People, people, calm down

[spectrhz]

Lol, I left the forums when .22 came out because I was to busy with KSP, I had no idea people were upset with it... May i ask what people are upset about? This is my favorite update by far.

[Gus]

I don't think Squad spent a lot of time on their tech tree, knowing full well that modders would spend countless hours developing their own.

When Squad next updates the tech tree, they will be able to incorporate all of the ideas uncovered by the modders.

[Edit: Full credit to them developing a good moddable system though.]

Edited October 20, 2013 by Gus

[regex]

I don't think Squad spent a lot of time on their tech tree, knowing full well that modders would spend countless hours developing their own.

When Squad next updates the tech tree, they will be able to incorporate all of the ideas uncovered by the modders.

Squad needs to change their attitude towards the tech tree before that happens.

Now, an economy and other such features may fully flesh out career mode but the tech tree will always just be a small sideline of that for anyone who's been playing KSP for any amount of time. Science may also play a big role in career mode, but the tech tree will still be an introductory tool. It's not going to be more meaningful under an economy. It's not going to be awesome because of modder input. It's not going to really be anything other than an introductory tool so long as Squad continues to think of it and balance it as such. Until they change gears on it, it's pretty much just a speed bump for experienced players.

And all that is perfectly fine for career mode, and we will likely end up with a rich and rewarding experience, but the stock tech tree will have little relevance past your first foray through it.

[Whackjob]

I don't think for a second the stock tech tree will remain this simple. We've got a lot of other mechanics coming down the pipe, and I don't doubt that quite a few will find a home as nodes on that tree. We may even see stat-buff sub-nodes.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, it's silly to make a grand judgement on what is effectively a placeholder in an alpha. Let's wait until the tree is shaken to talk about what fell out of it.

[Frostiken]

I have been surfing the forums for the last couple of days and seen a lot happen. There is an overly large amount anger and much of it is being vented at the Devs. There are various reasons from the 'Hardcore' gamer not being supported by squad anymore to the lack of content and the arrangement of tech tree and things like development cycles and stuff. I just want everyone to calm down and take a deep breath. There are some valid concerns but venting the anger the hand that feeds you' isn't going to get you guys anywhere. I am not going to propose any solutions to these problems as they are my opinions and my opinion isn't shared by everyone but be nice to the mods and developers.

I will leave you with a Indian Proverb: "If things aren' perfect or you are not happy, the journey you are on is not over and it is only over when things get better"

People are probably getting frustrated.

1) The game costs more than ever. The team is larger than ever. And for some completely unknown reason, the updates are coming slower than ever. 0.21, 0.20, and 0.19 had so little actual content they could've been combined into one update and honestly shouldn't have taken the half a year it took. A year and a half ago when the team was about two people and one guy part-time, they were redoing the entire terrain system, implemented five planets and a half-dozen moons, overhauled the graphics twice, and built the docking system from scratch. Now the team is about a dozen people and we get a couple new menus? We're still being told they 'don't have time' to even put in basic features like ghost markers on the navball showing you where the maneuver nodes are?

2) The features that we wait for are meager offerings. They hired the creator of KSPX. We've gotten like five parts from the KSPX pack (out of about ninety that were in the pack itself) in the six plus months it's been since she was hired.

3) Developers are now openly taking a pro-casuals approach with the game. Everything up to now has been fairly 'open'... sandbox has no rules and flight is flight, so there's been no establishment of where the game would really be going. Now that the framework for the actual rules and 'direction' of the game is being laid, we're straight up being told by the devs that 'hardcore players' (ie: like 90% of the people who've been supporting the game) are going to blow through the career mode in an afternoon by design, so people are feeling betrayed. We're basically being given content and told that we're not allowed to have fun with it because we're "too good".

Edited October 20, 2013 by stupid_chris
removed profanity, do not re-add it.

[Whackjob]

People are probably getting frustrated.

1) The game costs more than ever. The team is larger than ever. And for some completely unknown reason, the updates are coming slower than ever. 0.21, 0.20, and 0.19 had so little actual content they could've been combined into one update and honestly shouldn't have taken the half a year it took. A year and a half ago when the team was about two people and one guy part-time, they were redoing the entire terrain system, implemented five planets and a half-dozen moons, overhauled the graphics twice, and built the docking system from scratch. Now the team is about a dozen people and we get a couple new menus? We're still being told they 'don't have time' to even put in basic features like ghost markers on the navball showing you where the maneuver nodes are?

