Kerbal like Minecraft?

[nine_iron]

Steam claims Skyrim and FarCry 4 to be sandbox games.

Are those from community tags or Steam?

I would class those two under "Open World" which is very different to sandbox. Yes both you can play around in.

Main difference is in Sandbox you make and test stuff. In open world you play through very small "linear missions" in any order you wish to progress a general "Story".

In other words open world games are like a big bowl of cut up spaghetti and sand box games are a bag of ingredients.

[radonek]

The article does not sound at all bad to me. The actual reference to to minecraft is this:

It's no wonder people are calling this Minecraft in space – it has that same sense of creativity and possibility.

…and its right and true in my book. As an avid player of both, I can tell they touch some similar feeleings. Freedom to build, complex world and lack of mindless violence work for me in both. Where most games have you blindly following storyline, with bodycount as measure of success, KSP and minecraft are both different in similar way. Add in that both are indies with strong and nice community, both aimed at something unusual in industry, and both surprisingly succeeded… hell I hope Squad don't get bought by Microsoft too :-)

[pxi]

It's a decent article giving the game a positive spin. The people it's aimed at are parents and grandparents - people that probably aren't hip-to-the-groove in terms of the finer points of what differentiates an open-world from a sandbox.

Frankly I can let the Minecraft comparison pass, it's close enough for the most part.

[tater]

What it is is excellent press. Nitpicking what game is a better analogy (that 99.9999% of people won't recognize the name of anyway) doesn't matter.

[gutza1]

I play Minecraft with lots of tech mods, so now I can build a working factory or go to space. However, vanilla Minecraft is too boring for me.

[boxman]

disagree.

Anyway, to me Kerbal is more about exploring and getting stuff someplace. Travel...etc.

Legos is more about building something, like make your own astroid like object like in space engineers

The building aspect of KSP is pretty much lego as well except that you are not limited to blocks. And people also build all kinds of contraptions in KSP which is one of the fun things about this game. I myself for example wasted time just building kerbal funfair park and thanks to physics it mostly behaved like the real rides which is one of the thing i love about KSP how you can build something based on real life contraptions and thanks to phsyics it mostly work.

Like these early prototypes: http://postimg.org/gallery/vjhui46w/

Edited October 14, 2014 by boxman

[Las-pen]

Try Starmade. Another Minecraft-in-Space

[Curiosity7907]

I like KSP alot better because in minecraft theres no maths , science , chemistry , shaders .

 

On 10/14/2014, 2:53:30, bsalis said:

KSP has quite a few similarities to Minecraft. So much so, in the early days here on the forum, comparison threads were frowned upon. Sure, you build things lego-like, but theres more similarities...

* Open sandbox world

* Sold while still in development (Minecraft was Beta, KSP an Alpha, but neither development phase labels are accurate)

* Indie game

* Community oriented, with developer engagement

* and um, you build things... both games tend to tug at your creative spirit

I also get bored in stock ksp.

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

The way I see it, Minecraft is about mastering your environment, changing it to solve problems. In KSP, you have to change YOUR OWN DESIGN to solve any problems. If you run into an obstacle on a moon, you need to plan to get around it.

 

So KSP is kinda similar to minecraft. They both have a lot of different playstyles, but they have different goals in mind.

[swjr-swis]

I'm glad I didn't see that headline before getting KSP... it may have ended up on my 'Minecraft-related so automatically to be ignored' list.

Ugh. Let's talk about how KSP is NOT like Minecraft.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Space Engineers is Minecraft in space. Period.

Kerbal Space Program doesn't feature any of the things one would associate with a "Minecraft" style game like; Crafting items into other items, Blocks you can pick up and place, Enemies, etc...

The only thing I can see that the two games have in common is...umm...they both revolve around creating things/exploration?

P.S. I would actually say the closest thing I've ever played to this game is Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts. If you played it back in the day then you'll know what I'm talking about...if not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banjo-Kazooie:_Nuts_%26_Bolts

Edited December 8, 2015 by Rocket In My Pocket

[KerikBalm]

On 10/14/2014, 2:23:55, nine_iron said:

I would class those two under "Open World" which is very different to sandbox. Yes both you can play around in.

Main difference is in Sandbox you make and test stuff. In open world you play through very small "linear missions" in any order you wish to progress a general "Story".

You are using terminology that is not standardized... GTA has been described as a sandbox game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world

"The player also has the ability to interact with the world in other ways, using tools like ropes and shovels, to progress.^{[citation needed]}Hunter (1991) has been described as the first sandbox game to feature full 3D, third-person graphics.^[28]"

"The game's large interactive environments, wealth of options, level of detail and the scope of its urban sandbox exploration has been compared to later sandbox games like Grand Theft Auto III and its sequels, Sega's own Yakuza series, Fallout 3, and Deadly Premonition"

Sadly.. any game that meets your "sandbox" definition is described by comparing it to minecraft.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/179811/EVE_Online_and_the_meaning_of_sandbox.php

Eve online is described as a sandbox (and the guy they interviewed has his own warped definition... "social"? wtf... I'm surely not the only kid that ever played in a sandbox by him/herself... and most games that have been described as a sandbox are single player oriented)

Pretty much any game with an open world (or in KSPs case, an open solar system... and ) where they provide you with basic tools to build things, and you have basically unlimited permutations of what you can create... is compared to minecraft.

