KSP2 EA: No new KSC buildings...

[Vl3d]

I've been looking over all available screenshots and I'm kind of sad that there's no new building(s) and also that there doesn't seem to be a lot of room to add any other to the KSC later. I was really hoping for a Planetarium building and a Museum / Showroom building where we can read Kerbal biographies, ship logs and also store craft returned from missions, our best craft designs or rare objects recovered from the solar system. I still hope the statue in front of the Astronaut Complex which basically replaces the Flag Pole doubles as a Fallen Heroes Memorial Plaque. I also hope there's an Observatory / Telescope Complex somewhere on a mountain on Kerbin.

For images go here:

Also.. where exactly is Mission Control?

Edited January 6, 2023 by Vl3d

[Wheehaw Kerman]

It’s still EA, with whole chunks of the game to follow.  Don’t be surprised if they add more buildings later.

[Vl3d]

17 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Don’t be surprised if they add more buildings later.

Maybe, but where? Maybe replacing the small lakes towards the East (lower part of the image)? There's a big hill on the left next to the runways so there's no room there. There could also be some room between launchpads 2 and 3, but that area should always be empty in case of RUDs.

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

I've been looking over all available screenshots and I'm kind of sad that there's no new building(s) and also that there doesn't seem to be a lot of room to add any other to the KSC later. I was really hoping for a Planetarium building and a Museum / Showroom building where we can read Kerbal biographies, ship logs and also store craft returned from missions, our best craft designs or rare objects recovered from the solar system. I still hope the statue in front of the Astronaut Complex which basically replaces the Flag Pole doubles as a Fallen Heroes Memorial Plaque. I also hope there's an Observatory / Telescope Complex somewhere on a mountain on Kerbin.

Also.. where exactly is Mission Control?

I mean I do think this says something, but the question is what  gameplay functions actually require a new building? Probably any discovery mechanic revealing new systems can be handled by the tracking station, and all of the exploration mode interface stuff can be handled at the Admin building. In fact I quite prefer that the devs stay focused on the core game mechanics and keep management distractions to a minimum. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by Pthigrivi

[t_v]

39 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

In fact I quite prefer that the devs stay focused on the core game mechanics and keep management distractions to a minimum

Specifically here for these proposed mechanics I agree with you, but I disagree generally. While having a solid core gameplay loop is important for a game, its side features, mini games, details, and other “distractions” are what oftentimes give games their character and make them interesting for long periods of time. There’s a reason why many combat or shooter games have puzzle segments or diversions that are don’t need to be there for good progression: they give a break from the main gameplay, introducing variety into the player’s experience and making the core gameplay loop more enjoyable as a result. 
 

In KSP, these exist to an extent, and in varying quality. There are two main loops you do in KSP: building a craft and flying it. Building is majority placing, rotating and transforming parts, using PAWs and other lists to set up those parts properly, and making sure that a variety of constraints are met. Flying, depending on the mission, will be predominantly conducted in the map view making sure that the course set is correctly and then executing it correctly, or in the flight mode, keeping a rover upright, a plane in the air, or a rocket pointing retrograde. There is lots of clicking around in PAWs for larger missions.
 

These two styles can keep players like me sustained for a while, but the added breaks really keep me from burning out due to gameplay alone. Kerbal EVAs are a cool little moment to relax during a challenging trip (if I don’t have reassembly to do) and reflect on the experience. It also breaks missions into chunks instead of a marathon maneuver node fiddling session. Satellite mapping, both Stock and Scansat, is a nice break where I can sit back and watch data appear, and occasionally mark anomalies with waypoints. After a mission is done, I don’t just go immediately back to building, either: there are science points to distribute, policies, building upgrades, and craft costs to choose from, and asteroids to mark for capture. These little distractions are actually the perfect remedy from burning out on an otherwise pretty focused game, and as long as they are short, they complement rather than detract from the main gameplay. 
 

The key point here is that you don’t want to oversaturate the game with these; checking up on a colony every once in a while can be fine, but when you have 30 of them it starts seriously cutting into your time, which is why colonies shouldn’t require maintenance on the player’s part. However, just because these systems shouldn’t take up your time doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be there at all - without them, the only way to avoid burnout is to just not play, while developing a negative experience around the game. 

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, t_v said:

The key point here is that you don’t want to oversaturate the game with these; checking up on a colony every once in a while can be fine, but when you have 30 of them it starts seriously cutting into your time, which is why colonies shouldn’t require maintenance on the player’s part. However, just because these systems shouldn’t take up your time doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be there at all - without them, the only way to avoid burnout is to just not play, while developing a negative experience around the game. 

