Female Kerbals

[Whirligig Girl]

If that's a suggestion that I should change my mod name to "Better Than Starting Peopled"...no...I won't be doing that

No, it's because BTSM is focused on history.

Anyway, I think "Manned" is a Politically Correct term, the use of "Man" to refer to "Human" is generally accepted. And probably Kerbal too.

[Nitrous Oxide]

I read it as "Arnt you the person making the historical tech progression mod? why dont you know the history better?"

Because Soviet history isn't really celebrated in North America or much of the rest of the world. Heck, as a kid they only taught me who the first Canadian woman in space was. Yay, nationalism!

[tntristan12]

No, it's because BTSM is focused on history.

Anyway, I think "Manned" is a Politically Correct term, the use of "Man" to refer to "Human" is generally accepted. And probably Kerbal too.

Wouldn't it be "better than starting kerballed" then? </hairsplitting>

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

Because Soviet history isn't really celebrated in North America. Heck, as a kid they only taught me who the first Canadian woman in space was. Yay, nationalism!

Hell, your lucky. I think in the Alberta Education they are teaching what was the first satellite, and that's it

[Norpo]

See, I just thought of something to think about, maybe this isn't the last we'll see of this feature. It was hyped for a reason.

I bet it won't stop at female kerbals and there being now *two* kinds of main kerbals, I bet it's laying the groundwork for kerbals with more features, like...

More suit colours!

Maybe subtle variations of skin colour! (so not totally different, still green, but light/dark green)

Hairstyles that aren't male pattern baldness!

Perhaps facial hair for males? (Could be straying too much from the "simple" look, so I would think not)

No two kerbals would look the same. (frequently)

Something similar to what Texture Replacer is now for kerbals, basically.

[LameLefty]

Do the various face packs for Texture Replacer actually take up that much memory?

I have 35 files in my /TextureReplacer/Heads folder, gathered from a couple different packs. All told, those total 27.5 megabytes.

[razark]

My original intention of this thread was that Female Kerbals shouldn't of been added yet. They should bugfix, and maybe go the route of Prison Architect, and do a update of bug fixes.

The problem with that is there will always be bugs, and therefore, there will always be something to point at and say "Well, why not fix that first?" Or do you have a way to measure how much bugfixing needs to occur per feature added?

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

See, I just thought of something to think about, maybe this isn't the last we'll see of this feature. It was hyped for a reason.

I bet it won't stop at female kerbals and there being now *two* kinds of main kerbals, I bet it's laying the groundwork for kerbals with more features, like...

More suit colours!

Maybe subtle variations of skin colour! (so not totally different, still green, but light/dark green)

Hairstyles that aren't male pattern baldness!

Perhaps facial hair for males? (Could be straying too much from the "simple" look, so I would think not)

No two kerbals would look the same. (frequently)

Something similar to what Texture Replacer is now for kerbals, basically.

This is what i'm talking about. We don't need that, at all. We need features that help the user

- - - Updated - - -

The problem with that is there will always be bugs, and therefore, there will always be something to point at and say "Well, why not fix that first? Or do you have a way to measure how much bugfixing needs to occur per feature added?

As with PA (Prison Architect), they do it through the most "supported" bug. They get that bug, and resolve it. They do this to the most supported, and common bugs. Fix them, better game altogether

[razark]

As with PA (Prison Architect), they do it through the most "supported" bug. They get that bug, and resolve it. They do this to the most supported, and common bugs. Fix them, better game altogether

I don't know anything about that game. But from your description, all I see is bugfixes. You didn't explain at what point the devs are allowed to add something new.

The problem with doing something "later" is that it's always "now", and not yet "later".

[Nitrous Oxide]

You didn't explain at what point the devs are allowed to add something new.

When everything they've half-added to the game is fully-added and working without bugs...

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

I don't know anything about that game. But from your description, all I see is bugfixes. You didn't explain at what point the devs are allowed to add something new.

PA's dev cycle is this - Mandatory update at the end of each month. Features implemented (almost) all the time. Only exception is the "bug-bash" months. Where they fix only bugs, and don't worry about features.

The features they add aren't small, however. In a month, they add AI improvments, optimization, and mod support. But this is a experienced dev team, unlike SQUAD's Game Making Department.

[Claw]

For those interested in the other features announced during the squad cast, you can find a summary here by ObsessedWithKSP.

Cheers,

~Claw

[GoSlash27]

I feel as if I need to reiterate myself. My original intention of this thread was that Female Kerbals shouldn't of been added yet. They should bugfix, and maybe go the route of Prison Architect, and do a update of bug fixes. And no features. I think that Female Kerbals are a good feature, but stupid in the sense of them being unneeded.

Aye, but...

People have been asking for female kerbals for a long time now, during which Squad has focused on debugging, adding features, and fleshing out playability. Female Kerbals have been at the top of the request list for as long as I've been around here.

I don't personally give a rip one way or the other, but I'm surprised that there's a backlash against it at this late stage. The devs intended to do this months ago. Do we really have to wait until the game is "perfect" before introducing something that so many people have been asking for?

