Science, it's boring, how can it be made more fun?

[fdsprod]

I really enjoy playing career mode, mostly for the challenge of having to start from scratch and work my way up. The 1 thing I despise about career mode is the way you have to gather science. It basically just feels like micro management. It feels like, every single spaceship/plane I build, i have to include a stock 5-6 science items on it just to make the trip worth while. So, I'm bringing forth this thread to basically try to drum up ideas (or perhaps enlighten me to mods I've missed) about different ways to gather science that aren't so "boring".

On to the idea...

Science can be gathered by building stations/bases. (Yes, this kind of already exists... sorta, but hear me out)

• Orbital stations, or planetary bases can produce science points in small (decimal) incremental values in overtime and in real time, once the station or base has been established.
  
• They require materials (resources) in order to produce science points.
  
• Materials must be delivered to the stations/bases on a regular basis to keep them supplied. (similar to how real science is generated on the ISS)
  
• Biomes can dictate the maximum amount of passively generated science a base can produce per material resource.
  
  • Orbital stations can use the biomes they orbit over, making multiple stations in orbit at different orbit types (equatorial, polar, etc) more valuable. (this may not be possible since stations aren't loaded if they are not within a certain distance, but I'm sure someone can figure something out)
    

  [*]Research and Development can contain new nodes that unlock science material containers.

I am a developer by trade, and while I do poses the ability to create a mod relating to this idea, I simply do not have the time to support it. So, given this, if anyone wants to take my idea and create a mod, you are more than welcome.

And now, open to discussion, do you like this idea, how can it be made better? Do you have a better idea along the same lines? Or simply, is this a terrible idea, and why do you think that?

Looking forward to seeing what others think.

[sal_vager]

I think all the science gadgets should open up a minigame style thing based on each one with buttons and dials, so you have to tweak them to get the science result.

Might be a bit tricky taking a Gravioli reading while aerobraking at Laythe but that'd just add to the fun

[Bill Phil]

I think all the science gadgets should open up a minigame style thing based on each one with buttons and dials, so you have to tweak them to get the science result.

Might be a bit tricky taking a Gravioli reading while aerobraking at Laythe but that'd just add to the fun

It would be interactive that way!

[Starwhip]

I think all the science gadgets should open up a minigame style thing based on each one with buttons and dials, so you have to tweak them to get the science result.

Might be a bit tricky taking a Gravioli reading while aerobraking at Laythe but that'd just add to the fun

"Alien Isolation" access tuner type of thing would be cool.

[Pthigrivi]

I agree there's something missing here. That's an interesting idea about mini-games. They would need to be relatively simple. To my mind what's really missing from science is the sense of adventure, going out into the unknown, spotting something interesting, and finding something surprising when you get there. I suggested how the addition of surface features might help recently here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/107825-Surface-features

Honestly a huge thing missing from science at the moment is the ability to map biomes, and a way to know in flight that there's uncollected science nearby. Just streamlining this would make the process less opaque and frustrating.

[CaptRobau]

I think all the science gadgets should open up a minigame style thing based on each one with buttons and dials, so you have to tweak them to get the science result.

Might be a bit tricky taking a Gravioli reading while aerobraking at Laythe but that'd just add to the fun

Not a big fan of standard mini-games. That gets old really quickly.

The impactor experiment from Interstellar is in my opinion a good example of fun/interesting science collection. You set up a seismometer on the surface of a planet or moon. Then you crash something into that planet/moon and the seismometer records it. You can then get a blurb and science out of the seismometer. I think important aspects which make it engaging are:

1. Multiple steps

The current system is go there and click a button, which is boring. The impactor experiment has you set down one probe and then crash another probe or piece of debris into the same body. Each step is different. One has you soft land something and another has you make sure you crash into the planet (which can be a challenge if the lander and the impactor were the first craft before). One of the reasons that launching something into orbit is fun is because it has multiple steps and each step feels different: the liftoff, the gravity turn, the orbital insertion, detaching fairings, etc.

