How important is a resource system to you?

[Spatzimaus]

Extracting resources from other planets for profit is ridiculously impractical. Back when the resource system was first announced, I said the same thing; giving finite quantities to deposits, and worrying about how much gets extracted, is horribly unrealistic. The amounts involved are many, many orders of magnitude more than any one vessel could extract. (It'd be like saying that if you filled up your car's tank a few dozen times you'd run out of oil in Texas.) And if you really wanted resources for profit, you wouldn't go down into a gravity well in the first place; you'd just mine asteroids.

That being said, the resource system is still the single most important feature yet to be implemented in KSP. As anyone who's used the Kethane mod can attest, the ability to refuel interplanetary vessels on-site makes a tremendous difference in terms of what is possible. With it, you can now do fun missions to places like Laythe, instead of limiting yourself, and THAT is the essence of Kerbalness. So, the official resource system will be incredibly valuable once it's implemented, because people will be able to visit the outer planets (including a hopefully soon-to-be-implemented second gas giant) instead of only limiting themselves to Duna, Ike, Minmus, and Mun as possible destinations.

So it's the only system I still care about them adding, because it's the only one that'll actually impact the designs I make. (Unless they get around to adding deadly re-entry or a better aerodynamics system, that is.) A lot of things are currently on hold until then, so I'm hoping they do it soon.

[zarniw00p]

If I were to have to pick one thing, just one thing, to see in 0.24, I'd love to see them do a pure bug-fix update. But maybe in 0.24, we get plane parts, or more rocket engines, or 3.75m stuff. Maybe we get resources. Maybe we get planets. Maybe a new solar system to explore. Or maybe we get something no one ever thought of, but ends up being epic.

0.23 is supposed to be mainly a bug-fixing update.

Unfortunately there are no reasons to assume that we'll get resources, more parts, planets or solar systems in the near future. And that's the problem. If you're not interested in multiplayer or career mode and are playing mostly sandbox, there isn't any major feature to look forward to in the foreseeable future. This is frustrating and will lead to a lot of people loose interest in KSP.

[Landwalker]

This is mostly where the upset comes from. The short version is that SQUAD has decided to shelve the expanded resource system as it was outlined back in 0.19 and take the game's development in a different direction, because they don't feel resources add enough for most of the player base. Many assumptions, arguments, debates, and discussions have emerged as a result of this statement, and I actually feel very sorry for the devteam for how much of a headache it's no doubt giving them to have to deal with it all.

http://www.twitch.tv/ksptv/b/487174346

11:55

Thank you folks for that. It clears up a lot of confusion on my end.

Oddly, I didn't hear anything outrageous at all, or anything about completely throwing out resources from the game's ultimate development goal. But I'm at least glad I now know the source of the uproar (even if I don't understand why or how it caused such an uproar...)

[darpavader]

To me resources were going to be one of the most important parts of the game. Science should be directly tied to it. Kerbalcon 2012 was great as we looked to the future, but kerbalcon 2013 ended on a sour note. Still love the game and have been playing since .16 but I hope Squad will change this.

[Pixel of Life]

I don't really care about an official resource system right now as I've got my hands full with Kethane

[Maddmatts]

For me it depends on implementation. If it's just there to help refuel ships, that's fine. There if I need it, but otherwise I can carry on if I don't. If I have to bring certain resources back to Kerbin to unlock certain research/part options, that ratchets up the difficulty in some cases but otherwise ok. However, if I need x-amount of resource A to build y-amount of part B, KSP will have gone from game to unnecessary time-sink.

[Dogface]

I have been playing sandbox mode, and like the idea of having something to do when I get somewhere. They have added science, which gives one a task on-site. Adding resources would further extend the playable life of the game.

Do a poll of multiplayer. I dont see the draw of that, could just be me tho.

[Alguien]

They have added science

funny enough, science is derived from resources and in fact mechanically it works pretty much the same (go to X area, use part, get "resource science") but apparently this was fun, while doing the exact same for, say, oxidizer, was not

[Merinsan]

I've already lost a lot of interest in KSP, due to nothing to do. Each update comes out I play, do the same thing I always do (set up stations, bases, and try the new feature).

What I need is something to do once I get to planets, a reason to go there.

Resources will be a big part of that reason.

Another thing that I think is necessary is something random - ie random planets with random discoveries to be made. This gives you a reason to explore. It would be a shame if Squad finally finished development, patted themselves on the back and found that all players stopped playing after 2 weeks of playing with the last feature added.

