Squad needs to get it together.

[mike9606]

IMO, they already kinda did pull a DF when they dropped [FEATURE REDACTED] a year ago and tried not to say anything about it...

Are you talking about procedural clouds, or the resource system? Clouds were dropped as they could not get a playable framerate with them. Also, I can't tell if you made the [FEATURE REDACTED] thing yourself to make Squad look bad or not. Also, regarding your earlier statement, so you believe ALL modders make simple mods like the banana experiment? There are tons of other mods, a few quite big and complex indeed.

[LethalDose]

Are you talking about procedural clouds, or the resource system? Clouds were dropped as they could not get a playable framerate with them. Also, I can't tell if you made the [FEATURE REDACTED] thing yourself to make Squad look bad or not.

I think you know what feature I'm talking about, but I'm NOT naming it because I don't feel like receiving more absurd reprimands for things I didn't do/say/type.

And I can't even explain what that means because it's against the rules to discuss specific instances on these forums.

Simply, there words and phrases that seem to... I can't even say it nicely. There's very VERY heavy-handed moderation on these forums.

Also, regarding your earlier statement, so you believe ALL modders make simple mods like the banana experiment? There are tons of other mods, a few quite big and complex indeed.

HUR HUR yeah, I think all coding is that simple...

Seriously?

Some mods are very complex, but they are the exception, not the rule when it comes to these "more than 200 active modders". There are maybe 2 dozen on par with DRE, TAC-LS, Kethane, Interstellar, etc. And even then, no-ones getting paid for it, and I doubt there are mod than a handful of mod devs doing 40 hr work weeks all year.

That's what the devs at Squad are paid to do.

I appreciate mod devs, and even the Squad devs on the occasions when they have their crap together. What I don't appreciate are these totally fallacious comparisons that we get fed from the Squad devs that they have fed the community repeatedly, and that's what the thread is about.

[CaptainKipard]

I think you know what feature I'm talking about, but I'm NOT naming it because I don't feel like receiving more absurd reprimands for things I didn't do/say/type.

Are you seriously saying that you can't even mention it in passing? That's not the same as discussing it. This sounds hard to believe.

DF 9

I'm not sure KSP is in danger here. Right now it's the 28th most played game on steam, so I'm guessing their financial situation is at least stable.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[Kerbart]

I'm not sure KSP is in danger here. Right now it's the 28th most played game on steam, so I'm guessing their financial situation is at least stable.

The problem with that is that Squad doesn't get paid for how much the game is paid. Squad gets paid for new copies sold. FS9/X is still hugely popular and widely played across the world, but Microsoft doesn't get much money from all those copies sold in the past anymore... Sales will inevitably peak and drop, and at one point drop below a level where squad can sustain development of new features. Hopefully by then the game is in 1.0 but the lingering fear is there that the game, great as it is in its current form, will never reach a "final version" Attractive as the game is, in general it doesn't appeal to the facebook/sports/first person shooter crowd.

Personally I wouldn't mind Squad monetizing the KSP universe (merchandise, advertisements on in-game buildings and vehicles, etc) as it would help to make the KSP future more secure.

[hawk_za]

I am a realist and understand the financial models but just want to be kept informed that is all the commitment i ask of squad as pulling the plug the way Double Fine did is not ethical either

[r4pt0r]

snip- basic necessities, like dV/TWR values.

those are not essential at all. maybe to your playstyle, but not to mine or any other stock purist.

[Rowsdower]

Are you seriously saying that you can't even mention it in passing? That's not the same as discussing it. This sounds hard to believe.

I'm not sure KSP is in danger here. Right now it's the 28th most played game on steam, so I'm guessing their financial situation is at least stable.

I believe it's a passing non-mention of resources. Resourcesreourcesresources. It's allowed to be spoken of. The problem is when it becomes a major focus in a thread, things tend to get out of hand somehow. If things stay even keeled and no tempers flare, all is well. As far as the second part is concerned, we're doing fine in that area. There's not even a thought of pulling out of development. We're full steam ahead.

[tntristan12]

I'm conflicted on this post. On the one hand I feel like the OP is inflammatory, entitled, and outright disrespectful. On the other hand, it raises a few valid points that have concerned me for a while.

First off, I don't think development needs to speed up. I'm perfectly happy with the pace. However, I feel like more effort has been spent on areas that perhaps didn't need as much attention at this stage in development as in others. For example, we just had a long discussion on the forums about realism, and simple fixes like making ISP vary the thrust rather than the mass flow rate. HarvesteR set the record straight by saying that we should ask if the problem is worth spending development effort on right now. This is a valid point, but as we've seen since then the development has been used to build other features like the destructible buildings.

