Resources - postponed, cancelled or reserved for a DLC?

[Niels]

Being critical of a design decision and hate are very different. A few people have gone over the top a little, but the vast majority have been very civil (go read some other game forums for pure vitriol).

I would imagine the vast majority of people can understand the decision, are at least satisfied we have an answer and understand the owners/developers want to push it in a more main stream direction.

The fact remains it is disappointing for a number of players who were teased with the .19 statements.

On the bright side it will secure the future of this game for a year or so with more cash injections from a wider player base.

Too bad that Squad took approach of taking money from more people for the sake of taking more money (not for continuing the actual work on the game)

[CaptRobau]

4. Not really related to this but if you go and watch Pewdiepie's last video of 'Crash test' you would hear him at the end of the video saying that he is considering doing KSP as it is a very similar game. He then goes on to say that if you want him to play KSP, write in the comments. As of right now there are a lot of comments asking to play KSP. Is this a godsend or the beginning of the end, I let you decide.

Here is the Link: (skip to 9:20 to see what I said above)

Your negativity probably has to do with the childish audience that Pewdiepie is often associated with. I don't think you have to worry about that. The objectionable part of his audience probably won't take to a reasonably complex game like KSP. They're happy enough with their CoD and Minecraft griefing. I doubt we'll see a tsunami of screaming idiots descend on KSP.

[CaptRobau]

The thing that many seem to be overlooking, is Kethane already supports multiple resources. Just no one has made use of this, apart from the Ore for the extraplanetary launchpads mod.

There was a project somewhere to make a mod that took advantage of this aspect of Kethane to make a more complex set, but no idea if it's still going, or anything came from it.

Kethane's license is very restricting, which is why you don't see much stuff being based on Kethane. The Kethane mod is always necessary, meaning you can't remove the Kethane resource. The assets are also off-limits, so no parts based on Kethane models or even cfg edits of original Kethane parts. It's Majir's right to license it this way, but it is limiting what can be done with the solid framework for resource extraction that has Kethane has created.

[LethalDose]

Has there been any official squad comment on this or is it just 20+ pages of conjecture?

As far as we can tell, no.

They're probably tired after 24 hrs of webcasting Mun crash videos KerbalKon 2013.

[PDCWolf]

i have never known that those recourses were such a big deal to the community. just... so much hate

you guys do realize that squad also does a whole lot right? (in my opinion)

Not really, I could name all things being done wrong. Again, we are talking opinions here so you can just say that I'm a hater or a troll like most people tend to do.

Being critical of a design decision and hate are very different. A few people have gone over the top a little, but the vast majority have been very civil (go read some other game forums for pure vitriol).

I would imagine the vast majority of people can understand the decision, are at least satisfied we have an answer and understand the owners/developers want to push it in a more main stream direction.

The fact remains it is disappointing for a number of players who were teased with the .19 statements.

On the bright side it will secure the future of this game for a year or so with more cash injections from a wider player base.

Do you know those fiery guard dogs rich people (and companies, etc) use? They are not being feed all day long so that they go "my master is such a god, better do my work for him at night", nope, they are fed once a day at the morning, so that they stay awake because they are hungry.

You don't give a developer -more- money after you brought their product because you want more, you let them be poor so that they make an effort to give out good content so that they get paid for it. Either that or they go out of business because they can't think of good content. The problem here is that instead of putting out good content (resources) they decide to appeal to a "wider" fanbase (multiplayer) to get more money for the same unfinished game.

Your negativity probably has to do with the childish audience that Pewdiepie is often associated with. I don't think you have to worry about that. The objectionable part of his audience probably won't take to a reasonably complex game like KSP.

Mechjeb.

They're happy enough with their CoD and Minecraft griefing. I doubt we'll see a tsunami of screaming idiots descend on KSP.

I remember when KurtJmac did his first KSP video and what happened to the forums back then, some people with more time spent on the community remember even worse cases. It happens, it has happened and it will continue to happen.

--

For the people saying that the community "divided in 2" not really, we have always been here, it's just that we don't really post that much. If you look at it, it's the same 100 or so people posting on every thread ever. When something bad (or really good) happens, we appear. It's the "Vocal minority / Quiet majority" thingy I posted a few pages back.