Multiplayer is going to do virtually nothing for me. I might be play a little with my son, but I'd rather not be playing with a stranger - after all I am the director of my space program. I honestly feel that multiplayer is being added because a vocal minority demanded it. The real challenge will be to make multiplayer add something that single player doesn't have. If Squad succeeds, then I may well enjoy it, but from my current perspective, I think it will be a bit of a waste of their effort.

As of now, I will be turning to the dark side, and finally installing mods. I've been holding out for resources, but it looks like it is at least 1 year away now.

[TicTacToe!]

I've got to agree with a lot of other posters in this thread, I too don't like the decision. In my opinion it's made all the worse because resources have been "replaced" as a focus with multiplayer, and to be honest I think at it it's core, KSP just isn't a multiplayer game (apples and oranges I know, but the same reason I don't like the idea of Elder Scrolls Online, or if they ever made a multiplayer Just Cause). I just don't think it'll work. Whilst we've all known SQUAD as the dev's that can, in nearly all instances I've seen companies have had to sacrifice precious time that could be spent on gameplay on multiplayer, ruining what would've been a fantastic singleplayer game.

Also, whilst I agree that it is definitely beneficial to ease the learning curve into a game like KSP, so it can also kind of be used as an educational tool as well as a game, there is only so much you can do. Resources are endgame, at least for me, but it gives something to work to, another potential idea. Whilst KSP has definitely snowballed in popularity over the last year or so, the reason I think it stood out before is because it offered a challenge. I've always been interested in space, (so hoping for a course in aerospace engineering at Uni) so when I saw kurtjmac playing this space game on YouTube, before the maneuver node system, before docking, it was a challenge. I saw threads of great achievements on here, I remember when Temstar took on Duna and Ike double landing with the primitive docking mods at hand. My point is, KSP is an orbital simulation game, for those who are unfamiliar to the concept, it's going to be hard.

Now that they've been shelved, I think SQUAD may have dropped themselves in it, because that would offer something else to do on the planets we land on. Now, I see nothing new for exploration. Land, click, science. I think that's also why these planet resizes, reshuffles and changes we see in various mods are so popular, the game's just getting stale for me.

[Alguien]

Also, whilst I agree that it is definitely beneficial to ease the learning curve into a game like KSP, so it can also kind of be used as an educational tool as well as a game, there is only so much you can do.

and kinda need to be mentioned a little, but another problem now a days, is how making a game "more accessible" also means it ends as deep as a water puddle because everyone should be able to access every part of the game, it doesnt help than the main difficulty of KSP is actually getting the whole space travel physics and how it works (i am sure a lot of us have that friend who just aims upwards and then wonders why the rocket falls back anyway) and once you get decent and making rocket designs and understanding the mechanics (not even "mastering" them) the game becomes pretty easy (also because this whole year squad has been adding stuff cented to new/bad players when adding nothing to keep the ball going for the ones who have been playing for a while), and as you say, resources were this feature for players than had been playing for a while

[Albert VDS]

Kethane already has the ability to add what Squad wanted for resources.

It allows you to add all the resources and converters which were planned in the resources schematic.

It's even not all the hard to add the parst and adding resources to the cfgs.

Coding isn't even necessary cause Majir already has done the hard work of making it possible.

The only problem is that no one wants to make it happen.

So while Squad gives us patches with performance optimizations and other cool features, why doesn't the community pick up on resources?

[John FX]

This is mostly where the upset comes from. The short version is that SQUAD has decided to shelve the expanded resource system as it was outlined back in 0.19 and take the game's development in a different direction, because they don't feel resources add enough for most of the player base. Many assumptions, arguments, debates, and discussions have emerged as a result of this statement, and I actually feel very sorry for the devteam for how much of a headache it's no doubt giving them to have to deal with it all.

As you have said it there I agree. I agree resources don`t add as much per Dev Man Hour as other features and that, as a player, is what is important to me. Resources seemed more important to me a little while ago but now I would prefer a money economy (to validate SSTO, jet stages etc and flesh out/round off the current game) and a more fleshed out career mode. Resources are more like something you could tack on to the main game (maybe a DLC) while career is central to the main game and so I support the Devs in their decision.

As I have moved more from Mechjeb and Kethane into KOS I find myself wanting different things. I want more of the essential mods to become stock.

