Is KSP becoming like Minecraft?

[ElJugador]

What I got from the latest news post: We may not get stock delta-V calculation? Big disappointment. That's just way too vital to be left out.

Edited December 25, 2013 by ElJugador

[stupid_chris]

What I got from the latest news post: We may not get stock delta-V calculation? Big disappointment. That's just way too vital to be left out.

That'S not what this article said at all, nowhere did I read "there will be no delta V calculations in v1.0", he merely mentioned how he constantly switched between yes and no in his mind.

[swiftgates24]

Why is it that, all the time people are screaming "WE NEED MULTIPLAYER SUAYHD8UASDH7YASDAYUID!!!1!112!" Then as soon as they announce it, nobody wants it? This forum confuses me...

[Jodo42]

That'S not what this article said at all, nowhere did I read "there will be no delta V calculations in v1.0", he merely mentioned how he constantly switched between yes and no in his mind.

Jugador said "may not," not "will not," which, I feel, accurately reflected Harvester's opinion on it. And I'd agree with Jugador, that's REALLY not an opinion a majority of players support.

[stupid_chris]

Jugador said "may not," not "will not," which, I feel, accurately reflected Harvester's opinion on it. And I'd agree with Jugador, that's REALLY not an opinion a majority of players support.

I'm being careful to make it clear here, because this could easily be picked up as "delta V calcs are shelved". I understand the reasoning behind HarvesteR's statement though. If he decides not to include it, I'll live perfectly well with MechJeb or Engineer.

[DaveofDefeat]

Why is it that, all the time people are screaming "WE NEED MULTIPLAYER SUAYHD8UASDH7YASDAYUID!!!1!112!" Then as soon as they announce it, nobody wants it? This forum confuses me...

People are mad because squad said multiplayer was never a priority or focus, then as soon as a multiplayer mod comes out, that actually kinda works, mulitplayer is suddenly their biggest focus after career. At least that's my take on it.

[Hodo]

No KSP is not becoming like Minecraft, Minecraft was made by a guy (Notch) who worked on a MMO Sandbox for years with a nother gentleman (Rolf) who wanted a slow paced grind happy sandbox. Minecraft was what Notch wanted, he didn't expect it to become what it is today. KSP is what the developers want it to be. It is turning out to be a great game, and each patch is improving the game in some way shape or form.

While you (the OP) feel that the game is going the wrong direction I can't disagree more. .23 was a good patch, it added more than just RAPIER engines and tweakables, it set the ground work for so much more, not only did the frame rates improve but the game had a more fleshed out in the career mode and science departments.

By far KSP has been the best money I have spent all year on a game and I have bought a few games this year from Planetside 2 and Mechwarrior Online to the old X-Com games. KSP is the one I have spent the most time in, and the one my girlfriend yells at me about when I am talking about it with my friends who play. It is a great game, it reminds me in many ways of when I was a kid playing with my Legos dreaming of ships and planes and then blowing them up. I can do that now in KSP, and don't have to worry about finding those lost Legos later while walking around in my socks.

[mknote]

People are mad because squad said multiplayer was never a priority or focus

They never said this.

On topic, it seems the OP was trying to imply that being like Minecraft is... a bad thing? It's one of the better games to come out recently, and it's getting better with each update! How can that be a bad thing? So the poll is missing an option: KSP is becoming more like Minecraft, and that's a good thing.

[Tuareg]

Why is it that, all the time people are screaming "WE NEED MULTIPLAYER SUAYHD8UASDH7YASDAYUID!!!1!112!" Then as soon as they announce it, nobody wants it? This forum confuses me...

only a few want multiplayer as a priority. a lot more would like to see KAC, KAS, Mechjeb, aerodynamics, hollow stations, working kerbals, animated mechanisms, mining, docking alignment etc but squad totally depends on modders and ignore the community (except the clapping ones)

They never said this.

On topic, it seems the OP was trying to imply that being like Minecraft is... a bad thing? It's one of the better games to come out recently, and it's getting better with each update! How can that be a bad thing? So the poll is missing an option: KSP is becoming more like Minecraft, and that's a good thing.

minecraft is like tetris, millions can play it endlessly but it doesnt make it a quality game. some has higher demands, thats it

Edited December 25, 2013 by Tuareg

[regex]

This thread is dumb. The KSP devs are going to create the game they want to see and that may be a moving goal. If you don't like it you can either mod it, play an earlier version (if you saved them), write your own, or move on.