2. You can fail

A normal experiment can't fail. You can time it wrong, do the experiment in the wrong place or have already done the experiment, but you can't really fail. The impactor experiment can fail. If your soft landed seismometer didn't land in one piece then the impactor is worthless and the experiment is a bust. If you don't pack enough fuel in the impactor to crash into the body the seismometer is on, the experiment has also failed. Being able to fail gives you an incentive to not fail and as such adds challenge.

Here are some ideas for the current experiments that could make them more interesting:

Surface Sample

Make it have zero science payout unless you process it in a lab and transmit it back or bring it back to Kerbin. You'd either need to bring it back (could be challenging) or you need to send a manned science lab to the surface to get transmittable science points. Making a part so that unmanned probes could also do it would be realistic (sample return is the holy grail of robotic missions) and make returning samples from Eve or Tylo a bit less impossible.

Seismometer Scan

The aforementioned impactor experiment fits this well.

Gravimetric Scan

SCANsat has shown that orbital science over time is fun and interesting. Turn on the experiment and 'map' the planet's gravitational field. The more you cover of the planet, the higher the science points you get. The challenge here is that you have to put the probe in an inclined orbit if you want to cover all of the planet.

The most important part of science collection should be uniqueness. If you have to do everything a hundred times, it'll get old even with the suggestions above. Each experiment should only have a few situation where it's usable. This makes experiments stand out from each other more and reduces the amount of times you need to do an action.

[MartGonzo]

"Alien Isolation" access tuner type of thing would be cool.

oh god no!

I use minigames and quicktime events as an example of how game dev's are really just sadists who like to annoy players as much as they can.

[Pthigrivi]

Those are great ideas CaptRobau. It makes me think the Atmospheric Scan should require maintaining speed and altitude for 15 seconds or so. The goo could be really simple and left as is, just an entry module to introduce the idea of science and biomes. I like the idea that the Materials bay could be loaded with actual materials, perhaps with things gathered during EVA's. This way the more materials you load into the Materials bay the more science it produces, creating a snowball effect over time if planned and coordinated right. That's the kind of mini-game that really challenges players and involves the whole planning of your program and missions.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[Robotengineer]

I too like your ideas CaptRobau, in-depth science is something that would make career mode feel complete. I do not like the idea of mini-games, they would get very old, very quick.

[SaturnV]

Not a fan of mini-game too, it feels boring very quickly, and become annoying when you‘re doing a lot.

As KSP is a simulator, I think the key to keep it fun all the time is to make it realistic (but not too realistic). The SCANsat mod is kind of realistic and it's FUN.

[Empiro]

Science should have a much greater impact on the way you play the game. Right now, you click "run experiment", and you're done. This is true for every single experiment in the game. Plus, there's no reason to do it other than to unlock the tech tree. Science needs to be dynamic and integrated with the rest of the game besides just generating numbers.

Science should be a multi-step process, where each step has specific requirements (how high, fast, planetary body, etc.), AND the result should impact the game in some way. For example, you should have to set up something like a scan-sat first, and it maps out potential "points of interest" for you to land. After you do so, you could perhaps use the gravity scanner to detect nearby anomalies, and you get science from investigating those anomalies.

In addition, getting that result should open up more avenues of gameplay. For example you might detect a pocket of particularly interesting ore, and that generates a contract to land a giant drill on top of that spot. After you do that, you should get a mission to bring back some big slab of rock from that planet back to Kerbin for analysis (OR land a giant lab to study it, and so forth). Each experiment should have a number of different possible results (requiring different next steps), and it would make things much more interesting.

