Kerbal Space Station have to learn from Spin Tires !

[Warsoul]

I just played Spin Tires recently and i saw an opportunity to merge 2 great indies games together before it was too late (it already does but).

The terrain destruction in Spin Tires show a real MUST for Ksp and vehicule assembly show a real Must for Spin Tires. Maybe they are a way to share their works and bring theses 2 games at a new level !?

A level near AAA games ?

I know; i'm dreaming; not the same engine not the same direct x. Ksp is almost done. But how ksp can be an real extraplanetary explorer without this terrain destruction ?

Kerbal must have this technology, it's too late; i tried it !

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/358753914/spintires-the-ultimate-off-road-challenge

[cpast]

Why, exactly, is terrain destruction a critical feature of a game mostly played in orbit?

[sumghai]

Why, exactly, is terrain destruction a critical feature of a game mostly played in orbit?

I concur with cpast.

Ground vehicles are only a fraction of the overall vision of KSP as a spacecraft design / space mission simulator. As SQUAD's recent focus has demostrated, KSP development is focused on gameplay framework with broader areas of impact than just improving a small subset of SFX.

I'll also add that, as if SQUAD isn't busy enough with their current workload, now you're requesting them divert their efforts to foreign, unfamiliar code that was made for another (different) game engine architecture, just so that you can crash stuff into buildings?

Honest question, Warsoul - are you and your friends still trying to turn KSP into a Starcraft/Freelancer clone? Because all your proposals about destructible environments, bipedal mechs, "dropper" dropships, forges, orbital factories and space stations that magically teleport spacecraft into orbit seem to indicate this is the case.

Also, perhaps it's merely the byproduct of you attempting to translate your thoughts directly from French to English without the proper context - but what exactly do you mean by things being "boring", "bored" or "too late"? KSP has its own focus based on SQUAD's vision, and just because it doesn't excite you personally the way RPGs and FPSs do, doesn't mean it will become less popular in general.

[Tex]

Wow, that is impressive technology. Perhaps not so relevant in terms of KSP, but it would be simply amazing to see in a game like GTA, or other racing games.

[Ravyne]

This reads more like an ad than a suggestion...

[Vonar]

I don't think terrain destruction really adds that much to the game as it currently stands. It might be a useful late game polishing feature if the developers include satellite impactors as well as earthquake sensors as a method of gathering science, and have a chance for micrometeorites to damage stations and ships in orbit but as it currently stands since there's next to no information on if the developers are planning on including either feature I half to agree with cpast and sumghai that terrain destruction has no place in a game that you spend 90% of the time in space.

[Tex]

This reads more like an ad than a suggestion...

True, but they've already got their kickstarter money, so we don't have to give a flying crap about donating

[MR4Y]

Well, considering we have useless asteroids that don't do any damage and only add an artificial type of challenge to the game, this is an idea worth considering. We have wheels with horrible collision and too fragile on any terrain.

Also, other idea worth considering: A clear objectives and development description. And that game is not even playable yet.

But, of course. People are too busy bashing the ad to notice those things. Let's just opt for the status quo of 'our game is perfect because it's unique.'

[Warsoul]

I don't think terrain destruction really adds that much to the game as it currently stands. It might be a useful late game polishing feature if the developers include satellite impactors as well as earthquake sensors as a method of gathering science, and have a chance for micrometeorites to damage stations and ships in orbit but as it currently stands since there's next to no information on if the developers are planning on including either feature I half to agree with cpast and sumghai that terrain destruction has no place in a game that you spend 90% of the time in space.

90% in space ?

Rovers ? Landers ? Digging ? Drilling ? Transporting ? Terraforming ? Real water diving ? Thermal damage mesh ? Colission mesh ? How an dynamical collision mesh can't be a real must for Ksp ? Do you ever tried Spin Tires ?

[Warsoul]

Honest question, Warsoul - are you and your friends still trying to turn KSP into a Starcraft/Freelancer clone? Because all your proposals about destructible environments, bipedal mechs, "dropper" dropships, forges, orbital factories and space stations that magically teleport spacecraft into orbit seem to indicate this is the case.

There a line for a troll;

''Because all your proposals about destructible environments, bipedal mechs, "dropper" dropships, forges, orbital factories and space stations that magically teleport spacecraft into orbit seem to indicate this is the case.''

All theses things are already made on Ksp Space Port. So what i proposed was so terrible? They all work on 23.5 and they are popular. I think ? Who you are and why you think you can limit people of what they want to do with their time ? What's wrong with you ? You have an vision of KSP fine, i respect that !

