Fairing adjust system (how do you prefer to interact with the procedural fairings?)

[Vl3d]

Ugly oversized fairings ruin the game!

Edited August 30, 2023 by Vl3d

[Spicat]

Your poll should have the "both" option.

We still need the old system, sometimes fairings can be used for aesthetic:

Some parts of these craft were made with empty fairings. (No comment on the common theme of these pictures)

I would love to have this feature has an addition, like adding a button next to the buttons we have right now.

Edited August 30, 2023 by Spicat

[Vl3d]

Just now, Spicat said:

Your poll should have the "both" option.

We still need the old system, sometimes fairings can be used for aesthetic:

Some parts of this craft were made with empty fairings. (No comment on the common theme of these pictures)

I would love to have this feature has an addition, like adding a button next to the buttons we have right now.

I added the "both" option. But that should be added to the auto-adjusting pool.

[InterstellarDrifter]

The KSP1 design is perfect and did not require a refresh. They nailed it already, why change it?

[linuxgurugamer]

37 minutes ago, InterstellarDrifter said:

The KSP1 design is perfect and did not require a refresh. They nailed it already, why change it?

There were also two other methods to do fairings, one by Procedural Fairings, the other using Simple Adjustable fairings

Edited August 30, 2023 by linuxgurugamer

[shdwlrd]

I miss the procedural fairings mod. Much less headaches than the manual fairings.

[Meecrob]

Every time there is a poll for player's preferences, the answer unequivically is "make a clickbox so players can choose"

[chefsbrian]

5 hours ago, Meecrob said:

Every time there is a poll for player's preferences, the answer unequivically is "make a clickbox so players can choose"

Yup, and from a game designers perspective, its a nightmare to maintain infinitely expanding options and accounting for all the possible interactions. Which is why endless configurable options is rare

"Both" felt like a copout to me, so I voted for the KSP2 system - the specific interface could use some refinement, but having dragged points instead of mouse tracking is way preferable to me from a consistent interaction perspective - no more fairings freaking out because of a bad camera angle.

[Meecrob]

I'm very tired of the argument that its hard on the devs.  Look at the product the consumer receives.

[Superfluous J]

On 9/1/2023 at 9:34 AM, Meecrob said:

I'm very tired of the argument that its hard on the devs.  Look at the product the consumer receives.

It's not that the poor devs have to deal with it.

It's that making things unnecessarily more difficult to do makes the product take longer to make and/or makes the product worse in the long run.

[Snip]

Edited September 3, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[Meecrob]

[Snip]

I think that players are going to do things with the fairings that the designers never thought of, so I'd say keep as many options in as possible. The whole point of KSP is its not an arcade game.

Edited September 3, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[PDCWolf]

[Snip]

I'd like to keep the quickness of the first game, with an option to just type parameters, like they did with tweakables. I think that'd be the best way to both have the quick setup, and the option for the parameters to be entered manually. What they did right now is redesign a very quick and well implemented system that didn't need a redesign at all.

Edited September 3, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[shdwlrd]

A fairing that can be both procedural and manual wouldn't be that difficult to do. If you think it is, you're over thinking it.

This is a part level option, not one that would affect the whole of the game. You either choose to create the fairing manually or have the system create one for you. It's not that complicated.

[Meecrob]

[Snip]

The general idea behind making things toggleable is that we are a diverse group of people who do unintuitive things with the parts available. KSP allows very different people to have fun in entirely different manners all within the same game. Rather than shooting down my argument, do you have a suggestion? The coolest stuff about KSP, at least for me, is seeing people use parts in ways I never could have come up with on my own...and it inspires me to make crazy contraptions. This won't happen if we make fairings only to be fairings.

The popularity of this game is that you can play it totally different from me and we can both have fun due to the fact that things are options. 

[Snip]

Edited September 3, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[Periple]

I’m normally really against optional features or different ways to do the same thing because they add complication at every step, I’d much rather have fewer features that are better thought-out and implemented.

In this case though “both” would be totally feasible! Just have the regular manual fairing and add an “auto” button that creates one automatically. Shouldn’t be hard and would be a nice QoL feature!

[Bej Kerman]

[Snip]

On 9/1/2023 at 9:34 AM, Meecrob said:

I'm very tired of the argument that its hard on the devs.  Look at the product the consumer receives.

[Snip]

It is hard on the devs and CMs and I'm tired of people pretending otherwise so they can paint the developers as lazy demons who do nothing all week because they don't like some stinking game.

Edited September 3, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[Meecrob]

@Bej Kerman

The point of making a video game should be to make players happy, thus "look at the product the consumer receives."

Its the devs job, literally, to make a good game. Having said that, I am 100% against crunch, but making games isn't supposed to be easy.  If you wanna make good games, its gonna be stressful at times and hopefully it pays off in the end. I don't get this idea that the devs are "victims."

6 hours ago, Periple said:

Just have the regular manual fairing and add an “auto” button that creates one automatically. Shouldn’t be hard and would be a nice QoL feature!

I think we agree. Have the option to do both.

Edited September 2, 2023 by Meecrob

[Mitokandria]

I would be ok with the current system IF there was an option for auto/procedural. It's true that the current system allows for much finer control, but the beauty of the KSP1 method was speed and ease-of-use. I think the procedural method would hit on what made KSP1 fairings feel "good". It would also be very helpful if the drag arrows moved faster.

