Secret feature is completely underwhelming.

[tater]

I'm with regex overall. I'd be far more in interested in destructible terrain, personally. At least it would be fun to intentionally design something to make the biggest possible crater (maybe put it in a retrograde kerbol orbit, and slam into the Mun at 2X orbital velocity). The buildings are a lot harder to make feel right unless the damage model is actually pretty complex. All told, meh.

That said, it has some utility later, I suppose.

On the plus side, I have yet to make any space planes, but SP+ makes me want to, just because the models are so pretty.

[TimberWolffe]

there is no pre-loaded part in KSP that takes more than mere miliseconds to load. If what you suggest would be truth - initial loading of the game would take minutes.

it absolutely does, for me at least

[MKI]

How does this apply to the future i feel?

Simple why add a destructive structure feature if there's only a few structures.

The best result from this hidden feature is what it implies for .26 and beyond.

What i assume is in the near future, is MORE BUILDINGS. In other words possibly more KSC's, more launch pads, more landmark buildings, more things to simply blow up.

Along with this you could say in the far future you can create buildings/ secondary launch locations. These locations would be essentially buildings, but as such they can't be permanent. Which is where you come in. If things can be destroyed (as the New ksc or any other part) things can be created just as much as they can be removed. This is all implied, there is no mention of more launch locations. But the idea they implemented this feature shows that there is framework for interactive buildings outside of functionality.

This is still just implied, as it doesn't really warrant new buildings outside of the KSC.(now they can just explode)

As Maxmaps said in the stream it does have some gameplay implications, as you can damage the launchpad and Runway.

All in all i can see why they can present it as a hidden feature. It fits what they said, anyone actually angry about the feature on how it "wasted time" is up to their usual complaints. This has been proposed for a while, the Devs wanted to do it and it does fit in with the next explosion effects. It also fits in with the newest building added to the KSC which possibly with be the last. Yes the Devs could of went over the flight dynamics or added more biomes or done this or that. But this isn't the main point of this update, rather this is possibly the LEAST important part of the update. Which is why it can be sold as a SECRET FEATURE and the update still looks pretty hefty.(SP+ alone is a significant update)

A true HypeTrain needs max hype to get up to speed, whats better than some big explosions for a secret update? We still get a new Career mechanic, cargo bays, updated SpacePlane parts, new explosions and new navball. All fun and games, dont get mad because you expected something BIGGER than a crap ton of new parts!

[ArmchairGravy]

This will be diabolical in multiplayer.

[regex]

This will be diabolical in multiplayer.

Actually ... That is a bright side.

[Vanamonde]

Destructible buildings is not the entirety of the .25 update. It is one feature which was chosen for emphasis because it's colorful, playful, and easy to portray in pre-release publicity. The fact that it isn't something some players wanted is hardly evidence that the game's development process has catastrophically derailed, especially because it was stated several times that it was a feature many players might never see. I myself have never seen the kraken on Bop, but that hardly means it was irresponsible of Squad to take the time to put it there. Also, many of the complaints here are taking the position that this feature is useless for its own sake, which ignores the repeated statements that it is one aspect of something which will be expanded later. Let's not lose our heads, okay guys?

[Rowsdower]

You grumpy spacehippie!

Guys - last time. Shall we not resort to this?

[regex]

Guys - last time. Shall we not resort to this?

Dude, it was obviously a joke. I can understand "not setting a precedent", but it's my self-proclaimed "title".

[Whackjob]

...Though I will say for a moment, that it will be refreshing to see destructible buildings I don't have to build and launch first.

Dude, it was obviously a joke. I can understand "not setting a precedent", but it's my self-proclaimed "title".

He probably didn't notice. I didn't.

[TimberWolffe]

I won't say destructible buildings is a useless feature, but I would've liked more buildings to destructify first, or at the same time

[LaydeeDem]

Guys - last time. Shall we not resort to this?

Well you don't have to be such a Kommunity Manager about it geez.

[Rowsdower]

Dude, it was obviously a joke. I can understand "not setting a precedent", but it's my self-proclaimed "title".

Pretty much not setting a precedent. It seemed a bit off to me in how it came up.

[Sky_walker]

it absolutely does, for me at least

O_O stock?

my semi-modded version loads under a minute easily, and I'm using modded HD skybox, etc. which sagnificantly increases load time.

Oh, and I got regular HDD, not an SSD drive.

well, ok then - for you it'd be hours

[ferram4]

If it's quite easy to add new destructible buildings, this could actually be lots of fun for multiplayer; you could play a nice game of Global Thermonuclear War against another player, with destructible cities, missile silos, air bases, etc. It would actually make for an interesting game mode for multiplayer (for once).

Let's give three cheers for Squad, finally embracing the militaristic attitudes that started spaceflight and getting us closer to a competitive, aggressive, and violent KSP experience! After all, why else would they add something like this?

[AvronMullican]

I missed the squadcast. can somebody post a picture of the destroyed buildings?

Please?

[Franklin]

Also, many of the complaints here are taking the position that this feature is useless for its own sake, which ignores the repeated statements that it is one aspect of something which will be expanded later.

I believe this is just half the argument that's being presented in that, we're not concerned that this is an inclusion that nobody asked for (let's be factual though, it isn't), ultimately it's a meaningless, flashy bolt-on. But rather it's a cobble stone on a roadmap we're not privy to knowing, and it's a developmental process that is often neglectful of very vocal concerns and requests of Squad's alpha tester pool.

At this point some developmental drift, which I chalk this up to, is less of a yellow card than us slowly realizing we're not really sure where Squad wants to take KSP, but it's at least not committedly in the direction we keep asking for. I mean, we've got verbose blog posts about the over-arcing vision of KSP, but no actual, concrete roadmap in what we're to expect with the end-game development. No flames to hold their feet to.