Now don't get me wrong. I don't have the same vehemence towards destructible buildings as some have shown in the community. It's a useful and fun feature that I'm legitimately excited about seeing the devs expand on! However, as I examine the ever growing catalog of "low-hanging fruit"-type improvements which could greatly enhance the game, I would probably have picked a different one for this particular update.

It is worth noting, however, that Squad has shown a clear interest in being smarter about what it decides to work on. The voting system that was mentioned for QA testing is a direct payoff of those efforts. Also other features added in this very update perfectly fit the bill of what I described above. The navball improvements are something I've dreamed they'd add for a long time, and the administration building (though still requiring some tweaks as far as balancing goes) really gels the whole career mode together in a way it was sorely needing.

I will admit that there have been some developments in KSP that make me want to pull my hair out and start complaining to strangers on the internet, but this is not one of them. In fact, I would go so far as to say that they've been more consistent in their efforts lately. I have no real reason to complain about this update.

[JohntotheBrogan]

Have you even taken a peek at the complexity of this game and its programming? and also squad is not a very big company so quit your bichoring

- - - Updated - - -

And along with that you try getting a few people and making a game like that yourself I bet it would take well over a year for you to make a texture...

[peadar1987]

Does anybody else think that we'll see a whole bunch of mods assimilated into the game when we reach 1.0? At the moment, I think it kind of makes sense not to include loads of stuff that's already catered to by mods, because the bigger the stock game is, the more time and energy Squad have to put in to make everything compatible every time they update, whereas if they get the game more or less scope complete first, then incorporate the mods, everything gets done a lot faster.

[SkyRender]

My own $0.02US on the matter is that SQUAD has assigned a downright anemic team to development by modern software standards. The active development staff of KSP can just about be counted on two hands. The total staff the game overall has had working on it overall has never gone past 20 people, to my knowledge, and I'm pretty sure the current devteam is the biggest it's ever been. Most games these days have development staff numbers in the hundreds, and that's not even including the testers. I don't see the small team size as necessarily being a bad thing (big teams equal messier communications, and can actually increase development times if implemented mid-development-cycle), but it does mean that it takes more time to complete things. Particularly if there's any sort of standards of quality, which clearly the KSP devteam have. The mere fact that they go to great lengths to make sure that their alpha builds go out as stable and playable as possible puts them miles ahead of many game developers.

[pxi]

I have no real complaints about the size of the dev team, excluding the obvious 'harvester falls under a bus' worries. I come from a time when small (often one person) teams were much more the norm, and honestly I feel the games that were being produced during those earlier days tended to have more unique ideas. That's not to say I'd be complaining if they announced they were expanding the team tenfold, just that at the moment I'm in a "things seem to be going well, keep doing what you're doing" mindset.

As for assimilating mods, I feel that it's basically a win-win for all involved. If I was in Squad's position, it would definitely be something I would be considering, if for no reason other than not duplicating effort.

Edited October 19, 2014 by pxi

[Kulebron]

I think SQUAD is doing pretty well, and that they have enough information and smart people on the team to handle development and the strategy. I don't think that users are qualified or have enough info to judge how the team is doing.

But I think it's a matter of discussion what is happening around and what kind of gaming process/experience should be paid attention to.

I can only urge SQUAD to extend its userbase by attracting people to use KSP in more ways. And here are my suggestions:

1. An API for interactive languages (Python/Lua). Right now modding is a hard matter. API documentation is not easy, but also iterating, as I understand, takes ages: compile, run (load all the KSP), stop, fix, compile, run. Interactive languages let you program in the shell, try things on the fly and then just dump the shell session in a file to polish, that becomes the mod itself. Python and Lua are times less verbose than C, so such easier languages can remove entry barrier for lots of people. There's kOS mod, but guess how narrower its language base is compared to wold-wide used languages, and think of how much effort it takes to support such a mod.

This is not just easier modding. It may turn KSP into a deeper engineering game. Instead of, say, making a contest where you assemble rockets and fly them, one may make a contest of autopilot programmers at school/university.

2. Other modes of meaningful playing besides or beyond space program. Whether you play vanilla, or BTSM career, it's still a game against obstacles someone put for you. More interesting is to play and compare yourself to the others. Whether there will be multiplayer mode or not, it would be great to have more support for such things as challenges (either those that aim to get objectives, or those like cheapest travel ticket). I would be pleased to pay for a "beyond" extension pack.

