would remove nearly 25% of the games content, like flavortext, part descriptions and the sort

True, but 75% of the game would still be left. That said, I'm not advocating removing kerbals, I hope that isn't something this is suggesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Souptime

Souptime

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

I keep hearing this but I dont understand it. The ONLY other space sim I know that exists that is in any way similar to KSP is simple rockets 2. In my opinion that game is just very unfinished, lacks a lot of content, and has no where near the depth of simulation that KSP has. So please, if you can name another space flight sim that allows me to build and fly complex modular rockets with similar ease to KSP please tell me what it is, because when I hear "another space simulator" I'm left asking "what other ones even exist?"

Space agency, spaceflight simulator, SR2, all the other ones that come up when you search rocket builder

[snip]

2 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Is it really? Why?

It is no harder and in some aspects... it's even easier. Go land a manned capsule on the back of the mun , now go land a probe on the back of the mun. The probe was harder, wasn't it? You had to send a relay along with the probe and keep it in high orbit with line of sight to both your probe and Kerbin simultaneously while your manned craft could just land.

yeah, but for probes all you need is the probe, power, fuel, and a relay sat. humans need space, socialization, food, water, waste disposal, humans need lotsa things that probes DONT need. it is much easier to launch probes from earth to the moon and much more impressive when a human is launched just into LKO

Edited by Snark
Redacted by moderator
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bill Phil

Bill Phil

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Is it really? Why?

It is no harder and in some aspects... it's even easier. Go land a manned capsule on the back of the mun , now go land a probe on the back of the mun. The probe was harder, wasn't it? You had to send a relay along with the probe and keep it in high orbit with line of sight to both your probe and Kerbin simultaneously while your manned craft could just land.

Not if you turn off the comm mechanic of the game, like I regularly do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Souptime

Souptime

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Le Lynx said:

Sorry, I'm French and I make mistakes. Shame doesn't mean "dommage"?

Nope, its ok thoguh. being bi-lingual is hard. shame in english means, and i quote from google: "

"a painful feeling of humiliation or distress caused by the consciousness of wrong or foolish behavior.
"she was hot with shame" "
Link to comment
Share on other sites
evileye.x

evileye.x

Posted
Posted

First of all, this thread is pure heresy. :D

Especially after stock KIS upgrade.

Can you look in this brave little fella's eyes and say to him that he's overrated? :)

ACtC-3dYsUvLLKhdyhwQisNEHQKPnqedIlFZrbES

Also, Kerbals on EVA give good sense of scale. Also, life support and career mods. With some mods, successful  manned missions feel like achievements to be proud of.

Also KIS/KAS mods.

The thread is heresy, I tell you that much :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcwaffles2003

mcwaffles2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Souptime said:

Space agency, spaceflight simulator, SR2, all the other ones that come up when you search rocket builder

Ive beaten space agency, it was a decent game though getting to orbit was rather disappointing as you fly up to get there and not to the side...

[snip]

2 hours ago, Souptime said:

probes are old, humans are new!

But seriously, what do you mean to convey when you say this? why did you bother typing it. It doesn't emphasize your statement, it adds nothing new... so, why?

2 hours ago, Souptime said:

Space agency, spaceflight simulator, SR2, all the other ones that come up when you search rocket builder

yeah, but for probes all you need is the probe, power, fuel, and a relay sat. humans need space, socialization, food, water, waste disposal, humans need lotsa things that probes DONT need. it is much easier to launch probes from earth to the moon and much more impressive when a human is launched just into LKO

none of the things you stated humans need are in stock KSP... the kerbals need none of the things you have mentioned. Jeb can orbit around dres for 1000 years in nothing but his space suit. He doesn't need water, food, a toilet, HECK he dont even need a capsule, but in that case he has plenty of space :P. So, sorry, but you're bringing up something that apparently has nothing to do with kerbals. Meanwhile probes need something kerbals don't, a link of communication to the KSC, which is more than kerbals need.... so.......... yeah, I guess flying probes is "much more impressive" since they are by definition, harder to fly since they have more requirements to survive than kerbals. Funny how things turn around like that.

2 hours ago, Le Lynx said:

Sorry, I'm French and I make mistakes. Shame doesn't mean "dommage"?

what you said makes perfect sense with its context, I have no idea why @VoidCosmos is trying to correct you.

2 hours ago, VoidCosmos said:

We wouldn't get a good amount of laughter from Danny2462 if there were no kerbals

once again, not advocating removing them but if the main reason to keep them is so a youtuber can make content with them, then ok

Edited by Snark
Redacted by moderator
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VoidCosmos

VoidCosmos

Posted
Posted
Just now, mcwaffles2003 said:

Ive beaten space agency, it was a decent game though getting to orbit was rather disappointing as you fly up to get there and not to the side...

Well I guess surprisingly to you, my friends seem to think so, or at least thats what I think they think when I keep getting invited to them. Maybe its just all the fireworks I bring with me....

But seriously, what do you mean to convey when you say this? why did you bother typing it. It doesn't emphasize your statement, it adds nothing new... so, why?

none of the things you stated humans need are in stock KSP... the kerbals need none of the things you have mentioned. Jeb can orbit around dres for 1000 years in nothing but his space suit. He doesn't need water, food, a toilet, HECK he dont even need a capsule, but in that case he has plenty of space :P. So, sorry, but you're bringing up something that apparently has nothing to do with kerbals. Meanwhile probes need something kerbals don't, a link of communication to the KSC, which is more than kerbals need.... so.......... yeah, I guess flying probes is "much more impressive" since they are by definition, harder to fly since they have more requirements to survive than kerbals. Funny how things turn around like that.

You forgot about orbit decay

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcwaffles2003

mcwaffles2003

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, VoidCosmos said:

You forgot about orbit decay

where does orbit decay come into this? you realise it's both unrelated to the topic at hand AND isn't simulated in KSP outside an atmospheres hard boundary, right?

2 hours ago, VoidCosmos said:

. 

That was a typo

@mcwaffles2003define what you really mean

define what I really mean about what?

 

You do realize I can't read your mind, right? Please, take your time, make your questions/comments thoughtful/coherent, then post them.

[snip]

2 hours ago, VoidCosmos said:

Look at the poll. The poll speaks for itself 

I'm looking at it, what do I do now? It isn't talking. Is it okay? DID YOU HURT MY BEAUTIFUL BABY POLL?!

Edited by Snark
Redacted by moderator
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Souptime

Souptime

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

none of the things you stated humans need are in stock KSP... the kerbals need none of the things you have mentioned. Jeb can orbit around dres for 1000 years in nothing but his space suit. He doesn't need water, food, a toilet, HECK he dont even need a capsule, but in that case he has plenty of space :P. So, sorry, but you're bringing up something that apparently has nothing to do with kerbals. Meanwhile probes need something kerbals don't, a link of communication to the KSC, which is more than kerbals need.... so.......... yeah, I guess flying probes is "much more impressive" since they are by definition, harder to fly since they have more requirements to survive than kerbals. Funny how things turn around like that.

I was reffering to their use in real life,  as you sked why it was so much more impressive for a human to go to space than a probe. and.. mods. you forgot about mods.

[snip]

Edited by Snark
Redacted by moderator
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...