I actually completely agree with your post, only I would say I feel exactly the way about program management as you do about colonies. Absolutely there's some framing and strategic management--choosing what technologies you wish to invest in and where best to go next to give players a sense of a grand plan and direction. But this side of things--scrolling through menus outside the VAB, BAE, and flight views--should be as efficient and minimized as humanly possible. Even upgrading colonies from to time should still be a design challenge very similar to that of designing a vessel. Those other strategic tasks should only exist if they serve core gameplay, if they create real, quantifiable incentives that affect a players access to technology, resources, personnel, and change the way a player plans and carries out missions. A museum would be neat. But does it actually affect gameplay? No. What is happening in a planetarium? Are we just zooming around looking at things? Can't we just use the tracking station to do that? Something like Scansat is an excellent example of a 'minigame' that has very direct and obvious implications for vessel design and orbital maneuvering. So are some tasks on EVA, because they have to do with how you move in space and how vessels are designed to make manual access to the surface and critical systems possible. Im most interested in resource gathering and processing dynamics because that could generate whole swaths of unique vessel designs to carry out the prospecting, harvesting, and processing chain. But do we need some kind of variant of Fallout Terminal hacking to get science to work? No. Do we want players spending 20% of their time scrolling through crew rosters and assigning tasks? God no. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by Pthigrivi

[t_v]

1 hour ago, Pthigrivi said:

I actually completely agree with your post, only I would say I feel exactly the way about program management as you do about colonies. Absolutely there's some framing and strategic management--choosing what technologies you wish to invest in and where best to go next to give players a sense of a grand plan and direction. But this side of things--scrolling through menus outside the VAB, BAE, and flight views--should be as efficient and minimized as humanly possible.

I’m not sure about the first statement. I don’t think that colonies should be as minimized as humanly possible, hence this part,

2 hours ago, t_v said:

just because these systems shouldn’t take up your time doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be there at all

I was just bringing up colonies as an example that wasn’t the KSC buildings. And I feel the same way about program management as I do colonies - namely, that I think it could be beneficial if well executed. We are on the same page that large amounts of time on these side tasks is detrimental (trying to transfer fuel anywhere is the epitome of that), and that scrolling through menus is not exactly the engaging diversion that we are hoping for. We are also on the same page that these things need to tie into the rest of the game in some way - both to incentivize players to do them and to make them more meaningful. Science progression is already tied into the main game so one example of how the side-gameplay of implementing new technology could be made engaging without becoming time consuming is to have an expanded Kerbilopedia (which has a KSC building dedicated to it) detailing the results of your experiments and once you make certain discoveries, new parts are unlocked. 
 

I’m personally in favor of a multi-resource science system instead of a discovery based one, but you can see how side-gameplay can be well designed and integrated into the game while not involving building or flying. In the end, I don’t care whether you can spend fifty seconds to five minutes in the Program Timeline building (missions influence colony happiness, for example) or in the Colony Management Module putting more kerbals in greenhouse jobs (and then leaving it be), or both, I just want there to be some action that is not done automatically that isn’t the same gameplay that dominates the game. 

[Snafu225]

13 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

A museum would be neat. But does it actually affect gameplay? No. What is happening in a planetarium? Are we just zooming around looking at things? Can't we just use the tracking station to do that?

This. Pretty much nothing to add to it. Yes, those buildings add a little to the experience but my "museum" will be on the planet surfaces, where I see past/old expeditions, the first base structures etc. I don't need and don't want to do that in a menu/building on kerbin. It might be need for things like the first probe to flyby/orbit something, but is it cool enough that I'd want dev time used up for it? Nah, not really. Maybe, as soon as KSP 2 as future DLCs or free updates, but now I couldn't care less about things like that, even if that might sound a bit harsh.

@Vl3d I read your Wishlist/Suggestions collection and though I pretty much agree with 99% of all those ideas a majority is (in my oppinion) just stuff that's nice to have but far from needed or way to ressource intesive to develop/implement. Right now we're looking at a barebones beta release, what matters here is a stable, solid foundation for future features and expansions. 

[Vl3d]

3 minutes ago, Snafu225 said:

my "museum" will be on the planet surfaces, where I see past/old expeditions

I just think it's nice to walk around and see designs being exhibited in a nice environment - to see all your best designs next to each other, the first successful manned return pods, your cars, rovers.. a lot of stuff holds real sentimental value for players, we should have a place to store it.