That is what is going on here.

 

FWIW, I wouldn't be surprised if someone called operation flashpoint, and its ArmA sequels, as sandbox games, just because they gave you a map editor, and hundreds of square kilometers of islands to freely explore (I loved that game, btw... spent a lot of time flying over the island in a helicopter... getting out and walking around the little villages and such... I get similar feelings climbing out of my rockets, looking around.... flying to some mountain or canyon,going to orbit... the feeling of an open "world" [universe?realm?] to explore is great)

[Zoidos]

On 14.10.2014, 02:05:13, tater said:

I think a minecraft comparison is not only "ok," but could not possibly be better press for Squad. Had they been more picky about a comparison, no one would know the game they were talking about, and they get not hits. This might get a few people to see what it's all about. 

Although I can't imagine that there is a great overlap between Minecraft players and people who regularly read The Guardian. I could be wrong of course.

[problemecium]

I can see why it's a little like Minecraft. It's a sandbox game with no plot - you just manage your resources and built what you feel like. In addition you can start and stop at any time (unlike LoL for instance), it's for the most part a single-player game (Minecraft has a multiplayer mode, but the base game has no built-in special multiplayer mechanics), and it's generally a "peaceful" game - it's about exploring and being creative rather than fighting (unless you make it about fighting).

That said, KSP is really like Minecraft because you can build Minecraft in KSP:

 

[AbacusWizard]

The first time I heard about Kerbal Space Program was from a friend who did indeed describe it as "like Minecraft in spaaaaace," but I've never played Minecraft, so I tend to think of it as being more like "Dwarf Fortress in spaaaaace"--not because of any specific similarities, but because both KSP and DF push a lot of the same "set up a meticulously thought-out plan and then watch with joy as it works (or with laughter as it falls apart and explodes)" buttons for me.

 

Then again, I still refer to all first-person shooters as "DOOM clones" because I find it amusing, so I might not be the right person to ask.

[NecroBones]

Sadly, for a lot of people, Sandbox == Minecraft.

 

[Brofessional]

Minecraft does have a considerable amount of engineering challenge, especially when you start playing with redstone and various mods.  In that regard it has similarities to KSP.

[Plusck]

I completely agree with the proposition, but then again I suppose that depends on how you play Minecraft.

Having wasted thousands (probably) of hours on Minecraft, I still don't get the interest of PvP. For me it's exploring, finding neat features, building complicated traps and mechanisms and minecart systems. And doing it all within the confines of standard mode, "creative" mode also I find boring.

And so with KSP. I've been messing around with the demo on and off for years, and have only recently allowed myself the luxury of buying the full game, but it's already devoured hundreds of hours and the basic fun/reward/planning/hard work profile is very silmilar.

Where it really differs, though, is in the learning curve. It's a bit steeper in KSP Which is why the Dwarf Fortress comparison isn't bad either, except you really have to be a nerd not to be put off by the graphical barrenness of DF... Still, with redstone in Minecraft there is quite a steep learning curve too, which is probably why my kids (a) don't use redstone in Minecraft (b) don't understand DF and (c) haven't yet understood how excellent KSP is.

But in all three, it's much the same thing that draws me in. Building, problem-solving within significant constraints, trying not to die stupidly, exploring.

[Zephram Kerman]

Did anyone else notice this thread was necroed from last October?  But, hey, this topic is relevant to anyone who ever tried to talk to their non-gamer friends about KSP.

When I first started playing KSP there was no persistence. Just "build one thing and try not to crash". So it made sense to say, "It's like a cross between Legos, Orbiter, and The Muppet Show". But, 90% of folks don't know Orbiter. (Tragic!) So I replaced that with "flight sim", which seems to work, kinda...

Hmmm... I seem to recall an old thread about, "How to talk to your friends about KSP".

[Hysterrics]

The Minecraft community would undoubtedly kill our somewhat friendly community, but hopefully the learning curve would shake some of them off it such a thing ever happened.

[AbacusWizard]

4 hours ago, Plusck said:

Which is why the Dwarf Fortress comparison isn't bad either, except you really have to be a nerd not to be put off by the graphical barrenness of DF...

I grew up on Infocom text adventure games and I've been playing NetHack regularly for over a decade, so I'm quite accustomed to filling in the gaps between ASCII characters with my imagination.

[Hobbes Novakoff]

In my opinion, KSP is more like Playmobil than Lego. Everything in Lego is part of the same idea, and everything kind of works together. With Playmobil, there's an element of modularity but you still want to use certain parts with certain other parts. E.g. you don't put a RoveMax M3 on a moon buggy.

[322997am]

The comparison is not for gameplay its for the insanelypopularindiesandboxgame category.

[Hobbes Novakoff]

7 hours ago, 322997am said:

The comparison is not for gameplay its for the insanelypopularindiesandboxgame category.

I wouldn't say KSP is "insanely popular." Nowhere near the level of Minecraft, anyway. But I'm fine with that. 

[322997am]

Well Ksp is one of the most downloaded games so.