No Quicksaves

[IllicitMedic]

Lol, no where in my post did I tell anyone to play it my way....jesus people...

Moderators please lock this before it gets any worse.

[OopsThatNotWork]

I only started using them recently myself (been playing since 0.14) and only done so because a crane i made acts completely differently in low gravity than how i want it to, and don't want to have to keep re-landing base parts because every time i try to rotate the crane ever so slightly it does donuts.

Edit: fixing crane for 0.21 so no saves again

[Khrissetti]

Lol, no where in my post did I tell anyone to play it my way....jesus people...

Moderators please lock this before it gets any worse.

You didn't, others did.

[bogpad]

Lol, no where in my post did I tell anyone to play it my way....jesus people...

Moderators please lock this before it gets any worse.

you didn't indeed, but there were other people kind enough to derail it for you, so I guess, as you suggested, this one is for the mods to close.

[IllicitMedic]

you didn't indeed, but there were other people kind enough to derail it for you, so I guess, as you suggested, this one is for the mods to close.

Unfortunately, it never fails.

[Sma]

I think people are going by your title "No Quicksaves" thinking you're trying to push that on other people. Even if you aren't trying to push your believe on others, there are a few that were I think trying to do that.

I do agree with those that mention that NASA does extensive testing and simulations over and over until they get it right, which I would consider the sandbox as being that testing, once career mode comes around. In career mode however I do agree there should be little to no mods being as that by the time the full game is released most of the mods should be included. Maybe even debug mode should be taken out of career mod as well, since it has the ability for infinite fuel and hacking gravity.

As far as MechJeb, I myself don't use it, and don't suggest that other people use it, except in cases where they're launching the same thing over and over again and they've gotten bored of launching the same thing manually. Obviously I'm not going to call someone names, or berate them because they do use mech jeb, I just think it's more important to know the basics and how to do things "manually" first, just in case. I mean, as much as the shuttle and soyuz "fly them selfs" they still train to fly them manually in case something goes wrong and the computers aren't working. As for the shuttle, I'm pretty certain that a good portion of its landing was done manually(including the deorbit - directed by timers run by computers however - between deorbit and entry interface though, or the point at which the flaps and aero control surfaces start working I'm not sure, though it did have the option to land automatically/remotely in case something were to happen to the pilot/co-pilot. Docking also for the most part was done manually, though technically guided by computers that gave distance and speed readouts. Recently though, as they get more and more cargo flights to ISS they've been semi-automatic in that the cargo ship rendezvous with ISS to a parking orbit, where they can then reach out with the robotic arm and pull it in to dock. I believe though there was a (maybe a few) fully automatic docking(s) but for the most part they just don't trust computers to do that particular part just yet.

Anyway, didn't mean to babble on In short, in sandbox mode you should be able to do whatever you want, but in career mode, you should have to stick to whatever the devs decide to limit you by. I'm sure there will be people complaining about how certain parts cost, or how you're limited to certain things, but there's a saying that holds true for pretty much everything "You can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time".

[-RanZ-]

you made the statement that NASA doesn't get quick saves... NASA also has advanced computers that do all course planning and ensures the human variable is as small as possible so there are no screw ups. MechJeb works good for that!

[WeApOn]

Fully support this. I was playing for my first time last night and a few people mentioned I should quicksave on my way to the Mun.

If I landed on the Mun for the first time by spamming quicksave along the way, it would be so much less to me. I want to earn my objectives.

[AfailingHORSE]

Rarely use the function, not because I don't 'believe' in it, but merely because I forget it exists half the time.

[WhiteWeasel]

you didn't indeed, but there were other people kind enough to derail it for you, so I guess, as you suggested, this one is for the mods to close.

Yeah, this thread was a victim of the "Stop having fun guys".

In the end, what makes a "Stop Having Fun" Guy isn't the rule-setting, it's the attitude. "Stop Having Fun" Guy believes that this [theirs'] is the only right way to play the game.

Honestly I find the notion of upsetting someone by your playstyle in a single payer game absurd. You can only cheat yourself. And that's if you perceive them as cheats in the first place.

Edited July 24, 2013 by WhiteWeasel

[boxman]

Lol, no where in my post did I tell anyone to play it my way....jesus people...

Moderators please lock this before it gets any worse.

Asking that squad removes quick saves for career mode is exactly telling people how to play the game.

You can already decide for yourself if you want to use quick saves or not, but the likes of you want to force everyone not to use them.

If you were open to people deciding for themselves you would be okay with quick saves being in career mode.

Why is it so hard to let the player decide??

