Random Universe

[horndgmium]

It'd be kind of cool if there were a ton of different options for like moons, planets, orbits and such in a universe, except not at once. In each save you make, a universe could be randomly generated (sticking to presets and picking from a pool of choices).

So instead of having to load multiple different solar systems... which we have agreed is not going to happen ever, why not just make your ONE solar system really random so we never really have a need for more planets in one system?

[lajoswinkler]

One system, stock planets, random positions? That would violate the basic realism behind KSP. Eeloo can't exist where Moho is.

[zxczxczbfg]

Squad has stated, I believe, that random occurrences are not to be part of the game. Sorry.

[horndgmium]

You guys seem to have missed the point completely. You know how people keep wanting more solar systems? well that can't happen really, so the game picks fro pre-planned solar systems, so you get one out of however many.

Also, thanks for reminding me. I definitely have never heard that before. Also, not a random occurrence kind of thing. Also, this wasn't aimed at squad, but modders. Also, thanks for the constructive response.

[Ernest3.14]

Ta-da! http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/forums/13-Add-on-Requests-and-Support

[horndgmium]

Discussion... not a request. I will learn to not bother the masses anymore.

[FenrirWolf]

There isn't a whole lot to say about it, really. I guess it would make for personal challenges since you can't just look up info about some random planet in the wiki. But at the same time the point about random planets holding no common meaning to players is a big one. Like we all know what it's like to land on the Mun, Duna, Laythe, and all that. They're milestones that everyone understands.

On a related note, that's probably the core reason behind the dislike some people have for mods. When the average player sees a ship made of stock parts, they have a general idea of what the ship is capable of, what kind of design decisions went into its creation, and so forth. But if a screenshot depicts a ship full of unusual parts of unknown origin, the uninitiated player is like "uhh, i don't even know what that is. neat, i guess"

[AlamoVampire]

It'd be kind of cool if there were a ton of different options for like moons, planets, orbits and such in a universe, except not at once. In each save you make, a universe could be randomly generated (sticking to presets and picking from a pool of choices).

So instead of having to load multiple different solar systems... which we have agreed is not going to happen ever, why not just make your ONE solar system really random so we never really have a need for more planets in one system?

they said they will not add a random universe or procedural planets as it takes away from the unity of the games community. http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/12/23/kerbal-space-program-dev-on-random-solar-systems-the-joy-of-failure-and-the-cult-of-steam/

[Weylin]

Instead of total randomization they could use a seed.

Think of a stargate, and the code you enter will give access to a system based on that seed, so you can share the code and people will be able to relate or challenge others in some way.

Starquest online did this. Starbound did this. Shores of Hazeron did this. All the planets were procedurally generated, and other players can explore the same exact places based on coordinates.

[NovaSilisko]

Instead of total randomization they could use a seed.

Think of a stargate, and the code you enter will give access to a system based on that seed, so you can share the code and people will be able to relate or challenge others in some way.

Starquest online did this. Starbound did this. Shores of Hazeron did this. All the planets were procedurally generated, and other players can explore the same exact places based on coordinates.

That's what I've always thought would be the best way to go about it. Space Engine does this too, so if you find a cool place you can grab and share the coordinates with other people, and they can go take a look.

[Holo]

Shores of Hazeron did this.

Didn't expect to see a mention of SoH here. Hazeron for the win!

[Pinkishu]

As a roguelike/roguelite player, this would be SO cool

[rkman]

Many people here seem to not realize that random is not the same as procedural, and Harvester seems to have forgotten (probably temporarily).

Harvester made the procedural craters on the Mun, so obviously he knows those are not random but are in fact the same for everyone.

Squad has stated, I believe, that random occurrences are not to be part of the game.

Squad has stated, quite surprisingly, that procedurally generated solar systems will probably not be implemented because it would mean the game universe would not be the same for all players.

Q: Do you have plans to add more solar systems, or even randomly generated solar systems?