[boxman]

to clear up a few things for you bro, its their game, and they will do as they please. ksp is squads baby and they will do what they think is best for it. if your idea of a good update is many new parts and new planets, your "ideal" game has a mountain of ever expanding un-optimized content. 23. is the best update thus far. the things behind the scenes, optimization that kind of stuff, make it playable.

resources will take a long while, but you can play with them now if you like. when they do add resources half the community will say "aww its just like the kethane mod, i didn't want that" and the other half will say "its just like the kethane mod, awesome"! either that or people will have been wishing for something completely differennt. i dont think they should be adding much more content until the framework of the current game is more comlete. aerodynamics and drag need alot of re-working yet, and science and the tech tree might need some re-organizing.

furthermore, it literaly does not take 2 days to add a planet. coding is not that easy. you're ignoring biomes, the science fluff text, adding more code to the archives, having interesting planet geometry and textures. before they add any new planets, im certain they will finish adding biomes to our current roster of planets and moons. that kind of stuff is much more important to the game than another nondescript rock orbiting the sun.

The originally planned resources was alot more advanced than the kethane mod. I think the real problem is that they are afraid that it will scare of potential new players by making it too advanced. I really wish they would just make a customized career mode, so that the player themselves can decide if they want to for example use resources or not.

I have heard from some people that were at squad at that time that they did not even understand why it was dropped, as this person found that even the early resource system added alot to the game.

[johngault007]

I'm surprised this thread hasn't been nuked yet. Of course I read through the whole thing and came out on the other end more confused than when I started.

[Stargate525]

They never said this.

That's funny. If you go back into the archives of multiplayer request threads, they've all been locked with the explanation of "Squad has said they aren't going to be putting it in, no point asking."

I'm on the fence. Squad hasn't done anything wrong with the game yet. What they've said (and not said, and apparently never said) is becoming more and more troubling.

[ddavis425]

They never said this.

Squad stated several times over the past few years that multiplayer was either not possible, not practical, not a priority, or not going to be added until after 1.0 if at all. Your join date says March 2012, I would have expected you to have heard this at least once.

[Whackjob]

I'm not seeing an option for, "I'm thinking of a number between one... and no. How about no?"

[iDan122]

I do hope squad rethinks scraping resources and puts that on top priority, and multiplayer last since it is not always multiplayer that makes the game awesome. Resources would have added so much more depth into the game that no one would even care for multiplayer.

[m1xte]

they are afraid that it will scare of potential new players by making it too advanced.

Playerbase saturated.

Moneyflow stopped.

So potential new players are in control.

Old ones already paid.

I wish next version would be 1.0 and "KSP II" alpha would start.

Then i could pay again and squad didn't need to fish new players outside of original target group by pressing "emergency multiplayer" button

[jchad]

Dear OP.

Im sorry you are not entertained with career mode, as much as many of us are. I know I LOVE career mode, although I think the tech tree could be tweaked an ITTY BITTY bit, but that can be easily remedied with a mod. Now with career mode, I pretty much only use sandbox as a tool to learn how to get to other planets reliably, getting proper phase angles, etc. I also feel optimization of code is a KEY to a well polished game and Im very happy with what squad did to help OUR playing experience.

Your statement regarding it taking "literally like two days to make one" is baseless. I think that to support said statement, you should go develop a planet, do all the coding, properly match the collision messes *insert dev. mumbo jumbo* and come back on say, the 27th or the 28th and present it to us as a mod. where we can test it. Also we would like you to include a few biomes and science as well.

As for multiplier I am not sure how I feel about it, however I will be open to exploring it. I would like to have seen a resource system, but even with kethane it adds a metric buttload of complexity. And if you are still unhappy then just stop playing the game man. No need to beat others down telling them they aren't doing a good job when you are the one unhappy with the game. Maybe try Orbiter or something.

And to everyone else, have a Merry Christmas and enjoy the holidays!