2) The features that we wait for are meager offerings. They hired the creator of KSPX. We've gotten like five parts from the KSPX pack (out of about ninety that were in the pack itself) in the six plus months it's been since she was hired.

3) Developers are now openly taking a pro-casuals approach with the game. Everything up to now has been fairly 'open'... sandbox has no rules and flight is flight, so there's been no establishment of where the game would really be going. Now that the framework for the actual rules and 'direction' of the game is being laid, we're straight up being told by the devs that 'hardcore players' (ie: like 90% of the people who've been supporting the game) are going to blow through the career mode in an afternoon by design, so people are feeling betrayed. We're basically being given content and told that we're not allowed to have fun with it because we're "too good".

The issue appears to be that you have unrealistic expectations. You are working from a severely limited data set, and you have no idea what all of their time is going in to. They may very well be working multiple parallel paths, some that yield fruit sooner than others. It could be the reason that we're seeing things slowing down is because bigger things are building in the back. You simply do not know. And neither do I.

But I do know that posting in the manner which you are is inherently non-constructive. You will not badger the devs into doing things the way you want by posting in that manner.

Sit back, take a deep breath, relax. Play some Kerbal.

Edited October 20, 2013 by shadowsutekh
removed rule violating portion of quote

[Specialist290]

If money is what is needed for career mode to be relevant, no problem. But money isn't going to suddenly make an introductory feature more challenging because it will always have to be balanced against its introductory nature. This is why the tech tree will never be relevant to long-term players; it will remain a speed-bump and nothing more.

Precisely what I've been trying to say before myself. For me, the real challenge isn't going to be unlocking the entire tech tree, but (hopefully) juggling multiple, possibly conflicting goals and priorities in order to keep my space program running. The precise layout of the tech tree and the order in which I unlock parts will be secondary to that, coming into play only inasmuch as I can determine whether or not I can accomplish my goals with whatever I have available.

I've played with the stock tech tree, and while the novelty was fun while it lasted, without the distinct possibility that my decisions could seriously affect the success or failure of my space program as a whole, I haven't had much incentive to keep going when I already have my more-fleshed-out sandbox save that I ported over from 0.21 and have gotten up to speed.

That being said, I also agree with Whackjob: I'm sure that Squad is going to eventually work out something that is fully appealing to players of all skill levels and most play styles.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Specialist290

[Sof]

Squad needs to change their attitude towards the tech tree before that happens.

Now, an economy and other such features may fully flesh out career mode but the tech tree will always just be a small sideline of that for anyone who's been playing KSP for any amount of time. Science may also play a big role in career mode, but the tech tree will still be an introductory tool. It's not going to be more meaningful under an economy. It's not going to be awesome because of modder input. It's not going to really be anything other than an introductory tool so long as Squad continues to think of it and balance it as such. Until they change gears on it, it's pretty much just a speed bump for experienced players.

And all that is perfectly fine for career mode, and we will likely end up with a rich and rewarding experience, but the stock tech tree will have little relevance past your first foray through it.

Except what you linked to doesn't prove anything.

Asides from the fact that you didn't even bother to test the stock tree out for yourself, there is plenty of expanding that can be done into the tech tree. It is introductory because they don't want to make the first few science missions impossible for new players.

However, this doesn't then mean that later levels of tech aren't going to be challenging for the more experienced people.

Do you honestly expect to be challenged by the first few "levels" of any game you are good at?

If anything, the tech tree is going to get a lot longer as the game progresses. The later levels for things like base building and resource mining are going to require plenty of science. And with the addition of realistic drag and re-entry, maybe people won't be doing Minmus landing/returns with the first level of research.

[stupid_chris]

2) The features that we wait for are meager offerings. They hired the creator of KSPX. We've gotten like five parts from the KSPX pack (out of about ninety that were in the pack itself) in the six plus months it's been since she was hired.