KSP2 fairings can already detect the bounding boxes of parts. The big problem I see is that KSP2 fairings likely weren't coded to allow simultaneously manipulating the length AND width. That might require nearly rebuilding the code for drawing the fairings...unless...

It becomes more of a hybrid method. Instead of KSP2's click&drag method a hybrid method would make the arrows a toggle. Increase the draw speed as well would really help.

[Bej Kerman]

On 9/2/2023 at 8:32 PM, Meecrob said:

making games isn't supposed to be easy

Neither should people wish developers live in caves because of their fascination with said games. It's just a game and it's a ridiculous reason to be saying what people are saying about the devs.

[Snip]

Edited September 3, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[James Kerman]

Some content has been removed. You are welcome to state your opinion about the fairing adjustment system but making things personal is not allowed and makes the forum a less welcoming place for everyone.

[Meecrob]

On 9/3/2023 at 4:42 AM, Bej Kerman said:

Neither should people wish developers live in caves because of their fascination with said games. It's just a game and it's a ridiculous reason to be saying what people are saying about the devs.

[Snip]

I think we have the disconnect here. To you, it is "just a game," to many, it is what inspired their career, or re-kindled a love of science that maybe wasn't nurtured when they were in high school, etc. This was hands down one of the best communities on the internet due to the fact that a game brought us all together. You can't do that on purpose...it has to happen organically...and its been ruined.

Nobody wants the devs to live in a cave...I'm pretty sure they just want them to work on the game...which we can all admit needs some work. As I've said before...once there is a game worth playing again, I bet the community will put their claws away.

[Bej Kerman]

16 hours ago, Meecrob said:

To you, it is "just a game," to many, it is what inspired their career, or re-kindled a love of science that maybe wasn't nurtured when they were in high school, etc.

I wouldn't say those put it much above being just a game.

16 hours ago, Meecrob said:

I'm pretty sure they just want them to work on the game

I can guarantee they are.

16 hours ago, Meecrob said:

once there is a game worth playing again, I bet the community will put their claws away

If said proverbial claws ever come out, they should be pointed at the corporations, not the devs.

[Meecrob]

16 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

I wouldn't say those put it much above being just a game.

And exactly how did you arrive at that conclusion? Go check out what some of the things people who got inspired by this game have went on to do. Kinda like when I was 7 years old, my Mom won a hot air balloon ride. Now you might call it "just a balloon ride" but that day, I knew that I wanted to be in the sky...like as a career. And it has influenced many of my big decisions since.

This is a large community and we all need to keep in mind that we don't all play the same way. To you it is "just a game." To others it is not. Your answer of "I don't think so" is selfish because you don't reference anything other than your own opinion.

16 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

I can guarantee they are.

Not on vacation they aren't. As I said before, I do not condone crunch, but the opposite end of the spectrum is don't charge premium prices for a non-premium experience, then go on vacation. It looks bad. The updates are sparse both in content and frequency. Nobody is impressed with this game. If it was called something other than "Kerbal Space Program" this thing would have died months ago.

 

16 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

If said proverbial claws ever come out, they should be pointed at the corporations, not the devs.

You will notice I said "once there is a game worth playing.." not "once the devs make a game worth playing"

I specifically typed out lots of my opinion on how publishers are making games for shareholders, not gamers. I can't force you to read it though...

Have a good one.

 

Oh, almost forgot...you conveniently did not reply to my point about how KSP had one of the best communities on the internet, hands down, before KSP2...

I can't make you get it, obviously, but its frustrating that this forum is dead. Like we must be less than 100 posts a day here. Clearly public opinion has spoken that the interest is waning. The answer is to make a game that attracts interest, not frustration. Stop trying to spin it...its simple...make a good game, people are happy to play said good game, and ultimately a good community is organically grown. You can't astroturf it with a half-baked facsimile.

[Bej Kerman]

9 hours ago, Meecrob said:

On 9/5/2023 at 6:47 AM, Bej Kerman said:

I wouldn't say those put it much above being just a game.

And exactly how did you arrive at that conclusion? Go check out what some of the things people who got inspired by this game have went on to do. Kinda like when I was 7 years old, my Mom won a hot air balloon ride. Now you might call it "just a balloon ride" but that day, I knew that I wanted to be in the sky...like as a career. And it has influenced many of my big decisions since.

If you've got an entire village getting on someone's case because their balloon didn't break the sound barrier, I can't say anything besides the fact it's just a balloon.

9 hours ago, Meecrob said:

On 9/5/2023 at 6:47 AM, Bej Kerman said:

I can guarantee they are.

Not on vacation they aren't.

Developers deserve vacations.

9 hours ago, Meecrob said:

KSP had one of the best communities on the internet, hands down, before KSP2...

It's hard to talk about a game you like or have hope for if any discussion is going to invite pessimism.

9 hours ago, Meecrob said:

its simple...make a good game, people are happy to play said good game

Implement submillimeter precision for interstellar distances, run several systems of colonies in the background... simple, right?

Here's something that's simple: drop any pre-2020 expectations because the old technical manager was out of their depth with these promises KSP 2 is still trying to reach.

[Vl3d]

51 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Here's something that's simple: drop any pre-2020 expectations because the old technical manager was out of their depth with these promises KSP 2 is still trying to reach.

I strongly disagree. We have no idea of the amount of technical work that went into creating the foundations of the game. The framework looks solid, bugs are being ironed out.