A: ...So if we were to add procedurally generated planets outside the current solar system, you would end up with places and destinations that don’t exist for anyone else.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/12/23/kerbal-space-program-dev-on-random-solar-systems-the-joy-of-failure-and-the-cult-of-steam/

procedurally generated content is only different when a different seed number is used. The "procedure" (calculations) to generate content from that number is the same for every copy the game, so the content (universe) would be the same for everyone. In principal there is the possibility to make it different for everyone, but only if that option is specifically implemented.

So the solution to the problem of each player getting a different universe would simply be a matter of not implementing the option to generate different seed numbers. That is not rocket science. Otoh creating nice looking procedural content is a bit like rocket science.

[AlamoVampire]

its still a massive undertaking in terms of code and not breaking what already works. Guys, we are in ALPHA still, with many many many MANY miles left to go before even BETA, lets just sit back, and see what they cook up for the Kerbin system first huh?

[KvickFlygarn87]

I'd be all for a random generator, but three things; seeds, realism and KEEP KERBIN + MOONS WHERE THEY ARE!

First of all, seeds would be a must. It would give people the possibility to share their awesome universes.

Second, I don't think Eeloo would be able to exist below Moho, so might wanna add some sort of limit where icy planets can exist, where gas giants can exist and a max and min number of planets.

Third, keep Kerbin exactly as-is, i.e. the same orbit, the same moons, same atmosphere, etc. Kerbin is obviously habitable, let's keep it that way, OK?

[TimMartland]

However, think of how difficult it would be to implement such a system. SQUAD would either have to 1. Come up with a random generation code for planets which is a practical impossibility (think about it, games that use a random world system such as Starbound, Minecraft ect are usually voxel-based or something simmilar. With a 3D high detail game such as KSP with no such easy systems random planet generation is virtually impossible) or 2. They would have to make an insane amount of planets that would be randomly put into the game which is also practically impossible (think how long it took to make the existing planets)

[rkman]

Come up with a random procedural generation code for planets which is a practical impossibility

Impossible? You have not seen Space Engine.

[UH60guy]

The nice thing about the current universe, that you can't guarantee in a random universe, is the diversity of options for the player. Sure, you could get lucky with a good solar system, but what if you ended up with a system full of Tylos?

I mean, as-is, we have a great variety. A highly inclined rock (moho), a nearby (delta V map anyway) atmospheric world (Eve), a challenge to launch (Eve), a captured asteroid (Gilly), Two moons to practice on (Mun, Minmus), a gas giant with a multiple moon system (Jool et al), and an eccentric ice planet. I think by making a "stock" universe, you're able to guarantee that gameplay diversity, you get a good balance, and there really is something for everybody knowing instantly what an achievement it is when someone makes an Eve ascent rocket.

[Murph]

Completely random would be bad for the reasons given in the interview, that people would not be able to share their experiences properly, if it was different for everyone. What should work nicely is what Elite did with just 32kB RAM (and only about 16kB of that for code) in the 1980s, a procedural universe which never changed (the same seed for everyone, or actually 8 seeds in original Elite, if memory serves, for 8 galaxies), but was vast. For KSP, I'd see that being a great method to add effectively infinite systems beyond the Kerbol system, but keep the Kerbol system as we have it today (maybe add some additional bodies to it, but not generated).

[jwenting]

Discussion... not a request. I will learn to not bother the masses anymore.

yes, you know you're not allowed to suggest it so you "discuss" the "need" for it instead. Which is exactly the same thing and everyone sees right through it.

[Weylin]

I would personally suggest leaving the system we have now (And what is planned for it) as it is, but to have the option to reach out to other systems by a gate of some sort, because it's totally inconceivable to reach other solar systems by any other way in the frame of time this game can work within.

The gate would just be a simple way to access new systems with new challenges, massively increasing the replayabilty of this game.