7 minutes ago, Snafu225 said:

a majority of those ideas is (in my opinion) just stuff that's nice to have but far from needed

The game and mod devs at least have a list of ideas available and can pick interesting things to implement in the future.

[Pthigrivi]

12 hours ago, t_v said:

In the end, I don’t care whether you can spend fifty seconds to five minutes in the Program Timeline building (missions influence colony happiness, for example) or in the Colony Management Module putting more kerbals in greenhouse jobs (and then leaving it be), or both, I just want there to be some action that is not done automatically that isn’t the same gameplay that dominates the game. 

Oh yeah exactly. I'd definitely love to see a things like radiation and LS and habitation space get balled into a happiness rating that affected output, and I'd love if many modules like greenhouses, science labs, nurseries, maybe production facilitates and reactors had higher performance when crew were assigned. When I say you shouldn't be spending 20% of your time on that Im really saying you should be spending 1-2% of your time on that, and that the actual interface and mechanics should make moving kerbals around so easy that you can run through and fine tune a colony of a hundred kerbals in a minute or so. I think this kind of simplified population management with a really tight set of variables and feedback mechanics is another great example of a minigame that fits because it affects the way you design colonies, what resources you need, and consequently where players choose to go and explore and build. 

21 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I just think it's nice to walk around and see designs being exhibited in a nice environment - to see all your best designs next to each other, the first successful manned return pods, your cars, rovers.. a lot of stuff holds real sentimental value for players, we should have a place to store it.

The game and mod devs at least have a list of ideas available and can pick interesting things to implement in the future.

Oh and I agree that would be cool. I guess from my perspective it's just not necessary or critical, and given that they're trying to get all the big nuts and bolts organized in EA I'd rather see energy spent on things that are necessary and critical. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by Pthigrivi

[Snafu225]

13 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I just think it's nice to walk around and see designs being exhibited in a nice environment - to see all your best designs next to each other, the first successful manned return pods, your cars, rovers.. a lot of stuff holds real sentimental value for players, we should have a place to store it.

Don't get me wrong, I think something like that would be nice.  Just like I said, it's nothing KSP2 needs right now or most likely even a year after release. Despite that I feel like this has been discussed to the moon (mun? ;D) and back and it's important the devs start off with a good basegame for the community and future development to thrive on and than we can talk about museums.
 

4 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

Oh and I agree that would be cool. I guess from my perspective it's just not necessary or critical, and given that they're trying to get all the big nuts and bolts organized in EA I'd rather see energy spent on things that are necessary and critical. 

 

Edited January 7, 2023 by Snafu225
added a quote which happened while writing the post

[Bej Kerman]

On 1/7/2023 at 5:19 PM, Vl3d said:

On 1/7/2023 at 5:06 PM, Snafu225 said:

my "museum" will be on the planet surfaces, where I see past/old expeditions

I just think it's nice to walk around and see designs being exhibited in a nice environment - to see all your best designs next to each other, the first successful manned return pods, your cars, rovers.. a lot of stuff holds real sentimental value for players, we should have a place to store it.

Would rather the devs first do things that have an actual improvement on the game. I can't think of any possible benefit something like this would have that can't be fulfilled with screenshots while the devs organize important things. As for something like a planetarium... I mean, with the tracking station, a planetarium would be completely redundant.

[mattinoz]

On 1/7/2023 at 11:11 AM, Vl3d said:

Maybe, but where? Maybe replacing the small lakes towards the East (lower part of the image)? There's a big hill on the left next to the runways so there's no room there. There could also be some room between launchpads 2 and 3, but that area should always be empty in case of RUDs.

Seems to be some structures hidden by the rocket burn at far end of runway. 

[Vl3d]

6 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

I mean, with the tracking station, a planetarium would be completely redundant.

I think you underestimate the concept of the Planetarium. It's suppose to show you a lot more about a planet than just it's actual state. It shows togglable layers, evolution history, scientific details. Sure it can be integrated in the tracking station, but it's a different beast.

[Bej Kerman]

52 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I think you underestimate the concept of the Planetarium. It's suppose to show you a lot more about a planet than just it's actual state. It shows togglable layers, evolution history, scientific details. Sure it can be integrated in the tracking station, but it's a different beast.

None of that contributes to the gameplay in any shape or form. It looks pretty and that's about all it does. Would much rather the devs focus on actual features as opposed to glorified decorations.