Edited December 14, 2013 by PDCWolf

[I_Killed_Jeb]

I think the developers are currently being guided by KSP's recent meteoric success, not the other way around. Initially they had set out to make a game, but now it's become something of a phenomenon, and they are catering to this as opposed to their original vision (which is not necessarily a bad thing). In my opinion I see one major recent development that cascaded into integration of multiplayer into the core game - KerbalEDU. Think about it, it's a HUGE sales potential (schools will buy licenses by the hundreds) and when you have kids in a computer lab playing this game simultaneously, you naturally will need some kind of interactive element, both so that the teacher can teach and so that the kids can have fun. It's not necessarily a sinister plan but it's certainly a pivot. I hope they bring resources back or just buy out Kethane...

Edited December 14, 2013 by I_Killed_Jeb

[Col_Jessep]

I think we are not really talking about the core problem when we talk about about resources or multiplayer.

The core problem of KSP right now - as I see it - is the lack of things to do once you have landed.

Of course you can build a colony on the Mün or Duna. Who of us hasn't done it? And then what? There is really not much to do after you planted your flag and pocketed your dirt sample. And why should you come back? Some celestial bodies present you with a challenge that is fun, like Moho, Tylo or Eve. (Yay, out of fuel!) Some have a neat special feature that makes them interesting like Laythe or Duna. (Yay, spaceplanes!) However, you can fly your airbreathing engines around Laythe all day but there is still nothing to do but bring out more fuel and admire the landscape.

Why would resources have been a great solution to this problem?

Done right they give you a reason to go out exploring and mining day after day. I've seen some of you guys hate on Minecraft but Notch did one thing right: He gave you a reason to stop building your cobblestone monstrosity and dig to the center of the earth (sorta) repeatedly. At some point even your diamond pick is done and you need a replacement. Exploiting resources to build what you want can basically stem your entire game as Minecraft and Terraria have proven.

Is it the only solution?

Nope. There are a lot of popular mods and different players like different playstyles. I'm sure Whackjob might not be that interested in mining the resources for his "rockets" legitimately on Dres and Eeloo. Might take a bit too long...

Career mode, science, payed missions... there are a lot of ways to extend KSP's lifespan. Admittedly, the career mode introduced in .22 had a very short-lived fascination for me. Once you get the batteries and solar panels it really just becomes a grind tbh. And I have recently added FAR and Deadly Reentry just to make it more interesting. Now I have started playing with Mission Controller Extended to simulates a real Space Program. Still, there is this one blind spot left: I EVA Jeb, plant a flag, pocket some local rocks, type my report and there is nothing left to do but admire the view. Unless you have Kethane installed of course.

So, what's the conclusion?

Resources are not the only solution to keep the game interesting long-term but probably one of the best solutions. Squad should look at resource management again. If the first implementation was not fun they did something wrong. Because resource management can be extremely fun! Ask any strategy fan out there.

Concerning multiplayer:

I honestly don't see how this will be more than a bubble for KSP. Multiplayer can carry a game like Minecraft because you can get 10 friends together and work on a giant project for weeks or months. Well, try to build a space station in KSP with 10 people. Oh, everybody can only use 25 parts for their module or KSP turns into an unplayable slideshow for everybody? Yup, sounds like fun for - oh about 10 minutes. You got some packetloss just as you were trying to land? Oops, 3 hours of designing and flying down the drain.

PS: If you can tell me why multiplayer would be fun, please do! I can honestly not think of any worthwhile long-term project for multiplayer KSP but I would love to try if it is not a complete waste of time.

[Holo]

Once you get the batteries and solar panels it really just becomes a grind tbh.

How come? Maybe you're not exploring enough, but sending probes and kerbals to far-off destinations is really fun. Other than that, though, I agree - all you can do once landed is go back.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

PS: If you can tell me why multiplayer would be fun, please do! I can honestly not think of any worthwhile long-term project for multiplayer KSP but I would love to try if it is not a complete waste of time.

from the other thread, I think this would actually be awesome

I really like the idea of a "Kommand & Kontrol" mode too, one person teams up with another and one is the "Pilot" and the other is "Kommand". The pilot is stuck in IVA, make it so hes stuck in a first person space suit as well, and all he has is his instruments and those tiny windows to guide his craft. And then you have "Kontrol" who’s stuck with maps and telemetry from the craft in question and the two players have to kommunicate to get things done. You could add this to the coopetition mode and allow a total of 8-10 players as 4-5 teams of 2. A little thing I just thought of that would keep things interesting, make it so the "Pilot" and "Kontrol" could switch places if they wished. Let "Kontrol" have some support rolls, like they control the rovers and probes, unless the pilot is given equipment to do so, they can control things that take two different craft like a X-15 test craft type scenario, "Kontrol" flies the drop craft while the pilot flies the X-15 analog, that way the drop craft doesn’t just crash ruining all the K-bucks you spent on it.