Curious,

-Slashy

[Louella]

For those interested in the other features announced during the squad cast, you can find a summary here by ObsessedWithKSP.

Cheers,

~Claw

If they're adding tourists, then it would be the logical point to add female kerbalnauts, as the artists would be working on character models for the tourists as well.

So I don't believe female kerbalnauts would have held up anything else that the artists could have been working on.

[AndrewBCrisp]

I feel as if I need to reiterate myself. My original intention of this thread was that Female Kerbals shouldn't of been added yet. They should bugfix, and maybe go the route of Prison Architect, and do a update of bug fixes. And no features. I think that Female Kerbals are a good feature, but stupid in the sense of them being unneeded.

I am curious when you would expect Female Kerbals *should* be added. If not this update, then when? The update after this one? When KSP goes gold? When KSP 3 is announced? When should they be added?

As others have stated, representation matters. Not only so that women can feel they can play the game, but so that we men can see women in the game as our equals. Many of us may not want to see this, or would prefer to see women as equals "soon", but we need to see this. We need to learn this. We need to remember this.

The sad truth is, women in science and engineering have it harder because of us men. We've been told, almost since birth, that men are "better" than women. We take our prejudices with us into the laboratory and the workshop. When we have to work with women scientists and engineers, we condescend, we harrass, we insult. We do all we can to drive them out. There are individuals who don't. But, collectively, our gender needs to grow up. If adding Female Kerbals to KSP helps us grow up a bit, to start seeing women scientists and engineers as colleagues worthy of respect, then let them be added.

Arguments that adding Female Kerbals will "break the game" are, bluntly, false. If people are uncomfortable with the idea of Female Kerbals, then I respectfully submit that they need to ask themselves why they are uncomfortable.

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

Aye, but...

People have been asking for female kerbals for a long time now, during which Squad has focused on debugging, adding features, and fleshing out playability. Female Kerbals have been at the top of the request list for as long as I've been around here.

I don't personally give a rip one way or the other, but I'm surprised that there's a backlash against it at this late stage. The devs intended to do this months ago. Do we really have to wait until the game is "perfect" before introducing something that so many people have been asking for?

Curious,

-Slashy

Yes, they have been asking for them. But they also are asking for small features that will (hopefully) be added into the game. Like launchpad lights. Resources, colonization, terraforming, aerodynamics, life support, and others. 2/5 there have been confirmed, and they are huge. Which is why I am not against female kerbals, but the way it was marketed. I would of rather seen the new sounds being guessed at, and female kerbals outright announced

Source: https://twitter.com/KerbalSpaceP/status/558796495760023553

[razark]

When everything they've half-added to the game is fully-added and working without bugs...

See previous about all software having bugs.

PA's dev cycle is this...

So you think Squad should do 0.91 as a bugfix release, and then do 0.92 with aerodynamics and female Kerbals?

That's reasonable. The problem is that from what you've been saying, people are hearing "Fix all the bugs, and in a year add the new thing." Furthermore, I'm seeing a lot of pushback on this one feature. I haven't seen any sort of backlash on waiting to add the spaceplane parts or aerodynamics until all existing bugs are fixed. Hell, people are still asking Squad to add the barn back in, not fix the bugs and then add the barn back in.

Do you see the difference? Cause to some of us, it's casting a very bad light on certain members, even if they don't deserve it.

Edited January 24, 2015 by razark

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

I am curious when you would expect Female Kerbals *should* be added. If not this update, then when? The update after this one? When KSP goes gold? When KSP 3 is announced? When should they be added?

As others have stated, representation matters. Not only so that women can feel they can play the game, but so that we men can see women in the game as our equals. Many of us may not want to see this, or would prefer to see women as equals "soon", but we need to see this. We need to learn this. We need to remember this.

The sad truth is, women in science and engineering have it harder because of us men. We've been told, almost since birth, that men are "better" than women. We take our prejudices with us into the laboratory and the workshop. When we have to work with women scientists and engineers, we condescend, we harrass, we insult. We do all we can to drive them out. There are individuals who don't. But, collectively, our gender needs to grow up. If adding Female Kerbals to KSP helps us grow up a bit, to start seeing women scientists and engineers as colleagues worthy of respect, then let them be added.

Arguments that adding Female Kerbals will "break the game" are, bluntly, false. If people are uncomfortable with the idea of Female Kerbals, then I respectfully submit that they need to ask themselves why they are uncomfortable.

They should be added when major features have been fixed. Like Aerodynamics, resource collection, life support, re-entry, and that. After the majors are created, implement minor things.

[Bloody_looser]

Really enjoyed reading this "civilized" discussion.

Look like classic post-hype butthurt thread (e.g. around destructible buildings). Squad announces "super-duper secret feature". Everyone like - whoa aerodynamics, gas planets, radiation, launchpads etc. Feature turns out to be minor, but cool. And there we go - riots all over the forum.

Arguments about memory issues are ridiculous. One more model (or texture) won't explode your RAM. And I don't remember raging protests against Mk2\Mk3 overhaul.

Would comment on various posters' allusions about name Valentina, but this would get me banned for sure.

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

See previous about all software having bugs.