It's NOT difficult to procedurally generate height maps and biomes and planet statistics. It's a bit of work initially but saves you a lot of work in the long run.

[tntristan12]

HarvesteR and Calisker have basically said this isn't going to happen, though for reasons I don't fully agree with. Here's the article! That said, this is a discussion so let's discuss it. Here are my thoughts on the matter:

It's not true that "other star systems" == "random star systems", and likewise it is also not true that "procedurally generated star systems" == "random star systems," since as many others have said (including former dev NovaSilisko), even if they were to procedurally generate other star systems, the seed they use would be the same so even then it would be "random" only in the sense that it's only one of a literally infinite number of possibilities that could have existed for the game. Between players it would in fact be the same game, so I don't see how HarvesteR's comment stands up to any scrutiny here.

As far as arguments for other star systems go, I think that rather than adding new planets to the Kerbin system (which is already bursting at the seams with plenty of content to explore) the devs should welcome the opportunity to appease the loads of "moar planets plz" people out there, while still providing a natural evolution to the challenge curve. As it stands now, once you've visited all of Jool's moons you've pretty much exhausted as much of the challenge as there is (whether visiting Eeloo with its highly eccentric orbit is more of a challenge than visiting Jool still doesn't defeat my point). Not only would other star systems provide a logical next level of challenge and exploration, but it would allow players the opportunity to experience first hand one of the greatest adventures in science fiction. Consider that there aren't any other games out there on the market that offer the player a chance to reproduce any of their favorite missions from Science Fiction. If I want to reproduce of the flight of the Ad Astra from Starbound, KSP might very well be the only game in the world that allows me to do that in full 3D space, with complete flight controls and all of the associated engineering challenges. That has the potential to draw new players on its own merits!

As far as interstellar flight in the game introducing non-realistic technologies such as warp drive, I have two main things to address on that front:

1) 60 years ago the space shuttle and the ISS would probably have been written off as a pipe dream in the unrealistic minds of science fiction writers. Who can say what technologies will be possible in another 60 years of diligent research and development, and why does KSP have to be grounded in the here and now? The game already has the NERVA engine, with its ridiculous vacuum ISP an obvious niche as an interplanetary engine. Last I checked the space agencies of the world as they exist today aren't exactly brimming with nuclear engines (the same argument also applies to the new RAPIER by the way). My point: just because a technology doesn't exist today doesn't mean that as a concept it doesn't have merits that may render it possible at some point in the future, and if there exists the possibility that an engine might work then why can't KSP explore that?

2) Why should KSP only be grounded in what is possible? This is a game about building the impossible and accomplishing things that have not / are not/ will not / can not be accomplished by real life space agencies. The forums are brimming with people who build SSTO spacecraft, extraterrestrial mining operations, plan and execute massive grand tour missions, and create the wildest of contraptions on a whim just because the game allows them to. This makes KSP one of the greatest pieces of science fiction around, because it's the fiction that enables people to free their mind and make the impossible possible. By adding tools that are not 100% realistic (and lets be honest, until now almost every decision the devs have made has (rightly) gone in the favor of gameplay over realism anyway so it's not like this is unprecedented), they'd be giving the game and its players an opportunity to take their creations to the next logical conclusion of freedom and difficulty.

And don't tell me "it breaks gameplay because then players would only exclusively use that new technology" because you've already put into place a system to ensure that that doesn't happen: either a player is in sandbox mode in which case it's their right to use whichever technology they want for whatever purpose they want to use it for, or they are in career mode in which case they must already navigate the tech tree and science system (which is game-breaking already, and needs massive improvements anyway) in order to unlock it. Currently the tech tree does nothing but delay the player from getting the technology they need to explore what's already been given to them, so this would give them exactly the opportunity they'd need to turn it into an engine that drives the development of player abilities, instead of restricting us until we collect enough extraterrestrial dirt.

And that's all I have to say about that...

Edited December 27, 2013 by tntristan12