[glacierre]

To me, the problem is not if resources are there or not. The biggest problem is that a feature gets announced and then gets forgotten.

This HURTS mods! If resources are announced as impending release, some mods will be not used/developed as much as they could, since the feeling is that is better to wait for the official feature. I had precisely this feeling with kethane, when resources where unveiled. I found kethane idea interesting but... resources seemed to be so much more... maybe just wait a couple releases!

So, nobody forces Squad to disclose plans. I would really appreciate if whatever is announced is followed through, and if not, clarified asap. Otherwise I might start to get the feeling that they announce this or that without intention to implement, just to ride the hype.

And I sooo not appreciate when a developer hypes up.

Let's see what happens now with multiplayer. Maybe a year from now there is a thread like this wondering what happened?

[Col_Jessep]

How come? Maybe you're not exploring enough, but sending probes and kerbals to far-off destinations is really fun. Other than that, though, I agree - all you can do once landed is go back.

Doing it without batteries and solar panels is a challenge. Add a mod like Deadly Reentry and limited money from Mission Controller and you can be looking at a major challenge. I like challenges in KSP.

I enjoy bringing Jeb, Bob and Bill to the edge of the solar system. I just wish there was a good reason to do it! Science is not the answer. A multi-probe ship to Jool will do just fine.

[czokletmuss]

To me, the problem is not if resources are there or not. The biggest problem is that a feature gets announced and then gets forgotten.

This HURTS mods! If resources are announced as impending release, some mods will be not used/developed as much as they could, since the feeling is that is better to wait for the official feature. I had precisely this feeling with kethane, when resources where unveiled. I found kethane idea interesting but... resources seemed to be so much more... maybe just wait a couple releases!

Very good point! And to think I wanted to wait with starting my AAR until the resources are complete. Now it turns out there won't be any resource system at all and I'm nearing the release of the 50th chapter...

[GusTurbo]

you let them be poor so that they make an effort to give out good content so that they get paid for it. Either that or they go out of business because they can't think of good content. The problem here is that instead of putting out good content (resources) they decide to appeal to a "wider" fanbase (multiplayer) to get more money for the same unfinished game.

Squad is a company that consists of real people who have to make a living. They're not your servants. I used to be a modeler with dreams of working in the game industry, but after actually researching what the working conditions are like, I decided against it. I don't know what the hours or workload are like at Squad, but I would hope that they actually enjoy what they are doing. If they can make decent money doing what they enjoy, that is awesome. To say that they should be "poor" or have to struggle not to go out of business is BS.

I don't agree with the refocus on multiplayer, but I think the price I paid for the game I got (back in .18) was fair. I don't think the devs owe me anything.

[Col_Jessep]

from the other thread, I think this would actually be awesome

I really like the idea of a "Kommand & Kontrol" mode too, one person teams up with another and one is the "Pilot" and the other is "Kommand". The pilot is stuck in IVA, make it so hes stuck in a first person space suit as well, and all he has is his instruments and those tiny windows to guide his craft. And then you have "Kontrol" who’s stuck with maps and telemetry from the craft in question and the two players have to kommunicate to get things done. You could add this to the coopetition mode and allow a total of 8-10 players as 4-5 teams of 2. A little thing I just thought of that would keep things interesting, make it so the "Pilot" and "Kontrol" could switch places if they wished. Let "Kontrol" have some support rolls, like they control the rovers and probes, unless the pilot is given equipment to do so, they can control things that take two different craft like a X-15 test craft type scenario, "Kontrol" flies the drop craft while the pilot flies the X-15 analog, that way the drop craft doesn’t just crash ruining all the K-bucks you spent on it.

Sorry, but I'm pretty sure you will find this to become extremely boring after a couple of hours. I know many singleplayer games that would have profited from multiplayer. KSP is not among them. At least not in its current form with all the lag we already have in regular singleplayer. If we could build space stations with 5000+ parts and take control of Jeb in first person mode and walk in those space stations... Edited December 14, 2013 by Col_Jessep

[satcharna]

Squad is a company that consists of real people who have to make a living. They're not your servants. I used to be a modeler with dreams of working in the game industry, but after actually researching what the working conditions are like, I decided against it. I don't know what the hours or workload are like at Squad, but I would hope that they actually enjoy what they are doing. If they can make decent money doing what they enjoy, that is awesome. To say that they should be "poor" or have to struggle not to go out of business is BS.