John

[boxman]

only a few want multiplayer as a priority. a lot more would like to see KAC, KAS, Mechjeb, aerodynamics, hollow stations, working kerbals, animated mechanisms, mining, docking alignment etc but squad totally depends on modders and ignore the community (except the clapping ones)

They could easily do both if they didnt pretty much set a deadline for final version. I would much rather see them working on it for longer as a alpha so they can add both multiplayer and other features missing like resources. Even though this game is pretty amazing i still think it could be so much more if they spent some more time on it instead of giving themselves a "year" deadline.

[SkyRender]

This poll needs a third option: mu (this is not the right question). The correct question is, how willing is the community to accept the direction in which Kerbal Space Program is being developed? This is not mere semantics. To ask an opinion of the community concerning the developers is folly at best, hearsay at worst; we the community are not the developers, and do not have any insight beyond what they provide to us. We may express our feelings about how things are going, but we hardly have any right to say whether the developers are doing the job they set out for themselves to do or not.

My own feeling is that KSP will be what it will be. What it is now satisfies me quite well, each new addition is met with enthusiasm as I see what new avenues of play they open up, and I have modding options available to me to expand that into more if I decide I want features that aren't in the game by default. It would be selfish of me to demand that the developers deviate from their intended development cycle just for me, especially when there is a choice already there for what I would ask of them.

Long-time veterans and advanced players are potentially quite toxic to a game being developed under this "continuous improvement" model of game design. We have the best of intentions in our desire to see the game become more than it is or promises to be, but we bring the worst sort of trouble when we cross the line of "suggest" to "demand". Thus we have a responsibility to recognize when what we ask is unreasonable, and to find alternative means to obtain what we desire until the less experienced part of the community can catch up to us.

[boxman]

Long-time veterans and advanced players are potentially quite toxic to a game being developed under this "continuous improvement" model of game design. We have the best of intentions in our desire to see the game become more than it is or promises to be, but we bring the worst sort of trouble when we cross the line of "suggest" to "demand". Thus we have a responsibility to recognize when what we ask is unreasonable, and to find alternative means to obtain what we desire until the less experienced part of the community can catch up to us.

It should still be possible to keep some kind of balance so they please both newbies and long time experienced players. It wont be good for them if the long term players eventually gets tired because of lacks of challenges or exploration. I myself find that i play this game less and less because i simply dont really have any real challenges left or any places to explore. I know planets and moons are big and that i have not been everywhere, but as it is now there is just not much to do. Not even bases/colonies have a real purpose with the current science system.

[SkyRender]

It should still be possible to keep some kind of balance so they please both newbies and long time experienced players. It wont be good for them if the long term players eventually gets tired because of lacks of challenges or exploration. I myself find that i play this game less and less because i simply dont really have any real challenges left or any places to explore. I know planets and moons are big and that i have not been everywhere, but as it is now there is just not much to do. Not even bases/colonies have a real purpose with the current science system.

I do understand where you're coming from. However, we have a strong modding community to fill in that gap. At this point, I would consider it a bit of a failing of the community that there are so few exoplanetary-focused mods out there which give bases and stations some real purpose. Most of them are aesthetic at best, and none are particularly rewarding beyond letting you keep doing what you were already doing in the first place to get your station or base set up. The addition of the economy to the game may well help a bit with that; if nothing else, it could well inspire a mod maker to devise a mod which rewards bases with monetary and reputation gains.

[J.Random]

Playerbase saturated.

Moneyflow stopped.

So potential new players are in control.

Old ones already paid.

I wish next version would be 1.0 and "KSP II" alpha would start.

Then i could pay again and squad didn't need to fish new players outside of original target group by pressing "emergency multiplayer" button

I vote for 1.0 and DLCs: resources DLC, MP DLC, Interstellar DLC with multiple star systems, new planets DLSs, parts DLCs, etc. For the same reason. The only things game really needs before becoming 1.0 are polished career, polished x64 and maybe stock FAR. Maybe graphic engine polishing (sunspots on the wrong side, smart texture mixing to remove seams on water surfaces, this sort of things).

Edited December 25, 2013 by J.Random

[panfish5]

Oh god not another one of these.

[Alguien]

However, we have a strong modding community to fill in that gap.

the strong modding community is a double edge sword, for example one of the excuses to cut resources was "too similar to kethane" and people replying "well you could use kethane" and then there is the case when the stock implementation is inferior to the mod, even when Squad should be able to do better