Edited June 16, 2014 by UbioZur
language/form

[Tery215]

KSP can be a real extraplanetary explorer without terrain destruction. You don't NEED footprints to be a hero of the Mun, or to fly planes on Laythe. You might need footprints to create a permanent establishment(not the same as exploration), but it's easy to do without.

Although, it would probably make asteroids a lot more fun.

This would likely double the ram usage of the game, and the need for asteroid simulation isn't helping...

[cpast]

90% in space ?

Rovers ? Landers ? Digging ? Drilling ? Transporting ? Terraforming ? Real water diving ? Thermal damage mesh ? Colission mesh ? How an dynamical collision mesh can't be a real must for Ksp ? Do you ever tried Spin Tires ?

Yes, the game is played 90% in space. Not sure how "Kerbal SPACE Program" gives a different impression.

In stock KSP, there is no digging, drilling, or terraforming. There are landers and rovers, but you definitely don't need terrain deformation for that. It's a minor graphical enhancement. Terraforming wouldn't work without terrain deformation, but that's not in KSP.

All theses things are already made on Ksp Space Port. So what i proposed was so terrible for you ? They all work on 23.5 and they are popular. I think ? Who you are and why you think you can limit people of what they want to do with their time ? What's wrong with you ? You have an vision of KSP fine, i respect that !

Those are mods. You're posting in Suggestions, meaning you're asking the devs for stock features. There's a big difference between mods (where one person liking it is enough) and things the devs spend their limited time on (which should be restricted for stuff that actually has to do with the point of the game).

Edited June 16, 2014 by UbioZur

[r4pt0r]

There a line for a troll;

''Because all your proposals about destructible environments, bipedal mechs, "dropper" dropships, forges, orbital factories and space stations that magically teleport spacecraft into orbit seem to indicate this is the case.''

All theses things are already made on Ksp Space Port. So what i proposed was so terrible for you? They all work on 23.5 and they are popular. I think ? Who you are and why you think you can limit people of what they want to do with their time ? What's wrong with you ? You have an vision of KSP fine, i respect that !

dude, we will play vanilla, and you should probably start posting your threads in the mod request board, cuz alot of your ideas will honestly NEVER be stock.

Edited June 16, 2014 by UbioZur

[Red Iron Crown]

That's some impressive terrain interaction in the linked demo.

I don't really care too much about wheels tearing up the terrain as seen in the video (though some sort of tracks would be nice). What would be interesting is the ability to make your own craters by high energy impacts. Slam a captured asteroid into a body and watch the debris fly!

Not sure it's a necessary feature, I think it falls into the "nice-to-have" category, at least for me.

[Random Tank]

Uh guys, you do know that original plan was that rockets and planes that crash could damage KSC? It might have been NovaSilisko that wanted to add this, so it's less likely that it would be added now, but the plan was that the buildings, Launchpads and runways could be damaged and blown up by being hit by rockets and such, and you would have to pay to repair them. This was in an effort to stop people dumping SRB's at 3km and letting them smack into the Launchpad at terminal velocity (I know they would despawn in the atmosphere now, but that was going to change too). So this idea of terrain damage isn't as obscure as it seems...

[Kasuha]

Hmmm a crater in surface of a planet or moon as another form of ship debris could be manageable I guess (disappearing when the debris piece gets removed from game). Wheel tracks or footprints would need to keep disappearing rather fast though, or the game would choke to death under amount of memory needed to keep these permanent. Not mentioning save file size. There's a bit of difference between doing it for a few square kilometers and a whole planetary system. Not mentioning in that game you won't notice if they disappear while in KSP you'll notice it rather fast since all surface is initially "pristine".

[Warsoul]

Kerbal Space Program is a space exploration game where the goal is collect sediments of various alien elements or not. So I found it very appropriate that land navigation need to be as faithful as possible to reality. So the type of navigable surface should be a dominant factor it can provide a simulation worthy the real challenge NASA must deal with. As an example; move to 150 meters away with a robot on the surface of Mars without getting stuck. A detail of size which is totally absent in Kerbal Space Program. A detail that I would pay $ 7.50 well as DLC.