I don't agree with the refocus on multiplayer, but I think the price I paid for the game I got (back in .18) was fair. I don't think the devs owe me anything.

You don't understand how an economy works.

If you don't have to struggle to produce the very best product you can, your product will be bad. Competition drives innovation. If there was another game like KSP, the two would be competing to be the very best they could be, to make more sales, and everyone would benefit. A monopoly situation is what we currently have. Squad have their money, and they're the only company making a game like this, so there is no reason for them to strive to actually make a good game. They're getting money either way.

They're also not a "poor indie developer", they're a division of a big marketing company, and they've made a lot of sales on Steam (with a price that is astoundingly high for a game supposedly still in alpha). They're not about to run out of money, which is another big negative for KSP.

[sparty48]

If multiplayer gets put in before resources... I will uninstall ksp, and cry while doing it.

They announced it, they should at least put a basic model on.

[Why No Resources]

I am dissapointed in Squad for dropping resources (a planned feature) so easily while suddenly starting to develop multiplayer which used to be a feature that according to KSP Wiki had been confirmed not to be in the official game.

I believe resources would have added so much in terms of gameplay. For example with resources added to the game building bases on other celestial bodies and colonization would have made more sense than now. Resources would have opened up numerous opportunities and ways to play Kerbal Space Program. Resources could also play an important role in interstellar travelling and reaching other star systems in the future (if Squad decides to add other star systems).

As of now i just hope the developers will at least tell us in detail why they think the original resources system was too complex and not fun for the players because I feel quite the opposite.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

Sorry, but I'm pretty sure you will find this to become extremely boring after a couple of hours. I know many singleplayer games that would have profited from multiplayer. KSP is not among them. At least not in its current form with all the lag we already have in regular singleplayer. If we could build space stations with 5000+ parts and take control of Jeb in first person mode and walk in those space stations...

Everything gets boring after you've been doing it for a while. Your estimate of a couple of hours is a bit extreme IMO, and sure after you've buddied up to land on every celestial body 2-3 times things might get stale but it still sounds like a pretty fun idea. As disappointed as I am regarding this about-face by squad (see my previous post regarding my own theories as to why) I don't think it's fair to condemn the mode just yet. Though I'm not necessarily hopeful either.

[mknote]

Just FYI:

I've been here since 0.14, and I don't think SQUAD has done a thing wrong. Y'all need to chill out and stop -hugging-, because that's what really turns good developers into... well, EA: an unpleasable fanbase. They've churned out a good game already and I have zero reason not to trust them in the future.

Furthermore, some of the people in this thread are being plain rude. That's simply unacceptable, and I think moderators should take action. It's fine to have a wildly differing opinion, as long as you express it in a respectful manner.

Also, for the comparisons to Minecraft... that turned out fine, so I don't see at all why that's supposed to be a bad thing.

Edited December 14, 2013 by KasperVld

[Scotius]

Squad is a company that consists of real people who have to make a living. They're not your servants. I used to be a modeler with dreams of working in the game industry, but after actually researching what the working conditions are like, I decided against it. I don't know what the hours or workload are like at Squad, but I would hope that they actually enjoy what they are doing. If they can make decent money doing what they enjoy, that is awesome. To say that they should be "poor" or have to struggle not to go out of business is BS.

I don't agree with the refocus on multiplayer, but I think the price I paid for the game I got (back in .18) was fair. I don't think the devs owe me anything.

No one says SQUAD devs owe us anything. But if significant percentage of their customers repeatedly state that they indeed want resources implemented, then maybe SQUAD should rethink their decision of shelving the project? Eh...at least we have modders I've seen some attempts at adding resources to the game cropping up recently (besides Kethane of course). Maybe now, when the news spread someone will take a serious shot at this *coughMajiirNovaSiliskoFractal_UKwhataboutitguyscough*

[kitoban]

I posted this over on Reddit and thought it was relevant here as well.

The biggest issue I can see with multiplayer is that as much as I like the idea of co-operative gameplay what does this add to the game?

Multiplayer objective

Beyond simply launching a rocket with a firend and building a space station, what is the ultimate point? You can land as a team on another planet, having someone control the rcs, while another is concentrating on the throttle (maybe this is speculation based on the tweakable sharing they mentioned) Or maybe you could send a rescue for a friend who has low fuel around a planet. Although at the point of finding out you had low fuel you need could do this yourself, as there would be nothing for you to do waiting for a rescue.