[tntristan12]

CaptRobau'CaptRobau's ideas are something I've been harping on for a long time. Currently there's no sense that the experiments are tangible. For example, if I take a Goo measurement on the dark side of LKO, and the sample is frozen solid and floating in zero G, then how on Kerbin am I supposed to return it to the planet's surface for science points? Certain events or actions the player takes would destroy the experiment, and without that feature, I feel like immersion is lost. I don't feel like the kerbalspace are doing science so much as just being a vessel for me to gather science currency through. I really hope Squad has plans to make science more immersion than it currently is.

[tater]

I've said a few times, I think the entire arrangement of science/tech/contracts is messed up.

Contracts should be commercial stuff. Launch Satellites, test parts, mostly. Make sure the sats cannot be retasked. Follow up missions might be to grab a sat, and bring it to a lower orbit for "repair," or perhaps a contract could trigger parts to be broken, and the repair mission is to send an engineer astronaut of appropriate skill to repair it? Something for engineers to do!

Linus Kerman and Werner Kerman should then come up with pure science Missions, in the same area we now find contracts. These are what your program's own science/rocket guys say about the direction the program might take. Add a bunch more, with some of the ideas suggested. "Munar Exploration" would unlock a suite of missions, some of which are required precursors for others, for example. Each mission set you then choose would have a budget (what is up-front payment in "contracts"), and a short enough time window for completion after you accept it that they budget cannot merely be borrowed for other projects without some serious risk (the penalty would be meaningful). Some missions might then unlock test parts as well… the munar exploration has scanning from orbit to find suitable manned landing spots, but might then suggest a test landing mission (player could skip to manned, obviously). The test mission might be an unmanned lander and an instrument the player doesn't have. They take the mission to get that part (say it has to be set off on an unmanned lander on the Mun, then that node unlocks).

Tying rewards directly to specific acts of science.

[Jouni]

I think science should be more automatic:

• Crew reports and EVA reports are done automatically. If the ship has an antenna, you get the science points once you're within antenna range. Otherwise you'll have to wait until until you have recovered the ship.
  
• Probes would generate probe reports that are similar to crew reports.
  
• Science parts would be special payload for contracts. They would operate automatically, once the mission requirements are met.
  
• Crew collects surface samples automatically. To analyze them, you'll need to bring them either to Kerbin or to a laboratory in radio contact with Kerbin.
  

Scientists could also be necessary for resouce mining. To interpret the data from a resource scanner, the scanner must be in contact with a scientist (or with Kerbin). Once you have identified a suitable site, you'll need to analyze a surface sample from the site to determine how to extract resources from it. Engineers could then adjust the mining and refinery equipment to work on that particular site.

[Dazpoet]

• Orbital stations, or planetary bases can produce science points in small (decimal) incremental values in overtime and in real time, once the station or base has been established.
  
• They require materials (resources) in order to produce science points.
  
• Materials must be delivered to the stations/bases on a regular basis to keep them supplied. (similar to how real science is generated on the ISS)
  

You might want to look up the Station Science mod, this part of it is rather rudimentary but its there. Once you have a zoology lab in orbit you supply it with Kibbal and it slowly generates science. Edited January 23, 2015 by Dazpoet

[Pthigrivi]

Tater are you implying you shouldn't gain science unless you're on a specific contract for something? I think there should still be room for self-driven missions where budget allows.

Im totally with you on on tying rewards to experiments though. For instance constructing a sufficient gravoli survey might give delta-v and TWR information about that world, taking a barometric reading of a world's air-column would allow you to see your flight path with drag factored in. This way you feel as if you're doing real applicable research.

Just a thought on the Material's bay: if you did the surface features thing the samples you find could be added to the bays and reacted in different environments. Different samples could have different pay-outs, for instance Very Interesting Rocks would react more than Ice, and bacteria from stromata would react more than volcanic rock, giving extra incentives to visit these places. For simplicity the bay might only have 5 material slots. Samples from other places might also be possible, for instance the Atmospheric Sensor might be able to collect gasses from different world's atmospheres, and ocean and ground-scatter samples might be usable. They could be reloaded if you have an attached science lab, but only if those materials have been loaded onto the lab, making the transportation and coordination of material samples a real part of the game.

