Ideas for the New Secret Feature in 0.25!

[dryer_lint]

Maybe the secret feature is buildings that you can walk into while on EVA.

This would be really cool, but what would be the purpose of it? Maybe... you walk up to a door, press F, and it recovers the EVA guy and takes you into the building's interface? Gasp

[Franklin]

This would be really cool, but what would be the purpose of it? Maybe... you walk up to a door, press F, and it recovers the EVA guy and takes you into the building's interface? Gasp

Nah, cause they said they wanted to speed-up transition time between screens (by skipping having to go the pause screen, etc.). Having to physically move your Kerbal from building to building would be a nightmare.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean people hate rovers for how slow they are, imagine having to actually navigate the KSC on foot.

[peachoftree]

Just thought I would say the secret feature is destructible buildings. And it is totally amazing.

[Sandworm]

Any and all "improvements" to the physical KSC are useless to me. KSP is about space exploration. It is about going places OTHER than the launch pad. Blowing up buildings may make failure fun and provide youtube eye candy, but I'd much rather see features added to make non-failure more fun.

Am I the only one who hasn't ever crashed into a building? This "feature" could have been added a year ago and i wouldn't have noticed.

[nine_iron]

Shoulda been Kerbal Golf

[Sean Mirrsen]

Any and all "improvements" to the physical KSC are useless to me. KSP is about space exploration. It is about going places OTHER than the launch pad. Blowing up buildings may make failure fun and provide youtube eye candy, but I'd much rather see features added to make non-failure more fun.

Am I the only one who hasn't ever crashed into a building? This "feature" could have been added a year ago and i wouldn't have noticed.

I believe they did say that experienced players would hardly notice it. Congratulations! You sound like an experienced player!

And do recall that this is mostly just a byproduct of what they're really working on for .26. I personally don't mind seeing sooner rather than later.

[severedsolo]

Any and all "improvements" to the physical KSC are useless to me. KSP is about space exploration. It is about going places OTHER than the launch pad. Blowing up buildings may make failure fun and provide youtube eye candy, but I'd much rather see features added to make non-failure more fun.

Am I the only one who hasn't ever crashed into a building? This "feature" could have been added a year ago and i wouldn't have noticed.

You and me both. I'm not exactly trying to avoid them, it just doesn't happen,You have to be really unlucky, or aiming to hit anything specific most of the time (in space or on the ground).

The only thing I've collided with (other than the ground) is a space station, and that was because I wasn't paying attention to which way the nose was facing when I turned retrograde after undocking.

[jaredkzr]

Those explosions are amazing! I wonder if this can/will be expanded to terrain in general. I'm still hoping for destructible terrain at some point which I feel would be encountered by a lot more users.

[TimberWolffe]

I bet the secret feature is destructible buildings

[Alewx]

The SF is destructable buildings.

But my guess for the big underlining framework that it contains is an improvement in groundscatter and procedurally generated destructable cities on kerbin. Every time you damage somthing it will costs you founds and reputation.

[Luis]

The SF is destructable buildings.

But my guess for the big underlining framework that it contains is an improvement in groundscatter and procedurally generated destructable cities on kerbin. Every time you damage somthing it will costs you founds and reputation.

That would be an enormous waste of dev time. How often do you fly around Kerbin? I think it's much more likely that the destructible buildings are a harbinger of constructable buildings. Maybe we'll be able to create new launch sites on Kerbin. Hopefully we'll be able to build bases on other worlds too.

[Akinesis]

I'm hoping this is paving the way for destructible parts. And by that I mean we will see parts explode causing lots of fragments of debris (that become physical objects themselves?) as opposed to just 'proofing' into dust.

Also, partly-destroyed parts would look very good, too. Fuel tanks could leak fuel, and such.

[BadManiac]

Am I the only one who hasn't ever crashed into a building? This "feature" could have been added a year ago and i wouldn't have noticed.

I was thinking the exact same thing! "Oh hey, a new feature that I'll never even see, great"... I must be playing KSP wrong because I basically never crash, let along into KSC building which are the exact opposite way from the way most space and aircraft actually take off, which is towards the east.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I take it every rocket and spaceplane you launch is always perfect, and you never ever have to revert the launch due to spontaneous rapid disassembly on liftoff? Or accidentally messed-up staging?

[Alewx]

That would be an enormous waste of dev time. How often do you fly around Kerbin? I think it's much more likely that the destructible buildings are a harbinger of constructable buildings. Maybe we'll be able to create new launch sites on Kerbin. Hopefully we'll be able to build bases on other worlds too.