For example, correctly applied ISP, better aerodynamics, stupid chris`s realchutes etc even KOS have a place in stock for me (as do most parts that you don`t *have* to use but which would enrich the playing experience, like procedural tanks, wings, and fairings).

Edited December 15, 2013 by John FX

[Adslegend]

I think that resources is key to keeping players interested in the game. Right now, once you've landed and done the science there's very little left to do. Getting there is enjoyable but after you arrive there's nothing to keep you entertained.

Resources give the player a long term goal, the ability to have self sustaining missions without having to spend hours carting fuel across the Solar system and open up a lot more possibilities. They'd also give sandbox players something to look forward to and enjoy because right now, if you don't play career mode, there's very little to look forwards to.

[iDan122]

Right from the Terms of service:

Please keep in mind:

Squad is not under any obligation to release any updates, expansions or titles at any time. Each release may very well be the last one.

Squad is under no obligation to implement any given set of features prior to the final release for KSP or any future title. All posted lists of planned features are unofficial and do not imply a promise by Squad to deliver anything listed in them.

Squad reserves the right to add, remove and modify content on any of its software at their own discretion, without prior notice.

Squad is under no obligation to maintain any level of communication with the player community, choosing to do so at their own discretion.

The minimum hardware specifications are posted for reference purposes only. KSP is a work-in-progress, and as such, may not perform as expected under any given hardware configuration.

The Software is made available as-is, and may contain bugs and/or manifest undesirable behaviour. Squad does not guarantee any level of stability or performance for the Software, and takes no responsibility in the event of data loss or damage ocurred as a direct or indirect result of using the software. Use at your own risk.

Also EULA point 5 is a good one to read as well..

[MKI]

Having a resource system implemented eventually is important to me. As i see no reason not to add resources and considering the game completely finished without even considering such would be a letdown. I would rather see development toward part costs to facilitate SSTO's and reusability. Both are much more connected to the ship building aspect of the game rather than adding to what is already a very deep game.

I would rather see a simplified resource system implemented(kethane level is a good start), and a much more interactive system updated far in the future. A large and complex resource system would only be worth it if is can be:

1. accessible, not tedious and highly complex

2. compliments the main point of the game(ship building, flying)

3. adds an entire new level to the game(gives reason to the rest of the game)

In other words the system would become the end game of ksp. It would give reason to do everything, i believe that is important to many players. Currently the game has no reason besides the "fun" of it. Even the career mode has relatively no end, it only morphs into sandbox mode. That is the underlying reason to add a resource system, a constant manageable aspect.

Without it many players will get bored once the achievements have been met.

Currently the long term goals are generally set by players, but some do not want or play for such aspects, and thus are disappointed by the current lack of "guidelines".

I say only to look at this problem later, as there are many other aspects of the game that are more core to the experience(flying, building) that need working. Part costs are far more important than a resource system, but both are really needed to facilitate goal oriented gameplay which are important to players looking for a start to finish type experience.

But the Current KSP do what you want cuse its free in ksp, must stay in sandbox mode. I, and many others do not want to grind it out just to make a space station.

[arq]

Really, resources have no place until after the economy is in place. Without a notion of money, Kethane is really the only resource mod that make sense at the moment, and even that can be shaky at times. Why do we think Squad would have done it better?

Once Squad implements the economy, we'll see what modders come up with. Chances are, I'll be happy enough with that. If Squad thinks that changes to the core game could improve those mods, THEN they can mess with resources more seriously. The whole reason resources were delayed was because they were uninteresting in the form they had. KSP is designed to be heavily modded, Squad is focused on the parts that modders can't do. This is why Squad has been so slow to add new parts and instead focused on a tech tree and tweakables.

I actually like what they did with multiplayer - let the modders work out the concepts and then take a look. Since the modders are limited in what they can do, Squad is stepping in to enhance that experience. If KMP worked flawlessly and as Squad wanted, they would just drag-and-drop it or leave it as a mod. Even though I care much more about resources than multiplayer, this is an efficient development model that gets us the maximum content in the minimum time.

[Santoron]

Resources are something I definitely want in my game, but I also have complete faith in the modding community to deliver a robust system now that they aren't worried about Squad making their efforts moot over time. If Squad believes this decision helps them deliver a better "vanilla" experience, I see no reason to doubt them.