3. Sketchup for 3D modelling. We do have a lot of parts mods, yet it takes a serious effort to learn 3D max or Blender. Sketchup takes little effort to start, but can involve a lot more people. I use it extensively for everyday tasks like drawing a scheme of a bike lane, or draw a home plan. It takes nothing to start, and learning curve is very welcoming. Has enormous support and pre-built 3D components library where users share their models. This could boost the process a lot!

Speaking of well-running community, success indicator could be a payware mod. Yes, this is an indicator that ecosystem is big and self-sustaining, not making one do a free effort and get exhausted to death. AFAIK, ArchiCad has a paid plugin called Grasshopper, which does a lot of physics calculations, and has its own system of plugins as well, some of which are very popular. Guess what, it's benefitual for ArchiCad too. (I don't mean all mods should be paid.)

Edited October 20, 2014 by Kulebron

[thereaverofdarkness]

This game has been out for WELL over a year

This game has not been released yet.

[Diazo]

Looking at the thread, posts have varied all over the place but there is one big point that I have not seen mentioned.

That is that the last few updates have been adding systems, not content. In fact, the post about going to version 0.90 next is Squads statement that they are done with systems and are now focusing on adding content to those systems and balancing said content.

Science? We get the ability to science but only the Kerbin system gets biomes. I'm pretty sure biomes for every body in the game are confirmed for next version.

Contracts? This KSP version gave us contracts, but the variety of said contracts was extremely limited and some of them are pretty odd. A strong indication that they were focusing on the underlying contract system and just threw some basic contracts in so we had something to use the system on.

Admin Building? We have a very limited selection of strategies, but again the update was about adding the Admin Building, there were just enough strategies added so that the Admin Building had a purpose in the current version of the game.

Career Mode? Here we see the example of progress. Career mode started with only Science being available. Then over the next few updates we got more systems to start fleshing out Career mode. This highlights Squads current strategy of releasing things in stages.

All this focus on the underlying systems is a huge amount of work for very little visible to the player which leads to this perception that nothing is happening, or that Squad seems to be stalled in development when in fact we are now at the point where Squad has finished the foundation of the house that will be KSP and they can finally start putting up the actual floors of the house (adding content) and then starting painting the walls and moving furniture in (balancing all the content they have added previously).

So the past few patches have been light on stuff for the players to actually do, but the changes behind the scenes to the code have been massive to get all the systems finished so that we will see the content start to stream in over the next releases.

D.

[Red Iron Crown]

This game has not been released yet.

Sure it has, I was playing it last night. I even paid money for it. It's available for purchase on Steam and the KSP store. You'd have to do some serious mental gymnastics to say "it's not released" with any kind of seriousness.

[rkman]

You'd have to do some serious mental gymnastics to say "it's not released" with any kind of seriousness.

Usually "released" in the context of games means "done" - but not so in case of early access.

It takes redefinition of the usual meaning of the word "released" in this context, to say that KSP has been released.

[Padishar]

I'm conflicted on this post. On the one hand I feel like the OP is inflammatory, entitled, and outright disrespectful. On the other hand, it raises a few valid points that have concerned me for a while.

That is very often the case with inflammatory, entitled, and outright disrespectful posts, however, in this instance, the OP is so misinformed, misguided, inaccurate and, in some ways, just downright wrong that I am disappointed to see it flare up again after nearly a week of sinking...

Please show mercy and just let this thread die...

[Tuareg]

Then don't play it. It's as simple as that.

As for development speed:

Do you have any idea how much work there needs to be done? AAA games are produced by 200-500 people over the course of 3 to 5 years. Squad can't compare to them.

well, AAA games are developed with 2-500 ppl in 1-2 years and even thats just cos of the incredibly lots of artwork and 3D modelling they have to do. squad cant compare to them cos they do 0 artwork or 3D modelling (well, 0.00005) and they cant even fix extremely simple things. KSP is a garageproject. OP is completely right. I'm a dev and I know very well how much work is put in ksp from patch to patch. its like a drunken group of uni students could do on their weekend meetings.

[_The_Burn_]

No DLC, don't even go there.

[DancZer]

well, AAA games are developed with 2-500 ppl in 1-2 years and even thats just cos of the incredibly lots of artwork and 3D modelling they have to do. squad cant compare to them cos they do 0 artwork or 3D modelling (well, 0.00005) and they cant even fix extremely simple things. KSP is a garageproject. OP is completely right. I'm a dev and I know very well how much work is put in ksp from patch to patch. its like a drunken group of uni students could do on their weekend meetings.

You summed it up pretty well! At least they do it.