I did not disagree at all with your original post. But your reply at post #31 shows that you do want to tell others how to play the game, as you did agree that quick saves should only be possible in career mode:

Quote Originally Posted by Alguien View Post

The same logic applies to you, if you don't like the idea of quicksaves then keep playing in sandbox mode, Career mode is suppose to give a challenge, if you can just ignore said challenge by quicksaving then whats the point of playing Career mode in the first place?

your reply: This

10 characters!

Edited July 24, 2013 by boxman

[Levelord]

Asking to have the removal of the quicksave for everyone is incredibly insulting because it's projecting your lack of self discipline onto others.

You want a challenge? DO IT YOURSELF and stop depending on others to change the game to suit your own lack of quicksave discipline.

[satcharna]

Asking to have the removal of the quicksave for everyone is incredibly insulting because it's projecting your lack of self discipline onto others.

You want a challenge? DO IT YOURSELF and stop depending on others to change the game to suit your own lack of quicksave discipline.

It's not that we lack the discipline to not use it, it's that we want the game to impose challenges on us, to have a set of rules to play by. Sure, you could make a Mario game without enemies, and tell us to just pretend that there are enemies around if we want a challenge, but it wouldn't be a good game. You could make a GTA game without the police, and tell us to pretend that some NPCs are police if we want a challenge, but it wouldn't be a good game. Every good game has a set of rules and built-in challenges, including most simulators. All we want is for Kerbal to also have rules and challenges. Sure, nothing should be too challenging, but a career mode without quicksaves isn't too challenging, simply because we have a sandbox mode to experiment and learn in, which clearly should still keep quicksave around.

Part of what makes modern games so simple and dull is that we can save whenever we want to, and how often we feel like. Sure, you'll beat the game easier and quicker if you can simply make a quicksave after every enemy, but it removes all the feeling of defeat you get from dying just before the boss of the level, and the feeling of accomplishment when you finally figure out the strategy.

Sandbox mode is for testing, learning and goofing around in, and career is for challenging us to manage a successful space programme on a limited budget in as realistic a setting as possible.

[CaptRobau]

I'm going to actually use quicksave more. The improvements made in 0.21 (ASAS, etc.) make manual flying more user-friendly so I'm going to MechJeb-less for a while and rediscover the universe manually. I don't have unlimited time, so those quicksaves are going to be necessary.

[Levelord]

It's not that we lack the discipline to not use it, it's that we want the game to impose challenges on us, to have a set of rules to play by. Sure, you could make a Mario game without enemies, and tell us to just pretend that there are enemies around if we want a challenge, but it wouldn't be a good game. You could make a GTA game without the police, and tell us to pretend that some NPCs are police if we want a challenge, but it wouldn't be a good game. Every good game has a set of rules and built-in challenges, including most simulators. All we want is for Kerbal to also have rules and challenges. Sure, nothing should be too challenging, but a career mode without quicksaves isn't too challenging, simply because we have a sandbox mode to experiment and learn in, which clearly should still keep quicksave around.

Part of what makes modern games so simple and dull is that we can save whenever we want to, and how often we feel like. Sure, you'll beat the game easier and quicker if you can simply make a quicksave after every enemy, but it removes all the feeling of defeat you get from dying just before the boss of the level, and the feeling of accomplishment when you finally figure out the strategy.

Sandbox mode is for testing, learning and goofing around in, and career is for challenging us to manage a successful space programme on a limited budget in as realistic a setting as possible.

Your analogies don't match at all, having the quicksave around is not the same as not having police in GTA or not having enemies in Mario. Mainly because you can choose to use the quicksaves, while in your analogies the choice to have enemies is not there.

There is an entire forum subsection dedicated to challenges that doesn't require their rules to be hard coded into the game, so stop pretending there is no challenge because of an optional feature that you can't discipline yourself to abstain from. You want a challenge, go to that subforum.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Levelord

[satcharna]

Your analogies don't match at all, having the quicksave around is not the same as not having police in GTA or not having enemies in Mario. Mainly because you can choose to use the quicksaves, while in your analogies the choice to have enemies is not there.

There is an entire forum subsection dedicated to challenges that doesn't require their rules to be hard coded into the game, so stop pretending there is no challenge because of an optional feature that you can't discipline yourself to abstain from. You want a challenge, go to that subforum.

And you completely miss my point.

I know that we can impose challenges on ourselves, and that's great. I want the game to ALSO impose challenges on us. A difficult concept to imagine, I'm sure.

For the record, I have absolutely no problem with self control, and haven't personally used quicksave in several months. I just don't want Squad to make the mistake of making the game too easy by adding too many crutches in the career mode.