A way to make the Barometer more interesting might be that it isnt a point reading, but rather pays out based on how large a swath of the atmosphere it passes through while activated. This would make dropping small probes into atmospheric planets more fun and lucrative.

Id love to get the impactor experiment in stock. Mapping from orbit might only give a rough location of where resources could be extracted, and only after doing an impact experiment would you see drilling sites precisely.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[Carmoldu]

I like Empiro ideas, it sounds great! It would make the game much more interesting, add gameplay and also a huge amount of exploration!

[tater]

Your mission control IS self-driven.

There are finite science missions in KSP, limited by how the game allows science---which is by definition arbitrary. Right now, you can take "science experiment unit" to a few different altitudes and all the biomes, click, and get "science." So being overly concerned that you lack freedom to do what you like is sort of silly, IMO. It's all nonsense anyway.

In my scheme, there would be "science" missions generated by KSP to literally cover ALL possible science gathering in the solar system. You would be free to pick whichever constellation of missions you desire, the difference is you'd usually have to pick them before you send them out.

What would you want to do? Explore asteroids for science? Scroll down to the "Asteroid rendezvous mission" and take that. Skip Kerbin SoI and got to Dres? Accept the Dres branch, then do science there. The point is that the missions would be put into a context, and would then be generated in a way that both makes sense from a space program POV, and has some challenges for the player in terms of mission parameters. Not crazy complex, but just requiring that you do science to establish landing areas of interest, etc.

[Pthigrivi]

Oh I see, you mean replacing the do science at x contracts, which I agree aren't super compelling. What I wonder though is if you're in flight over a world and see something interesting and decide on the fly to land there, would you still get science?

[tater]

Yeah, contracts would still be random, that is Acme Rocket Company wanting some idiotic test, like their air-breather engine tested underwater on Laythe. Like someone paying NASA to launch a satellite in the 60s.

Missions would be different. Those are the actual goals of the space program. You, as director, would choose the plan for the next round of missions, then the sub-missions generated more randomly would be tailored to that plan---your plan.

Right now, you either do your own thing, regardless of dumb contracts, or you do contracts, and don;t have much of a plan (or work contracts into whatever your plan is. I'm looking for a mechanism whereby the player drives the space program planning, instead of being reactive to these random "contracts" (most of which are pretty crappy).

I'd do away with all parts-testing contracts unless they make sense, too.

[Alias72]

I feel the game would benefit greatly from a greater variety of context specific contracts. perhaps certain rocks may appear on the surface of duna and when you right click you can take a sample. If the rock is valuable it will tell you. I feel the current surface sample is tedious and unnecessary because performing it is a given.

[tntristan12]

These suggestions are all great, but I am worried that we will never see a better science system, what with the game graduating to 1.0 in the next update.

[Tw1]

I think all the science gadgets should open up a minigame style thing based on each one with buttons and dials, so you have to tweak them to get the science result.

Might be a bit tricky taking a Gravioli reading while aerobraking at Laythe but that'd just add to the fun

Something like this, where each thing actually takes some involvement could radically overhaul the game, and improve it an awful lot. Especially if you get images of graphs and things as you go.

But it would have to be easy to do multiple times, and be meaningful. Maybe mini games is not the best approach.

I have long wanted to be able to pick up samples and watch the composition change, as I gradually rove over the surface of the Mun, or Duna. Science should need a base, or at least an elaborate rover for you to make the most of it.

I still see two flaws- science becomes pointless once you've unlocked the tech tree, when a lot of the reason we go to space is to do science. There's also the finiteness of science, once all the biomes have been visited once, it's over.

To improve on this game, I'd like to propose one key new gameplay element- 'research' which is a measure of on going level of science activity,

and too smaller ones- long term experiment contracts, and building up detailed pictures of each planet's environment.