And it's not like that's outside the realm of reason, many great games have a solid roadmap, that customers can agree upon before purchase. Giving your customer base a vague sense of scope, with the guise that "It's an adventure that we hope you'll all be a part of," only works for so long.

So while concerns that Squad is losing focus were quiet and few back on patch .18, here on patch .25 a number of us (and let's not pretend it's just 3 a-holes here and 1 on Reddit) are getting restless to check Squad's playbook for the future of KSP. Because some of us are concerned it's blank.

edit: Like, let's be clear. Everyone here loves the game [in theory] and Squad [in theory], but we all want to shape this product together. We're just concerned that left-field additions made without request are actually shows of a disinterest in alpha tester desire, which from a product-development standpoint, always ends up unprofitable long term.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Franklin

[Whackjob]

Also, I've been kinda AFK for a month or so, but I just wanna note that maybe you guys kinda had unrealistic expectations here. I mean, I'm seeing all kinds of hype train and hype planes. Maybe... just maybe... you put a bit too much coal into the tender and made that train stop at the wrong station.

Or they could've said this would be a big deal and I could be rectally speaking. Either is possible.

/hasn't been paying attention

//been a bad bad 'Whack

[AvronMullican]

So while concerns that Squad is losing focus were quiet and few back on patch .18, here on patch .25 a number of us are getting restless to check Squad's playbook for the future of KSP. Because some of us are concerned it's blank.

Amen Dude.

However, Squad chose not to build a roadmap for fear that they would not be able to deliver.

When stock resources where tanked people raised heil about it.

[regex]

However, Squad chose not to build a roadmap for fear that they would not be able to deliver.

When stock resources where tanked people raised heil about it.

And yet they could have delivered; apparently it was functional enough for someone to say "This isn't fun because I might have forgotten to bring all these parts!". Basically they don't want to post a roadmap because they don't have one.

[metalmouth7]

Or they could've said this would be a big deal and I could be rectally speaking. Either is possible.

On various sites, Max had really been playing this feature up as a huge deal, and had been encouraging the hype train to nearly derail he had it chugging along that fast.

Amen Dude.

However, Squad chose not to build a roadmap for fear that they would not be able to deliver.

When stock resources where tanked people raised heil about it.

And that's no way to develop a game. At this point, it really looks like Squad is blundering about in the dark, trying to just hit us with as many shiny features as possible whilst abandoning numerous things along the way. If we could actually see a development roadmap, with all of their main goals laid out, perhaps people wouldn't be so quick to hop on their case. At this point, however, I feel more like Squad is purely a marketing team with their careful control of information, and attempts to make silly little features seem like huge deals.

[Camacha]

And yet they could have delivered; apparently it was functional enough for someone to say "This isn't fun because I might have forgotten to bring all these parts!". Basically they don't want to post a roadmap because they don't have one.

To be fair, I would never post a detailed or even rough roadmap. Any deviation, even if in everyone's best interest, will mean never ending arguments. Sometimes you have to shuffle things around to make it better and that is very hard if people are expecting all kinds of things. There is very little to gain and a lot to lose. People will just have to be patient.

Well you don't have to be such a Kommunity Manager about it geez.

Har, beat me to it I was obviously referencing the subtitle (not to mention it would make a rather dull insult on its own). I am fairly certain I never used foul language or made any offensive remarks on the forums and I do not intend to start now.

[AvronMullican]

And yet they could have delivered; apparently it was functional enough for someone to say "This isn't fun because I might have forgotten to bring all these parts!". Basically they don't want to post a roadmap because they don't have one.

I see your point, But the issue still remains, they are afraid of outrage.

Dear SQUAD,

Put on your man pants and quit being afraid of us.

Your mods are gods, they can silence all dissent without answering for their actions.

Your EULA states that you can walk away at any time, so if all else fails, you can quit.

You could sell to Microsoft for 2.5 BILLION, and give a lame excuse like "I felt like i was losing my humanity".

In short, you have nothing to fear.

Sincerely, AvronMullican.

[NathanKell]

TimberWolffe: As I said, *that mod does it*. No, your game won't grind to a halt when a texture is streamed. Also, you know the big loading screen you get on scene change? An extra second or two there won't make a difference.

ferram: on the contrary, we might hope that it could stem the tide of uncaring destruction that (as bac9 covered) is becoming the sad byword of KSP. If destroying things actually makes it impossible to build rockets, if you suffer consequences for your careless disregard for safety, maybe then you will learn to exercise better care and not treat KSP as Destruction Derby with Rockets.

Or maybe people will compete to blow the buildings up faster, ~so kerbal~.

If, and that's a big if as hoojiwana says, the functionality is exposed for modding (particularly Kerbin City etc), then I think it will be awesome; and while I am personally underwhelmed, I do think it's neat in and of itself--it's very strange that the environment doesn't react at all, and this will help.

[Camacha]

ferram: on the contrary, we might hope that it could stem the tide of uncaring destruction that (as bac9 covered) is becoming the sad byword of KSP. If destroying things actually makes it impossible to build rockets, if you suffer consequences for your careless disregard for safety, maybe then you will learn to exercise better care and not treat KSP as Destruction Derby with Rockets.

I feel it really adds to the idea of running a program, as the stakes are raised and a moment of carelessness can really hurt you.

[AvronMullican]

we might hope that it could stem the tide of uncaring destruction that is becoming the sad byword of KSP. If destroying things actually makes it impossible to build rockets, if you suffer consequences for your careless disregard for safety, maybe then you will learn to exercise better care and not treat KSP as Destruction Derby with Rockets.

Sir have you seen These Theads