Edited July 24, 2013 by satcharna

[Levelord]

And you completely miss my point.

I know that we can impose challenges on ourselves, and that's great. I want the game to ALSO impose challenges on us. A difficult concept to imagine, I'm sure.

The game already imposes a challenge with it's orbital mechanics and physics simulation. Removing the quicksave feature doesn't change the nature of the physics engine or how you get into orbit because it has nothing to do with it. I can't believe you think that removing the quicksave will magically make the game more challenging when you can achieve the exact same thing by simply not pressing the F5 button. A difficult concept to imagine, I'm sure.

I didn't miss your point because you didn't have any to begin with and you're simply going that route because I'm feeling that you're trying to be intellectually dishonest with me.

[satcharna]

The game already imposes a challenge with it's orbital mechanics and physics simulation.

Yes, it simulates space physics. So what? Getting into space and staying there really isn't all that difficult, and career mode is going to be more than just orbital mechanics and physics, it will also contain kerbal training, economy, and missions. All I'm saying is that the career mode, made for people who know how to play the game, shouldn't have quicksave, which is a feature made for those who don't yet know how to play the game. I'm saying that sandbox should have quicksave and be a place to learn, and career should be a lot more serious, and thus not have tutorial features like that. My point would be very obvious to you had you actually bothered to read my posts rather than just skimming them over, and the only one being dishonest here is you.

[AncientAstronaut]

You will hate your life the first time you fly some complex mission and the game crashes immediately after you enter your target's SOI. lol

[Firenexus13]

i never used them, and i don't plan on.

[acealeam]

Believe it or not, not everyone has super computers. If you do, that's awesome! But just because you're immortal to crashes and don't use quick save doesn't mean we should be forced to deal with it too.

[Flixxbeatz]

What about having a limited amount of quicksaves in career mode?

And if you ask, I only use quicksaves when trying something that will likely result in a "blooper reel" situation (before doing something that has a high chance of ruining anything of my stuff in orbit) or before doing a very difficult task (case in point: landing on Tylo)

Edited July 24, 2013 by Flixxbeatz

[acealeam]

What about having a limited amount of quicksaves in career mode?

So like, 5 per mission?

This is actually a good idea.

[Levelord]

Yes, it simulates space physics. So what? Getting into space and staying there really isn't all that difficult, and career mode is going to be more than just orbital mechanics and physics, it will also contain kerbal training, economy, and missions. All I'm saying is that the career mode, made for people who know how to play the game, shouldn't have quicksave, which is a feature made for those who don't yet know how to play the game. I'm saying that sandbox should have quicksave and be a place to learn, and career should be a lot more serious, and thus not have tutorial features like that. My point would be very obvious to you had you actually bothered to read my posts rather than just skimming them over, and the only one being dishonest here is you.

There is still no reason for the quicksave to be removed in a campaign mode because it doesn't affect the difficulty. If someone was that determined to save their progress, they would copy and paste their save files over and over again, so removing the quicksave option does nothing except inconvenience everyone else who use it legitimately (yes there are legitimate uses for it in campaign mode if you can put the effort to wrap your head around it).

The only difference between campaign mode and sandbox mode is the inclusion of mission goals and a budget. You're making a case where quicksaves factor into this and it's absence creates a challenge, which doesn't. The physics, limited budget and mission goals determine the challenge, not quicksaves.

[satcharna]

What about having a limited amount of quicksaves in career mode?

And if you ask, I only use quicksaves when trying something that will likely result in a "blooper reel" situation (before doing something that has a high chance of ruining anything of my stuff in orbit) or before doing a very difficult task (case in point: landing on Tylo)

Testing your designs is what sandbox is for, but a limited amount of quicksaves in career might work. It would give some safety from bugs, but not really be exploitable. A limit to a single restore per mission would work as well.

There is still no reason for the quicksave to be removed in a campaign mode because it doesn't affect the difficulty. If someone was that determined to save their progress, they would copy and paste their save files over and over again, so removing the quicksave option does nothing except inconvenience everyone else who use it legitimately (yes there are legitimate uses for it in campaign mode if you can put the effort to wrap your head around it).

The only difference between campaign mode and sandbox mode is the inclusion of mission goals and a budget. You're making a case where quicksaves factor into this and it's absence creates a challenge, which doesn't. The physics, limited budget and mission goals determine the challenge, not quicksaves.

Have you read the thread at all? This was brought up almost immediately: In a gamemode where budget is important, a failed launch/landing/whatever is a catastrophe and has consequences. Being able to just go lolquicksave until you succeed ruins the entire idea behind the gamemode.