That is the Job of MaxMaps to decide what a waste of time is and what not.

Building real colonies would be awesome, but destructable and colonies..... Not sure that fits well together.

Akinesis might have a valid Point there, what the new Feature did was adding different states for objects, and parts also just had 2 states, healthy, and exploded.

Maybe it really is visable damages parts, with interal rigs.

[TimberWolffe]

I think destructible buildings is a precursor to permanent extra-terrestrial colonies, so you could land stuff on planets or moons, set it to be a Colony type craft, and then you could launch from there, or play around there.

[SpaceXray]

I guessed the secret feture(yay for me).

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

The Buildings HAVE to be destructible.

Imagine a finished product of a game where you cannot destroy buildings.

This had to be implemented at some point and I am glad they did it for .25.

[superm18]

Here I wanted to see some theories (I know I used theories incorrectly, for me and all of those nerds out there) about what the new feature may be. Here is my idea:

I have two facts to back up my idea, which is that the new feature is: You can destroy and have to repair the space center!!!!

My first piece of evidence is that Squad said they would rather have told nobody about it and have people discover it through hilarious results. What's more hilarious that accidentally blowing up your Munar Lander and having a mono-propellant tank fly off of the launch pad and blow up the Astronaut Complex without your any knowledge of the fact that it may happen? My second piece of evidence is that in the wiki, on this page: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Planned_features there used to be something that actually mentioned that they were planning on having it be able to be destroyed in the future, but scroll through now and..................................................... IT'S NOT THERE!!!! :0.0::0.0: How interesting...

Anyway, that's my idea of what the secret feature is. Post yours below!!!!

omg you where soooo right!!

[lordlundar]

This is going to make VTOL experimentation a LOT more interesting...

[SelectHalfling0]

This is going to make VTOL experimentation a LOT more interesting...

lol. For me this will make every experimental launcher interesting

[Sandworm]

The Buildings HAVE to be destructible.

Imagine a finished product of a game where you cannot destroy buildings.

This had to be implemented at some point and I am glad they did it for .25.

You mean like every single flight simulator ever released? Or virtually every fps? KSP may not be a pure flight sim and certainly isn't a fps, but destructible buildings are not essential to any game.

I also question what greater features of which this is meant to be a part. Constructible buildings away from the KSC, especially on other bodies, seem totally outside of Squad's current direction. See the resources issue. Now, I can see upgradeable buildings at the KSC. An upgraded science center, that one would have to pay to expand/maintain, might work. But I would still call that eye candy as it could/should be implemented first without in-game models.

[Tw1]

I think destructible buildings is a precursor to permanent extra-terrestrial colonies, so you could land stuff on planets or moons, set it to be a Colony type craft, and then you could launch from there, or play around there.

I'm not sure, fun as it would be, there are other precursors that are not coming anytime soon, namely resources.

Re the other idea, upgradable KSC, I'm not quite sure about the link between construction and destruction people are seeing. Maybe the same code is needed to switch building models?

Not entirely enthusiastic about upgradable KSC, it's another limiting thing like the tech tree, that restricts your play for a while, then it's out of play completely. I'd rather they pursue features that bring new opportunities, and don't have a limited lifespan.

But if upgrading the science center will add more detailed and engaging types of science, then I'm all for it.

[razark]

The Buildings HAVE to be destructible.

Imagine a finished product of a game where you cannot destroy buildings.

I don't remember playing any game that had destructible buildings, unless the gameplay required buildings to be destroyed.

Can someone explain why destructible KSC buildings means colonies? Or cities on Kerbin? Or damageable parts? I keep seeing statements of "Detruction means we'll get feature X, but no one seems to be saying why they think destruction leads to X.

Edited September 27, 2014 by razark

[Sean Mirrsen]

Because think of what it means to have destructible buildings, from a codebase standpoint. It means that static objects - what you'd normally consider terrain features - can now properly interact with the player's actions. And they are no longer static, in the sense that it is now possible to modify them ingame. This also means that we get a UI specifically dealing with restoring damaged buildings in the KSC. Put it all together, and add the devs' earlier statements about the huge amounts of content being worked on for the upcoming .26 feature, and how big the feature is, and you get something along the lines of "we will be able to build new buildings, maybe just at the KSC, maybe anywhere we want, and we'll be able to blow them up and otherwise interact with them".

Not sure where people are getting damageable parts from though. There doesn't seem to be anything supporting that theory, at least as far as I can see.