More detail is in my blog, and also quoted below for convenience:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/entries/1767-Science-is-pretty-shallow-Could-it-be-shaken-up-a-bit#comments

Doing science could be modified, made into three (or more like two) subsystems, to make this critical part of the space exploration experience a lot more engaging, and rewarding.

Solar System Knowledge- Science where you collect Data to slowly build up an accurate picture of each planet, maps, atmosphere, mineralogy, etc, and the solar system, magnetic fields, radiation, solar wind, etc, which then could be accessed in the Editor to inform designs. Data is collected much like "Science" is now, through transmitting, and returning. It would be shown in the vessel recovery dialogue box in a similar way.

Research Levels, where you deploy probes, stations, bases, etc, to do on going experiments. This would be a point scoring system, but rather than a tally, these would be levels which rise and fall. Getting, and then keeping Research Levels high would be a boost to Reputation, (and through that, a boost to your budget, and available contracts).

These Levels would be dependant on how much your space program is currently contributing to science through on going experiments, on going monitoring (think solar wind measuring satellites, etc,), as well as the more instantaneous Data collection.

Ongoing Experiments would be done in a science lab. These would not go forever- some would have limited lives, or need resupplying. Different ones would be available, and cost money to run. The cost would offset one advantage- the penalty for having multiple experiments in the one place would be less steep, letting you build big research complexes. It is possible having certain science parts on your ship would be required to do some experiments though.

Monitoring equipment would be cameras, magnetometers, the thermometer, that sort of thing. These could break down, or need to be upgraded (technically, this would just be a replacement-upgrade would be the in-game reason for why the equipment is no longer contributing as much research) Having multiple monitoring systems on the same ship generally, would not be useful. To get more research happening, they should be in different biomes/orbits. Research will be higher when you first arrive at a new planet, and fall with time, but never become insignificant.

Monitoring would happen in the background, all the player needs to is activate them, land them, or put them on the right trajectory, leave them.

The parts used for the scientific Monitoring and Data collection would overlap where logical.

Research Levels could be subdivided into different types- Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc, as well as the solar system Knowledge. However, unlike the others, the Knowledge one wouldn't rise and fall, only rise-providing a permanent boost.

Getting these to their full levels should be hard. Admin building strategies could be used to boost them.

Lastly- Experiment Contracts- Much the same as we have now, but also including contracts for experiments that aren't possible under the other systems. E.g- transmitting a radio signal while on the other side of the Sun to Kerbin to test Albert kermanstine's theory of relativity-

Where appropriate, the results from these would contribute to Knowledge, and temporarily boost the appropriate Research Level.

How would the tech tree fit into this?

The current science point thing works fine for unlocking that tree. It could stay the same, but the points renamed "Tech Points" or something like that.

They'd only be shown in relevant places.

What about asteroids?

Contribute to knowledge until you've found all types. Grabbing and capture could give boosts to Research Level. Something that might be useful for a contract.

TL,DR version:

I'd break science into three things,

Knowledge- building up a picture of the solar system.

Research- Ongoing testing and monitoring.

Experiment contracts- for other, special experiments.

Giving you something to complete, something to ongoingly work on, and tasks you can follow. That would offer a much greater experience than the current, superficial system. Tech points would be earnt as a separate thing, similar to Science points now.

After all, a fun experience is all a computer game can offer.

*It is true this is rectified to an extent by contracts, but they still don't offer much of a science experience, plus there's the odd discrepancy of being asked for data that is apparently not valuable...

Edited January 24, 2015 by Tw1

[Tuareg]

I am worried that we will never see a better science system, what with the game graduating to 1.0 in the next update.

im not worried, im sure

[CaptRobau]

GregoxMun posted this somewhere else and I remember Maxmaps saying something along those lines too:

According to Maxmaps, the science system is being overhauled, I guess that's just fit under rebalances. He wants to make it less of a clickfest.

So the science system will receive some improvements with 1.0. It's probably not a complete overhaul as some of the suggestions above, but it's better than nothing.