Holla, hold on there friend. Current person managing what is left of the KSPX pack here, because really, "what is left" is the correct thing to say here. KSPX was far from having 90ish parts, there were thirty three parts in the whole pack before Claira was hired, twenty were added to stock and there are now 13 left, and not the most important to be honest. And it's also important to note that Claira is currently on leave for classes, she is only helping where she can and when she can. And that is not "making tons of new parts".

The development team currently consists of three coders, one coder/content designer, two part time content designers , two web developers, and one artist/animator. That's really what I would call a large team like you claim when four people are actually working on the game itself on a daily basis.

Edited October 20, 2013 by stupid_chris

[toomuchbrew]

Over hear it's 'rome wasn't build in 1 day.

No, but didn't it burn in a day?

[Ernest3.14]

1) The game costs more than ever. The team is larger than ever. And for some completely unknown reason, the updates are coming slower than ever. 0.21, 0.20, and 0.19 had so little actual content they could've been combined into one update and honestly shouldn't have taken the half a year it took. A year and a half ago when the team was about two people and one guy part-time, they were redoing the entire terrain system, implemented five planets and a half-dozen moons, overhauled the graphics twice, and built the docking system from scratch. Now the team is about a dozen people and we get a couple new menus? We're still being told they 'don't have time' to even put in basic features like ghost markers on the navball showing you where the maneuver nodes are?

Well, we did get subassemblies... As for the team issue, please see this article by HarvestR, which is a response to concerns like yours. Around the time of the 0.20 update, there was a lot of griping about the development process, and eventually that led to the weekly dev updates (yay!). There's a lot of behind-the-scenes work going on, but the devs try to add stuff that's more "prominent" in each update as well. If you read through some of the weekly updates from around that time you'll see discussions about this in the comments.

2) The features that we wait for are meager offerings. They hired the creator of KSPX. We've gotten like five parts from the KSPX pack (out of about ninety that were in the pack itself) in the six plus months it's been since she was hired.

I think she is on leave. Not to hand-wave here, but there's been quite a bit of behind-the-scenes work going on. We weren't even able to start career mode saves before 0.22. Also, there's been some work done on the resources/mining system, which simply hasn't been released, pending more career mode development.

3) Developers are now openly taking a pro-casuals approach with the game. Everything up to now has been fairly 'open'... sandbox has no rules and flight is flight, so there's been no establishment of where the game would really be going. Now that the framework for the actual rules and 'direction' of the game is being laid, we're straight up being told by the devs that 'hardcore players' (ie: like 90% of the people who've been supporting the game) are going to blow through the career mode in an afternoon by design, so people are feeling betrayed. We're basically being given content and told that we're not allowed to have fun with it because we're "too good".

I agree that the tech tree needs improvements. There's quite a few very thought-out suggestions for this on the "Suggestions & Development" forum. For example, this one. You should post there if you want to contribute to the discussion.

EDIT: ninja'd while I was looking up links.

[Frostiken]

The issue appears to be that you have unrealistic expectations. You are working from a severely limited data set, and you have no idea what all of their time is going in to.

Gee, wouldn't it be just fantastic if they could take five minutes out of their clearly overwhelmingly busy days planning meetings to meet to plan the next meeting discuss the plan to think about implementing the singular feature we'll get for 0.23 in four months, and instead explain exactly why progress is so miserable...

It could be the reason that we're seeing things slowing down is because bigger things are building in the back. You simply do not know. And neither do I.

No, what I know is what I see. We were told progress was slow for resources. Then resources got not only back-burner'd but we also got told it'll be severely dumbed-down from the original concept. Then we got told progress was slow for career mode implementation. Then we got told progress was slow for astronaut training (which is literally one screen where you can randomly add a kerbal - there's no 'training' to be had). Then we got told progress was slow for science. So what's the latest excuse? Progress is slow for economics? Progress is slow for resourcing (again)? Progress is slow for missions? After all these things are implements in what I imagine won't be earlier than another year from now, what then?

You will not badger the devs into doing things the way you want by posting in that manner.

The devs know what I want, they know what other people want, and it's pretty clear they no longer give a damn what anyone wants.

Did you know that once upon a time they actually used the suggestions forum and talked back to people in it? Now it's a huge garbage dumpster where the mods dump difficult topics so they can more easily be ignored.