Yes the code is different, so the direct X is different; but the work is already done mostly and the rest remains to be done to integrate with Kerbal Space Program is quite reasonable compared to the contribution that it could bring him, especially its educational version. Landing on hard or soft; there is a world of difference. Not to mention that this same technology could be used to simulate the thermal damage or damage caused by collisions. I see a great leap forward as possible with this technology. A little help NASA could facilitate this integration that will greatly benefit the three parties. Better game for both games and an beatifull publicity for Nasa funding programs.

This is an google traduction; so fix the errors made by google by yourself.

[Warsoul]

Those are mods. You're posting in Suggestions, meaning you're asking the devs for stock features. There's a big difference between mods (where one person liking it is enough) and things the devs spend their limited time on (which should be restricted for stuff that actually has to do with the point of the game).

Has i remember; i have asked 1 thing or 2 in suggestion forum; a Space Station mode for my friends and ( i don't remember the second ).

The forum Moderator had erased my reply i made in french. I'm forced to answer in an langage this is not mine because we have no chance or almost to see somes english trying to understand french. It's too hard we don't know. So i'm answering with my poor english i learn on the spot. So i can't full express myself and misguiding can occur.

[BudgetHedgehog]

Kerbal Space Program is a space exploration game where the goal is collect sediments of various alien elements or not.

No, KSP is a space exploration game with no goal but what you make.

EDIT: having terrain deformation in a game that is mostly spent in space doesn't seem that important to me. Sure, it'd be nice, I'm not denying that, but for 90% of the time, it will have no effect on me or my game.

Edited June 16, 2014 by ObsessedWithKSP

[Kasuha]

Has i remember; i have asked 1 thing or 2 in suggestion forum; a Space Station mode for my friends and ( i don't remember the second ).

The forum Moderator had erased my reply i made in french. I'm forced to answer in an langage this is not mine because we have no chance or almost to see somes english trying to understand french. It's too hard we don't know. So i'm answering with my poor english i learn on the spot. So i can't full express myself and misguiding can occur.

English is the official language for the main part of forums and you need to stick to that for moderation and communication reasons - there's little point in posting something most of visitors won't be able to read and moderators need to understand what you posted. You can use french in the french subforum or when you send a PM.

[Warsoul]

Hmmm a crater in surface of a planet or moon as another form of ship debris could be manageable I guess (disappearing when the debris piece gets removed from game). Wheel tracks or footprints would need to keep disappearing rather fast though, or the game would choke to death under amount of memory needed to keep these permanent. Not mentioning save file size. There's a bit of difference between doing it for a few square kilometers and a whole planetary system. Not mentioning in that game you won't notice if they disappear while in KSP you'll notice it rather fast since all surface is initially "pristine".

I totaly agree with you; chunking an planet in 1000 hex like kethane mod does is really challenging. But if we can load an savefile for the hex we landing to with some hex surronding him; i think we can do an fully destructive terrain for each planet. We need to load only few square kilometer then save them in many files for each region you have loaded. Like world of warcraft; you can run without any loading. Maybe this is an feature we can see in Kerbal Space Program 2

[Warsoul]

English is the official language for the main part of forums and you need to stick to that for moderation and communication reasons - there's little point in posting something most of visitors won't be able to read and moderators need to understand what you posted. You can use french in the french subforum or when you send a PM.

The french section are almost empty because almost all french can understand english very well. Or they simply use another Ksp's Fan website for French because an tiny section near the flushroom is not really enjoyable for them. So they use their broken english or simply don't give any topics.

I don't why others languages don't have the same space on the official Kerbal Space Program. This is not hard to copy and paste a theme. So we made it.

http://www.kerbalspaceprogram.fr/forum/

Edited June 16, 2014 by Warsoul

[UbioZur]

I don't why others languages don't have the same space on the official Kerbal Space Program. This is not hard to copy and paste a theme. So we made it.

Due to the amount of moderator require per forum.

But Back on track to the topic guys: Terrain Destruction and less off topic please.

I totaly agree with you; chunking an planet in 1000 hex like kethane mod does is really challenging. But if we can load an savefile for the hex we landing to with some hex surronding him; i think we can do an fully destructive terrain for each planet. We need to load only few square kilometer then save them in many files for each region you have loaded. Like world of warcraft; you can run without any loading. Maybe this is an feature we can see in Kerbal Space Program 2

That sound like a good aproach to it, if only the game would not load all the data at start up.

[SolarLiner]

Personally I'd see more KSP being merged with Space Engineers which also uses destructible environment, ya know, how cool would it be to be able to drill resources to be able to make new parts later? Orbital construction, also?

[coolitic]

Procedural craters (coming soon) is enough for now.