Resources - postponed, cancelled or reserved for a DLC?

[hoojiwana]

That's a good point. Multiplayer will just be more than one person having nothing to do. Sure you can make a station or something, but to what end?

They mentioned multiplayer career mode as well, so I imagine you could read some flavour text as a group.

[FITorion]

This about resources... not multiplayer. We should have a discussion about multiplayer but it should be it's own thread.

Resources as they were designed are not happening. We knew that already. That's all that was said. Nothing I heard indicated that they weren't going to look at resources again. It just got moved from necessary game system to neat feature to be added when all the necessary game systems are done.

I 100% believe the reasons they gave for why they went the way they did. I do not at all believe the "evil business" conspiracy theories people are coming up with. This is not EA. This is not a large gaming studio. This is a small team of people who we have way more access to than fans of games normally do. I 100% believe what they are telling us is their motivation is in fact their motivation.

Edited December 14, 2013 by FITorion

[OtherDalfite]

Right, back to resources. It seems to me that resources were going to be included, but were cut for the purpose of game completion. With all the merchandise, sponsorships, and celebrations, it seems as though SQUAD is trying to pack up KSP for a final release, supposedly "feature complete". Maybe it came down to "alright guys, we're doing one last feature haul, which will make the most money?" and the developers voted unanimously for multiplayer, as everyone goes bat crazy for the subject of it. If resources stay canned, I eagerly await the day the community ultimately says "Wow, KSP is still boring" and the developers are left scratching their heads thinking "where did we go wrong?"

Well developers, this isn't the first thing that went wrong, but it's definitely one of, if not THE worst things you could do to KSP.

[WillHop]

I 100% believe the reasons they gave for why they went the way they did. I do not at all believe the "evil business" conspiracy theories people are coming up with. This is not EA. This is not a large gaming studio. This is a small team of people who we have way more access to than fans of games normally do. I 100% believe what they are telling us is their motivation is in fact their motivation.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting Squad have turned in to EA and are happily exploiting all their fans for as much money as possible, I just think their motives have shifted away from the fans and that is the issue. Resources was something looked forward to and now its highly unlikely to be implemented, questions have to be asked.

[Majiir]

For obvious reasons, I've long opposed the idea of Squad implementing resource mining. It's a lot of work, but it's nothing revolutionary, and Squad should be working on things that are. I had hoped there would be more interest (both collaborative and competitive) in resource mining from the modding community, but I suppose there may have been hope that Squad would eventually come through. (Beginning with Kethane 0.5, I operated under the assumption this day would come.) I'm not necessarily pleased with Squad's performance, but I think this is a step in the right direction.

Regarding Kethane: Modding has been on my back-burner for the last few months. I will resume coding in earnest in a few hours when I complete my last deliverable of the year. (Woohoo!) I've set my sights on the third week of January for an expansion to Kethane that adds more resources. The API will remain open to the general public.

[LethalDose]

If the purpose of this thread is no longer about polling opinions about what the community thinks the devs are doing (which is totally pointless, btw), then it's become worth reading.

The KSP "about" site clearly states a "Tycoon-style" career mode. How they intend to do this without some kind of resource management is beyond me.

The mod said this:

By that logic we should have all the features cause someone might like them.

Squad spent many months leaving this on the backburner and leaving some time to know what they would do with this resource system. If they came to the conclusion resources are not fit for the game and they would rather include other features in the game, I trust them in their decision. This is exactly while they left the game to be so easily modded: so that everyone can personalize their personal game experience to what they want it to be. So let's roll it over and move on, no point on staying on this forever.

He basically said IF the devs came to the conclusion that resources are not fit for the game, then he agrees with them. He did not say that this has already happened, though.

However, I don't agree with it. I bought the game for a "Tycoon-style" career mode, which would require resource management.

If they cancel the part of the game, I will still not only stop playing it, but also request a refund since core features advertised to be in the game at a future date have been removed.

I understand that the game is under development, but entire removal of advertised features is too much of a change to the final product for it to represent what I purchased. I probably won't get the money back, but I can recommend other consumers not purchase the game and we as a community can cause enough publicity to make it difficult for the company with bad press.

I understand that the game can be modded to include a resource system, but it's not reasonable to rely on mods for what should be core gameplay, because mods require third-party support and can be broken at any time with an updates.

I also understand that the cancelation of a resource system has not yet been made, so I will continue playing. I simply wanted to state that my continued interest in the game is conditional on the fact that "resources" have not been canceled.

That's my opinion.

Edited December 14, 2013 by LethalDose
Edited to clarify that I am not quitting at this point.

[vexx32]

In my opinion, it's far too early to assume resources are an essential part of anything, really. It depends on exactly how some parts of Career mode are implemented.