So you think Squad should do 0.91 as a bugfix release, and then do 0.92 with aerodynamics and female Kerbals?

That's reasonable. The problem is that from what you've been saying, people are hearing "Fix all the bugs, and in a year add the new thing." Furthermore, I'm seeing a lot of pushback on this one feature. I haven't seen any sort of backlash on waiting to add the spaceplane parts or aerodynamics until all existing bugs are fixed. Hell, people are still asking Squad to add the barn back in, not fix the bugs, and then add the barn back in.

Do you see the difference? Cause to some of us, it's casting a very bad light on certain members, even if they don't deserve it.

Right, so, if you look at my profile. I usually bring up topics like this, (and the stupid "hype-train") because I think it needs to be addressed. I do not want to hold myself to seem like I am all high and mighty. But I think, as I said after you posted, that big features should be the main point of the beta updates. And bug fixes, of course.

If SQUAD work on the big features, and maybe get one out every month-or-two, many would be happy. With occasional bug-fix months. Once the major features that SQUAD think are done, add small stuff like female kerbals, and the such

- - - Updated - - -

Really enjoyed reading this "civilized" discussion.

Look like classic post-hype butthurt thread (e.g. around destructible buildings). Squad announces "super-duper secret feature". Everyone like - whoa aerodynamics, gas planets, radiation, launchpads etc. Feature turns out to be minor, but cool. And there we go - riots all over the forum.

Arguments about memory issues are ridiculous. One more model (or texture) won't explode your RAM. And I don't remember raging protests against Mk2\Mk3 overhaul.

Would comment on various posters' allusions about name Valentina, but this would get me banned for sure.

Who the hell brought up RAM? The first poster that the OP had nothing to do about?

[razark]

But I think, as I said after you posted, that big features should be the main point of the beta updates. And bug fixes, of course.

Thanks for the clarification. I see what you're saying, but I do disagree with it.

I also think they should be focused on getting the big features nailed down and fixing the bugs.

However, I also think that they should go ahead and work some of the small issues (like this) that add detail, life, and immersion to the gameworld. If they have someone that isn't being utilized in something, they can use that person to work on one of the detail bits. Just because they put some time into one small part does not mean they are ignoring the bigger parts. Watching the expressions on the Kerbals' faces adds nothing to gameplay, nor does it answer any issues with the big stuff. But I've seen quite a few people comment on them, how they made Jeb scared, or Bob would only smile once the landing was finished. The small things may not be as important, but they add up and add so much to the game. These detail parts should be worked on as possible, not just left until the end.

[AndrewBCrisp]

They should be added when major features have been fixed. Like Aerodynamics, resource collection, life support, re-entry, and that. After the majors are created, implement minor things.

Forgive my suspicion, but that seems a curiously open-ended list. It's almost as if once SQUAD has complied with your... request and given us the items you clearly stated, you (or others) will think up entirely new things that are "major" and Must Be Added or Dealt With before you will allow Female Kerbals into the game. This leads me to conclude that your list of requests amounts to little more than a delaying tactic. I reiterate my suggestion that those who are asking for the delay need to ask themselves why they want the delay.

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

Forgive my suspicion, but that seems a curiously open-ended list. It's almost as if once SQUAD has complied with your... request and given us the items you clearly stated, you (or others) will think up entirely new things that are "major" and Must Be Added or Dealt With before you will allow Female Kerbals into the game. This leads me to conclude that your list of requests amounts to little more than a delaying tactic. I reiterate my suggestion that those who are asking for the delay need to ask themselves why they want the delay.

It's easier to concentrate on one thing, than to spread out what you're doing

[Bloody_looser]

Right, so, if you look at my profile. I usually bring up topics like this, (and the stupid "hype-train") because I think it needs to be addressed. I do not want to hold myself to seem like I am all high and mighty. But I think, as I said after you posted, that big features should be the main point of the beta updates. And bug fixes, of course.

If SQUAD work on the big features, and maybe get one out every month-or-two, many would be happy. With occasional bug-fix months. Once the major features that SQUAD think are done, add small stuff like female kerbals, and the such

- - -

Who the hell brought up RAM? The first poster that the OP had nothing to do about?

Aerodynamics overhaul, time warp redone, fairings etc. are not "big" enough features?

My comment regards the whole thread, not just the OP, and memory issues are frequently mentioned in it.

[Nitrous Oxide]

I just love people immediately white-knighting "the cause" and not even rationally trying to hear us out. I've iterated about a half dozen times that I actually use a mod right now, currently, that add female Kerbals myself in case you want to know where I stand. I'm not saying, no don't ever add them. I'm not even saying don't add them right now. I'm saying finish what you started before starting other things! Is that so goddamn hard to understand? Right, of course, because it's automatically tied to gender. Because I don't want female Kerbals right now, I'm a misogynist. Cool.

I don't care what the hell the feature is. I DON'T WANT ANY MORE FEATURES. I WANT MY GAME TO ACTUALLY RUN FOR MORE THAN 15 MINUTES FIRST KTHX.

I'm not even going to get started with aero... especially when Ferram offered his expertise and Squad basically flat out ignored him. Now they're probably going to break FAR instead.