[Wallace]

I thought I wanted resources, but having installed Kethane and sent out various Kethane gathering ships which I have then left languishing on planets, I realise I don't really care that much about resources. Maybe if I had the offworld launchpads too, I'd use it more.

[John FX]

Somewhere in between "I will lose interest in KSP without it", and "It sounds fun, but I'll still enjoy the game without it".

I've heard that the reasoning behind the unimplementation of it is due to the complexity on the part of the player. I don't see how this is a valid reason, since the player could simply choose to ignore the whole system, and if they want to, pick it up later.

You don't have to dock ships, but the option's there, so why not give us the option of resources as just that; an <u><b>option</b></u>.

Anyone else feel the same way?

Careful, people who would not choose an option don`t want the option to be available to others and they will complain that you would use the feature but they would not and they will say that is a reason to not include it...

Myself I`m an options kind of guy. I like many many options as that makes any software I use better for me as opposed to an unrealistic generic player.

funny enough, science is derived from resources and in fact mechanically it works pretty much the same (go to X area, use part, get "resource science") but apparently this was fun, while doing the exact same for, say, oxidizer, was not

I would say it is more fun than oxidiser, which is why it got priority.

Nobody is saying resources are NO fun, just LESS fun than other things that the Devs could spend their time on which is why they are doing the more fun things before they do the less fun things. I hope that makes sense to you.

This means we will have more fun earlier but still all the fun later.

win-win.

Edited December 16, 2013 by John FX

[JumpsterG]

I thought I wanted resources, but having installed Kethane and sent out various Kethane gathering ships which I have then left languishing on planets, I realise I don't really care that much about resources. Maybe if I had the offworld launchpads too, I'd use it more.

My experience as well. Kethane is essentially fuel. Landing somewhere to gas up is only slightly different from docking with a station or tanker. It's cool and opens up a new avenue of gameplay for those who like building infrastructure, but it doesn't change the game in any large aspect.

Extraplanetary Launchpads is amazing and gives a good deal more substance to mining than just refueling efforts, but the infrastructure required to utilize it is still daunting in terms of time commitment and effort. And what do you get as an end result? You can launch vessels, which is something we already do. Again, this is cool, and opens up new mission types, but doesn't change the game as much.

I think this sums up what Squad feels was the problem with their proposed system. It was large and complex, requiring specialized single-purpose parts and an implementation for scanning, generating, and refining various resources. And the end result for a player was just a lot more work to do things the player was already doing (albeit in a cool way).

They didn't like the way it boiled down, especially when compared to the features that have yet to be implemented in the game. They could have resources (refueling, off-Kerbin construction) or they could make the entire career mode (science, economy, contracts) and multiplayer which are whole dimensions of difference in gameplay. So they're putting more into the game by switching focus. These broad strokes will eventually give way to polish, and we'll start to see improvements on planets, EVAs, aerodynamics, and such at that time further down the road.

They also said during the Twitch broadcast (in addition to "no we're not doing resources now", which most folks stop listening after hearing), that it would probably still come in some form later down the line. They just haven't figured out what form it would take or when it would become prioritized. I personally believe we'll have a stock drill and the ability to scoop Eve juice at some point! Just not soon.

[Elmun]

I haven't read the entire thread, so I apologize if someone has said this already.

I would love to see resources in the game, I think it adds a substantial reason to continue with career mode beyond what is currently in place (0.22 release). Having said that, I think it needs to be balanced delicately with other aspects of the game so that this doesn't become a single minded space mining game. As some of the posts I've read have stated, it takes a good deal of experience and knowledge to run a mining operation in this game. I've given Kethane a try, and I have had trouble with it. I'm more the kind of player who slaps together a rocket and lights the fuse with hopes of landing somewhere on the Mun and return for science points.

But I would like to see resources brought in, with or after they implement an economy into the game, and use mining as a supplement to mission rewards and science. For example, there could be simple mining missions because Kerbin is low on a particular resource. Or mining could be used while not on a mission to boost funds for future missions. Or it could even be used as a science boost, adding a particular mineral to the goo tubes and seeing what happens.

[TNM]

third thread...but ok, the poll is interesting:

as much fun as ksp is i would enjoy it much more if ressources where part of the core game. sure, i can always hope that a mod will somehow add a similar system to it (kethane on steroids with multiple ressources), but mod support is usually flimsy and can fall appart quickly once a key-member leaves.

so yea, i think i will lose interest if ksp stays what it is today without further features that deepen the experience like ressources could.

but...i already payed for the game, so i don't suppose it makes much difference to SQUAD what i want here, thats the bane of "early access games". I hope they haven't run out of ambition yet and want to grow their game still.