[Valley]

No, but didn't it burn in a day?

Rome was not built in a day - it was never finished. Cities are always growing. A game that is never finished can become a game not worth playing...to be honest.

Also, Rome had fires every day. Sometimes even bad ones once a week if there was no rain and the wind was strong. The fire Nero was blamed for most likely was an accident (and it is my understanding he wasn't in Rome at the time - he could of had somebody else start it of course). Anyway, the people were not really mad at him for the fire but for trying to rebuild the area burnt into his own private palace.

But back to the topic at hand...

I can see why some people can get mad at the update. By the time you're starting to get somewhere in the game...it changes. There is no closure. Also, while I have been told KSP was not meant to be realistic (which is why they refuse to add computers and other stuff) does not adding a Tech Tree kind of suggest it is meant to become realistic? And while it does allow a player to decide their own line of development...they only added a few new pieces of equipment. Which don't work in sandbox - which is more of a petty complaint really but it just adds wood to the fire.

I don't think people are truly mad at the game as much as a lot of people are all slightly annoyed by certain things AND a majority complain that the update either added very little or added nothing at all, from their point of view. They are kind of fueling each other's flames. Right when I was starting to figure out how to use Lifesupport and KAS and Kethane together I end up having to update (though I did save my save file by stripping down some of the stations and craft).

The end result is I have MechJeb 2 working again for the sandbox and am being forced to learn how to use SAS in career...and having less and less fun with each additional hour of play in that mode.

While not 'mad' I do think that the creators may wish to take a look at the mods that are most popular and see what players like and want. I understand it is their game and they can develop it anyway they wish. But if they plan to make people pay for it that also makes their game a product and they should listen to the customers. But this is coming from a customer who thinks Minecraft and Dwarf Fortress are, in some ways, superior because of the feedback from the players. Well, DF is free and people STILL complain about that also. Go figure.

Still, IMHO, without the mods I think a lot less people would STILL be playing it.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Valley

[Odo]

This is exactly how I feel. You were just given a new feature in a game.

How are you complaining? So what if its not for hardcore gamers!? ITS A NEW FEATURE! A new feature that might be flawed is better then not a new feature at all.

[Whackjob]

Gee, wouldn't it be just fantastic if they could take five minutes out of their clearly overwhelmingly busy days planning meetings to meet to plan the next meeting discuss the plan to think about implementing the singular feature we'll get for 0.23 in four months, and instead explain exactly why progress is so miserable...

You have unrealistic expectations, coupled with a bizarre sense of self entitlement. Recall, this isn't even being made by a game company. KSP is the result of a different sort of company (insurance?) doing an employee enrichment program. We're lucky to have any form of KSP at all.

No, what I know is what I see. We were told progress was slow for resources. Then resources got not only back-burner'd but we also got told it'll be severely dumbed-down from the original concept. Then we got told progress was slow for career mode implementation. Then we got told progress was slow for astronaut training (which is literally one screen where you can randomly add a kerbal - there's no 'training' to be had). Then we got told progress was slow for science. So what's the latest excuse? Progress is slow for economics? Progress is slow for resourcing (again)? Progress is slow for missions? After all these things are implements in what I imagine won't be earlier than another year from now, what then?

Wait and see.

The devs know what I want, they know what other people want, and it's pretty clear they no longer give a damn what anyone wants.

No, that's you projecting through a viewpoint tainted with an absurd level of self-entitlement.

Did you know that once upon a time they actually used the suggestions forum and talked back to people in it? Now it's a huge garbage dumpster where the mods dump difficult topics so they can more easily be ignored.

Do you really think you can coerce the developers to do what you want by being a jerk on the boards? Do you think these posts would be constructive in any way, shape or fashion?

[Ernest3.14]

IIRC, there was a "criticism" thread that amounted to this exact same argument/discussion. It's in the archives now, though, so I can't find it. It was a couple hundred pages long though. Does anyone else know what I'm referring to, or knows where to find it?

[sal_vager]

This thread is retreading old ground, KSP is the creation of Squad and of Felipe Falanghe, it will take the course they set, and arguing that it be different will get you nowhere.

By all means make and discuss suggestions, some do end up in KSP, but threads like this serve no purpose.