think a little, guys!

[BlackAdder128]

Not signed. Just read through the replies of the Dev Notes from August, 12th. The notes were nearly without content, no way around. But the replies were harsh.

And there are several other threads, where communication uses a lot of words and the semantics used were biased unfriendly. Of course this is a personal point of view.

Point is, the mood in the forums changed somewhere between 0.23 and 0.24. And I do not feel convinient with that.

Maybe. I haven't read through those in particular. Most of the threads I have read have been thoughtful. But speaking from experience in other forums, getting a less selective community is a necessary consequence of a game becoming more popular, unfortunately.

[Guest]

I am only arguing that the existence of a mod should be considered separately from whether an idea is a suggestion.

Ok, yes it's fine to submit an idea regardless of whether it's in a mod. And yes, whether it exists in a mod is one of the the things that should be considered before pressing forward with a suggestion.

I thought this thread was essentially about protocol: what bearing, if any, should the existence of a mod have on a suggestion thread. I say it is a good thing to bring up, but a page full of "there's a mod for that" replies are not useful. You have to follow up with, "any I think it should/should not be part of the game for reason X" to be helpful.

The suggestions of the people not using the search function for similar threads shouldn't be valued, that's the reason people have to say it. The devs don't need to be told there's a demand for x feature if there's a mod for it.

[BlackAdder128]

The suggestions of the people not using the search function for similar threads shouldn't be valued, that's the reason people have to say it. The devs don't need to be told there's a demand for x feature if there's a mod for it.

No, because the number of forum replies to a suggestion is probably more proprortional to actual demand for a feature to be in the stock game than the existence of a mod or even the number of dowloads. Therefore, a suggestion thread is not equivalent to search button failure.

[Mister Kerman]

Is there any dead horse left to beat or am I too late?

[Dunbaratu]

I give the community more credit than that.

Yes, there are some people who will use "there's a mod for that" for a variety of unstated purposes:

* To remind the requester they didn't invent the idea they're asking for

* To remind them that at least some solution exists that they or someone they respect worked hard to implement in some really cool way

* To remind the user that, if a mod exists, there is a decent chance the devs are aware of the level of demand for a feature.

You've left out (perhaps deliberately) the actual reason that causes the annoyance by the OP: when someone is bringing up the mod because they are trying to imply "You shouldn't be suggesting things that are already in mods". And there *are* people who do imply that. It's rather annoying because there can be added value in making something stock, and just because it's in a mod doesn't always mean it's a well maintained and robust error-free mod, but most of all it's annoying because with the very large number of mods out there, it's an attitude that would be very crippling to development of the main game. After all, the mod Mission Controller Extended existed before KSP 0.24 was out. Does that mean KSP 0.24 should never have had contracts because there was a mod that did it?

The existence of a mod that does something similar is NOT a valid reason to dismiss a suggestion.

"This mod can be used as an alternative if your suggestion isn't implemented (yet?)" is useful.

"This mod should be used *instead of* making your suggestion" is not, and can come across as a bit mean-spirited.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Steven Mading

[Dodgey]

Honestly that's just looking too far into it, in almost all cases of someone posting there's a mod for that they simply post that there is a mod for the idea that the OP has and the link to said mod. Or the name of said mod. Please tell me how that implies what you are saying. Because I have never seen someone explicitly say "you shouldn't have made your suggestion because there is a mod out there".

[KerbMav]

"This mod can be used as an alternative if your suggestion isn't implemented (yet?)" is useful.

Sure, the sender could wrap his intentions in many flowery words, but communication works both ways. Maybe the receiver of a neutral message should not read more (negatively) into "there is a mod for this, here is the link" than there is.

"This mod should be used *instead of* making your suggestion" is not, and can come across as a bit mean-spirited.

This or a similar verbalization could come across as rather cold, but it has to be so rare that I cannot even remember reading something like it - could be I am suppressing/ignoring such events though.

[Frank_G]

Playing stock KSP is getting more fun from update to update and the list of features that feel missing gets shorter also. One should never forget, that KSP is currently under heavy development and that lots of things are still missing... "There is a mod for that" is the phrase for many situations these days, just because KSP has a caring and agile community of modders, that help with their awesome work in the progress and beyond. Saddly some of the good and useful mods will probably die out, when the functionality they offer will make it into the final game.

"There is a mod for that" is nothing to blame SQUAD for, but a phrase that shows, how the modder community is keeping the flag waving, by making KSP feel more complete right now. Thank you for that!