[DominusNovus]

Personally, I'm certain I'm in the extreme minority here, but I'd like an option beyond "I will lose interest without it." I'm a huge fan of resource management games, and, honestly, I kinda view the whole orbital mechanics and launching part of the game as something I have to put up with in order to do the parts I find fun (or will, once I can do any resource management in the game). Thats not to say that launching the rockets and painstakingly aligning everything just right can't be a fun challenge and a rewarding success... it certainly is. But I'm personally a hands-off manager kinda guy that loves to delegate.

While this particular idea is far from what Kerbal is or should be, I'd love a game focused much more on the management angle, with the actual flight mechanics and orbital mechanics abstracted to their costs, rather than directly piloted (it costs $x/kg to reach LEO with 1950s technology, only $y/kg to reach it with 2010s technology, that sort of thing).

For example, take a space station. You design it, and then find out how much it will cost to launch through various means (one large rocket, multiple modules assembled in orbit, etc. etc.). You launch it, doing nothing other than paying the cost for the fuel, rocket, and other supplies for whatever given altitude you in which you want to orbit. Now, you've got a station with crew that needs to be ferried up and down, adding more cost. Plus food and water for them. The usual logistics.

Eventually, you'll be able to launch life support modules to recycle water, and your station becomes a little less costly to supply. Then, some greenhouses to grow crops. A little less costly to supply. You could build some more stations, in higher orbits (or, rather, lift your existing station into such an orbit). Maybe some as waypoints to the Moon. Build a lunar station, to mine Helium-3 and water. Go get some near-earth asteroids for metals, or comets, also for water. Develop an entire space-based economy, bit by bit. Your initial space stations replaced with giant rotating habitats, your temporary moon bases vast mining complexes... etc. etc.

I know this isn't what Kerbal is going to be, but I'd play that game for days at a time.

[HarvesteR]

I think there is a large amount of inaccurate overlap here between what the top-end of KSP gameplay needs and what the old resources system was supposed to add.

I agree that once you master the challenge of spaceflight and are able to get anywhere and pretty much do anything, you start to feel there isn't much left to do. This is true of any game. However, most games at that point just end and you get to watch the credits roll by. With KSP, you are free to continue playing until you've exhausted all possibilities, and beyond. This "end-game lull" is a frequent issue with sandbox games.

However, I disagree that resource mining-- especially the idea for resource mining that we proposed last year-- is the best solution to improve end-game activities. There are a lot of other cool things that we could add there, that would be a lot more interesting and fun, and that wouldn't require an overly complicated and honestly, very tedious system to give you new cool things to do.

What those things are aren't something we want to discuss yet. For all we know at this point, whatever new idea we disclose now might end up turning into a new 'resources', that later needs to get scrapped, so let's not get into that discussion now.

One thing that needs to be made clear though, is that a game in Early Access, while it shares a lot in common with the usual MMO-style development process (without any regard to payment model either, that's an entirely separate and off topic thing here), it is different in that while the MMO is essentially complete from the start, and receives new updates to extend the content for players who have done everything, the Early Access game is still incomplete, and must devote its development time to adding features that maybe might not seem important to experienced players, but that make it easier to be picked up by new players, or that make the overall game experience more complete even if that doesn't make it more lengthy.

That's not saying we won't ever add more things to do on the end-game level... However, you may notice it's even been mentioned several times here that the key thing is that people feel that once you land on another planet, there isn't much else to do. That does not imply the solution to that is to get out the shovels and start mining. Especially if you were supposed to remember to pack the shovels in the first place and didn't realize it until after touchdown.

My point is, that old plan we had for resources is most certainly not the right solution. It doesn't fit organically with the rest of the game, it requires you to remember to attach a bunch of single-purpose parts to a vessel (forgetting any of which would render a mission a complete failure), and really, that's just not how we want the game to play out.

I think this is the crux of the issue then. The resources plan being shelved is, by all means, a good thing. It wasn't any fun once we got down to it, so we're not losing anything that was worth keeping here. However, that does not mean there isn't a need (and budding plans) for more end-game activities. I'm just saying that old plan for resource mining wasn't it.

Cheers

Edited December 16, 2013 by HarvesteR