[LethalDose]

I can't find the original post that linked

about mining asteroids for resources.

But seriously, THIS.

Stating that resources are half the reason to go to space is an understatement. So really, it should be expected, and I would dare to say requisite, that a game about development in space should be concern itself with resources.

Again, this is my opinion. Feel free to disagree, that's fine. I'm posting this to express my opinion first to the devs, and second to the community. I'm not posting this to argue a point of the merit of a resource system.

IMO a resource system is too fundamental to a career mode to simply be dropped, so my mind won't be changed about it.

Edited December 14, 2013 by LethalDose
Edited to reiterate that it's my opinion and that I'm not interested in engaging in an argument about it.

[regex]

Given the choice between resources and multiplayer I'd choose resources any day of the week, but I'm not exactly excited about either. I think SQUAD is on the right track about resources not being fun, though. The current scan->mine->refine paradigm isn't exactly compelling gameplay and even combining that with mixing resources for greater effect just adds busywork. I'm not sure what would be better gameplay, but I do know I don't care for more of the same.

Anyway, multiplayer in favor of resources is a pretty bad choice, no matter how unfun resources are; resources open up more opportunities within the game.

[Tw1]

Stating that resources are half the reason to go to space is an understatement. So really, it should be expected, and I would dare to say requisite, that a game about development in space should be concern itself with resources.

It's a fair point about asteroid mining, but unless its a full on sci fi level space civilisation, I don't see why you'd need to go to space to get something you can mine or recycle. On Earth or Kerbin. Unless its for things that can only be got, like possible fuels for fusion power from the Mun or Moon.

But Kerbals don't have that level tech either.

I'm all for resources, but I'd sooner see more detailed levels of science, to make long term missions more fun. But I'm not particularly interested in running a mining program. But resources adds extra opportunities for long term missions, and bases.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Tw1

[Botch]

Regarding Kethane: ... I will resume coding in earnest in a few hours when I complete my last deliverable of the year. (Woohoo!) I've set my sights on the third week of January for an expansion to Kethane that adds more resources. The API will remain open to the general public.

This is really good news. I've used prev versions of Kethane and I look forward to crashing all over the solar system in search of Resources! and Science!

[Moach]

ppl, if you wanna make a case for resources being reconsidered, this is not the place for it. this thread is off-topic enough as is, but most importantly - in here, you arguments go nowhere.

If you can really think of a clear and concise point to make in behalf of that concept, defending it's claim as a core part of the game (which is not how I see it, in my opinion) - take it to the development boards and let this beated thread rest a while.

having this discussion in this thread is somewhat likely to be taken as little more than pointless digression (aka: off topic) - take it where it belongs and have it clearly elaborated - then it's a proper suggestion. but make sure it's not put in a confrontational way. that's a sure way to get ignored - be calm, civil, and concise. and think about what exact stuff it is you want - nobody can guess if you don't specify. (try to avoid the TL;DR effect, tho)

Ok, the original topic itself might actually be rather moot by now, but then again - topics are set by the thread at start, so starting a new one is the usually a good option if talk goes astray, lest your arguments are hidden behind an irrelevant initial point.

I'm not gonna throw any more wood into this fire, anyways. Just back to topic (whatever that still means)

Edited December 14, 2013 by Moach

[spudcosmic]

I feel like proper aerodynamics and economy are more important to ksp right now, and hope those get implemented sooner.

[LethalDose]

ppl, if you wanna make a case for resources being reconsidered, this is not the place for it. this thread is off-topic enough as is, but most importantly - in here, you arguments go nowhere.

If you can really think of a clear and concise point to make in behalf of that concept, defending it's claim as a core part of the game (which is not how I see it, in my opinion) - take it to the development boards and let this beated thread rest a while.

having this discussion in this thread is somewhat likely to be taken as little more than pointless digression (aka: off topic) - take it where it belongs and have it clearly elaborated - then it's a proper suggestion. but make sure it's not put in a confrontational way. that's a sure way to get ignored - be calm, civil, and concise. and think about what exact stuff it is you want - nobody can guess if you don't specify. (try to avoid the TL;DR effect, tho)

Ok, the original topic itself might actually be rather moot by now, but then again - topics are set by the thread at start, so starting a new one is the usually a good option if talk goes astray, lest your arguments are hidden behind an irrelevant initial point.

I'm not gonna throw any more wood into this fire, anyways. Just back to topic (whatever that still means)

I want this quoted so I can link to it.

The moderator just stated that the appropriate location for this is Development forum, DESPITE THE FACT THE DEVELOPMENT FORUM EXPLICITLY SAYS NOT TO RECOMMEND RESOURCES.