Resources objective

Opens up the world beyond the spawn area that is the starting point.

You can create your vehicle, plan you mission land in a shallow gravity well and build infrastructure to support further missions from a new "Spawn location" Create new ships possibly and launch from there. Possibly true orbital construction where you are not having to launch behemoths or dock strange structures together. which can lead to docking rubbery interplanetary ships. Maybe this was turning boring in the Dev's opinions, however they have had it proved time and again that people do things they never considered in the game, a great example of that was Scott Manley and Abyssal Lurkers section doing crazy things that the devs never expected. I think given the chance the player base could do wonders with resources built into the game

Summary

I think overall the point I am trying to get at is multiplayer sounds like a nice addition to the game but beyond the initial "lets dock in orbit" there is not a great deal that you can really do. An analogy here would be thing of minecraft where you had to pick everything in your inventory when you first spawn into the world, and that spawn point was static. What I would love to see would be both resources and multiplayer, as resources would be a hard feature of the game and take some building up to, therefore would take a lot of skill to build into however if you had a multiplayer there would be those skilled players there to help the newer players out and start spreading within the solar system. Without resources multiplayer is a nice gimmick, but is still a gimmick that is going to be limited by having a static entry into the KSP world.

Personally if resources are truely shelved/cancelled for good, I'll be looking into Kethane a lot more, and hope that the Dev's behind it are not too frustrated that they essentially have been putting any further development of this on hold since 0.19 as it was looking like Kethane was going to become obsolete.

[GusTurbo]

You don't understand how an economy works.

If you don't have to struggle to produce the very best product you can, your product will be bad. Competition drives innovation. If there was another game like KSP, the two would be competing to be the very best they could be, to make more sales, and everyone would benefit. A monopoly situation is what we currently have. Squad have their money, and they're the only company making a game like this, so there is no reason for them to strive to actually make a good game. They're getting money either way.

They're also not a "poor indie developer", they're a division of a big marketing company, and they've made a lot of sales on Steam (with a price that is astoundingly high for a game supposedly still in alpha). They're not about to run out of money, which is another big negative for KSP.

I know they're not a poor indie developer. As a result, I don't think the people actually making the game (Harvester, C7, etc.) are making all that much money. Squad (the ad company) is taking the surplus labor value created by the team as profit. This is capitalism, after all.

If the game wasn't making that much profit, it's not a given that the company would invest more money to try to make it successful. They might just cut jobs and make the remaining employees in the KSP unit work harder, which would likely result in a worse product. Since the game is already pretty substantial at this point, the company could just decide that it's good enough and stop development altogether. I think the team deserves better than that, and I think the community deserves better.

If they were an indie developer, I think the team would be more motivated by struggling sales or a community in revolt to improve the game, because it would actually belong to them.

[PDCWolf]

They might just cut jobs and make the remaining employees in the KSP unit work harder, which would likely result in a worse product. Since the game is already pretty substantial at this point, the company could just decide that it's good enough and stop development altogether.

It's not like they merged positions killing PD's position and then fired n3x1s. It's not like they develop everything in little steps to make sure its accepted by the community before continuing. It's not like they develop that fast anyway. It's not like they decided to appeal to a wider fanbase to ensure sales instead of making the game better.

Everything's fine, right?.

Edited December 14, 2013 by PDCWolf

[GusTurbo]

No, everything is not fine. But you can't use the ruthless logic of capitalism to argue that it will necessarily make things better when it can just as easily make things worse.

[PDCWolf]

No, everything is not fine. But you can't use the ruthless logic of capitalism to argue that it will necessarily make things better when it can just as easily make things worse.

Well, too bad then, because we live in a capitalistic society. Satcharna was right, you appear to lack any knowledge about economy.

It is really simple: They don't get money? 3 options: 1)Out of business (Bad, means we get the game as the mess it is now) | 2)Better content (Good) | 3)Emergency "Appeal to wider fanbase" button (Multiplayer announcement) Bad, the game stays as the mess it is, but it gets more sales because of an announcement.

When saying bad or good, I'm talking from the player's side. For squad, number 3 is a really good choice because they get more money without doing much really, by the time multiplayer becomes a reality -or not- they already have the money of who knows how many people more. Number 2 is the more balanced one, they probably get more money, but they have to work more. Number 1 is loss for everyone.