[sedativechunk]

seiously, ive seen many people saying 'theres mod for that' on almost every suggestion post! think! if the person who opened that post, this is a sign that he want it to be in stock. he may knew about the mod before, but he dont want to use it, he want to be directly in vanilla!

That's an awful one sided view don't you think? What if it's a newcomer who doesn't know mods exist for KSP that bought the game in the past week or so? I don't think that's the way to go about it.

Usually if someone ask me a KSP-related question, I will give them a stock option and a modded option. I don't try to shove the mods down their throat, though.

[JDCollie]

Also, not all "there's a mod for that" comments are meant to mean that the suggestion should be shot down. I know I have suggested mods to people because I think it would fulfill their gameplay desire until such time as Squad can catch up. Nothing wrong with helping a brother out.

[r4pt0r]

When I start suggestion threads I tend to add a disclaimer telling people "not to suggest mods, as my suggestion is for stock"

I also always 5 star threads with great ideas, and 1 star threads that i think are terrible ideas.

[Red Iron Crown]

There's two different reasons someone might be posting the "that's already in a mod" reply:

1 - "Just in case you didn't know already, I'm letting you know you can get that if you want it in a mod."

2 - "It's pointless to make your suggestion because it's in a mod, so please knock it off and don't do it."

I do #1 all the time (it's possible the suggester is unaware of a mod that does what they want) though I always try to comment on the prospect of a stock implementation.

Also related is the idea of "this suggestion should remain as a mod rather than stock", which many take to mean "shouldn't be added because there's a mod". I feel that there are lots of good mods out there that should never be brought into stock, not because the mod exists but because the functionality does not belong in stock. An example would be any of the beautiful historical spacecraft mods, which are wonderful pieces of work but not really suitable for regular play as their parts are often not compatible with the stock lineup.

[Joonatan1998]

I think it is ok to mention that there is a mod for some feature, but you really should read the entire thread to see if someone has already mentioned the mod. (If the thread is longer than 2 pages it is almost certain that someone has already mentioned the mod)

I have seen some threads where most posts are about mods, and only a few actually talk about the suggestion.

[Dunbaratu]

Honestly that's just looking too far into it, in almost all cases of someone posting there's a mod for that they simply post that there is a mod for the idea that the OP has and the link to said mod. Or the name of said mod. Please tell me how that implies what you are saying. Because I have never seen someone explicitly say "you shouldn't have made your suggestion because there is a mod out there".

It usually includes the word "but" or the word "already".

"there's already a mod for this".

"but that mod already exists".

Getting suggestion threads clogged with more mentions of the mod than discussions of the suggestion *is* shutting down the suggestion. The implication by that pattern is "there's no reason to discuss this. mod mentioned. so why are you still talking about it instead of the mod?"

[pxi]

seiously, ive seen many people saying 'theres mod for that' on almost every suggestion post! think! if the person who opened that post, this is a sign that he want it to be in stock. he may knew about the mod before, but he dont want to use it, he want to be directly in vanilla!

I'm a firm believer that the best way for us as end-users to demonstrate to Squad that we want this feature or that, is to use the mod if it's available.

Demanding something in stock otherwise, is your prerogative, but it makes your case a lot less compelling.

That's how I see it at least.

[r_rolo1]

I'm a firm believer that the best way for us as end-users to demonstrate to Squad that we want this feature or that, is to use the mod if it's available.

Demanding something in stock otherwise, is your prerogative, but it makes your case a lot less compelling.

That's how I see it at least.

If that was 100% true we would have some kind of Kethane-ish system in stock since 0.15 or similar :/ The devs already shown that they have their vision of the game and that, while they are willing to acept suggestions that do not make them stray much of it, they do not show signs of doing something just because a mod with it is highly popular ( see the issues they have with automation and life support in game, in spite of mechjeb and TAC being really popular mods ).

I'm not saying that complaining will be better than playing a mod, but I've seen both of them being sucessful in changing SQUAD hand in some subjects ( I do remember the aerospike nerf and the decouplers fuel flow cut in earlier days, that were simply suggested AFAIK ... ) ... and both of them failing miserably ...

And that is not even touching the fact that the mods existant for a feature that a person wants might be even be worse in their judgement than vanilla or simply not like they would want them ( for a example, IMHO both Kethane and Karbonite mods are not really good alternatives for vanilla, simply because it's mineable fuel source is a unique chemical ( instead of varied sources distributed unevenly through the planetary system ). It really makes me cringe ... ). I do not see a reason for anyone to support/use a mod that does things that in it's opinion are wrong , just because they have a feature that they like, but that they would like to see implemented in a completely diferent way ...

Edited August 23, 2014 by r_rolo1