Based on his comment, I am will be starting a thread there to discuss this.

Edited December 14, 2013 by LethalDose

[Jim DiGriz]

having this discussion in this thread is somewhat likely to be taken as little more than pointless digression (aka: off topic) - take it where it belongs and have it clearly elaborated - then it's a proper suggestion.

yeah, but this thread is clearly about people just wanting to vent.

its better to have one self contained thread to let everyone get that off of their chest than to spam it all over multiple threads across the forum, and any other thread is just as likely to spin out quickly from suggestions to venting.

and i don't much see the point of a suggestions thread, really. you've got people at squad smart enough to write a physics simulation with realistic rocket science. they already have a resources plan on the shelf. i'm certain they're not casually making decisions about the direction of their product.

[Moach]

i only said that for the case anyone does feel they have a thorough argument to make about that specific feature. venting is one thing - and here it goes very well without problems... (if nobody jumps at anyone's throats, of course)

just don't let your good points go unheard because of off-topic'ness - if that's the case

and you're right - they're not casually making decisions about stuff. if one thing gets scrapped, they probably have some better idea for doing instead

Edited December 14, 2013 by Moach

[Ernest3.14]

After reading through the previous 191 posts, all I have to contribute is this: "cancelling" resources (whatever that may mean) is a rather significant decision, and it is obvious that some of us have different ideas about why the devs chose to go down this path. All I would like is an in-depth blog post about why the devs chose to do this. After all, if procedural craters deserved a post, then resources surely do too. Especially if what the community perceives as the developers' intention is a misconception.

[Skyler4856]

Highly unlikely that it's canceled. It is one of the more important aspects of the game to the community.

[LethalDose]

Highly unlikely that it's canceled. It is one of the more important aspects of the game to the community.

It seems these moderators disagree with you.

In my opinion, it's far too early to assume resources are an essential part of anything, really. It depends on exactly how some parts of Career mode are implemented.

If you can really think of a clear and concise point to make in behalf of that concept, defending it's claim as a core part of the game (which is not how I see it, in my opinion)

Edited December 14, 2013 by LethalDose
particular mods

[EleSigma]

If what Max, (Squad PR guy) said is true then they were planning on scrapping resources entirely and were going to decide this before Kerbalkon started.

These sudden changes of plans Squad keeps doing, like when they postponed resources at the start of the year to "extremely slowly" work on career mode, are diminishing my hopes that this game will turn out good in the end.

[deadshot462]

[Disclosure: This is my personal opinion as a long time fan of the game. As a forum mod I know as little as any other regular user regarding Squad's planning.]

I'm biased because I was very excited about Resources when they were mentioned during 0.18 development. Although Squad mentioned it could be overly complicated and less fun, I think it's worth a try to code in. Since the game is still in early access, I would like to see at least a simplified version to be experimented with ingame. If Resources really are a bad feature, I would like that to be determined through user testing. Career mode is also an ongoing feature (biomes, experiments, parts being added gradually) so this could be the way to try resources out.

From what I heard, resources in the original posted system are unlikely to happen. A simpler resource system may be added but probably not until after the current feature items are completed (Career, multiplayer, economy).

If KMP is what convinced Squad that multiplayer is possible, maybe a modded resource system could show it's fun and worth implementing into the stock game. Sure there's Kethane, but I'd definitely like to see a similar mod with a larger amount of "elements."

[/End personal opinion]

Edited December 14, 2013 by deadshot462

[Sapphire]

It seems the moderators disagree with you.

Contrary to what some people might think, we're really not affiliated with the devs that much. I don't think I've ever even spoken to one of them. I really don't know any more than you, and I think my fellow mods would say the same.

[satcharna]

I am thoroughly disappointed in this game, this community, and Squad in general. You had a chance to make something great, but you opted to go for the easy money, and you have now ruined an entire niche of gaming, because there sure as hell won't be any other acceptable "build a rocket and fly it" games in the near future.

Squad, you are pathetic.

[LethalDose]

Contrary to what some people might think, we're really not affiliated with the devs that much. I don't think I've ever even spoken to one of them. I really don't know any more than you, and I think my fellow mods would say the same.

original post now edited.

[EleSigma]

I am thoroughly disappointed in this game, this community, and Squad in general. You had a chance to make something great, but you opted to go for the easy money, and you have now ruined an entire niche of gaming, because there sure as hell won't be any other acceptable "build a rocket and fly it" games in the near future.

Squad, you are pathetic.

I feel the same way, without the attack on Squad at the end of course. I am a bit disappointed in how the game is shaping up to be and how Squad is handling it and it really does seem like they're going for the minecraft route of things or as Satcharna said, "easy money". I fear that resources being canned for multiplayer won't be the end of the problems either.