what kind of ksp DLC would you like?

[cantab]

None. Because Kerbal Space Program, while a very inspired and reasonably well-executed game, is being held back by its engine. I would rather Squad work on a KSP2, running on a far more suitable game engine, than spent their time making DLCs.

What I and I think others would pay for would be fun tools and gadgets to work with the game. For example an updated Kerbalizer that lets you create a custom Kerbal and then import it into KSP. Or how about a VAB app for Android and iOS, letting you design your rockets on the move and have them automatically synchronised with the game on your desktop PC. I think that kind of stuff would be far better, and far better received, than just releasing DLC that is essentially paid-for mods.

[r_rolo1]

I would gladly pay for a expansion of KSP, but no one makes game expansions anymore :/

But anyway, if there are DLC, i would consider getting some extra tools for KSP. Say, something that allowed having different views in different screens without having to run more KSP instances and synch them. But definitely I would not get stuff like custom rocket paint DLC ...

P.S. And yeah, I'm with cantab. I would much rather prefer to see KSP in a game engine that really fits the game, since Unity has always been a major constrain to the game features ( say , like forcing all the planets to have the same rotation axis orientation ... )

[sal_vager]

Expansions were what HarvesteR originally intended, no small things like horse armour (looking at you Obilvion) but proper expansions like Brood War or Alien Crossfire, but everyone calls it DLC these days, the term for downloadable content has been hijacked by mini content updates/patches.

[Bigbootie]

I would pay for some Squad made DLC in the form of an expansion pack.

[Rocketscience101]

none

If you intended it to be in the game, do not release it separately, put in the full game on release or in a free future update.

[MartGonzo]

I'd pay for completely new set of planets

[TeddyDD]

There's already one. It's called KerbalEDU (And I'm going to buy it sometime)

Seriously: Rimworld like Duna colony simulation without combat (may even be a separate game)

[MGCJerry]

For new set of planets (or even some more sun systems, heck yes). Anything else, NOPE.

DLCs are terrible how theyre being handled nowadays. Remember Mass Effect 3? Total aggravation. Incomplete game comes out, then later "get this DLC to see the ending". Pay to play, pay to win, pay for powerups, its getting out of hand.

[panzer1b]

While i have nothing against the idea of payed DLC, i strongly encourage caution with how its implemented, as i really would not like to see communities fragmented by the DLC. Many games have alienated users, and force their community int DLC users and non-DLC users, with those that dont have DLC to often be unable to play alongside or with those that have it.

Now DLC such as other solar systems, visual upgrades, ect, wouldnt cause issues. But any DLC that gives certain users new parts, would, despite best intentions from squad, fragment the community into those that payed for teh DLC and have access to the parts, and those that dont.

[Gerandar]

The only thing worth paying extra for in this game would be a optimized and bug free 64bit windows version until they can do that I'll never give squad another dime towards KSP.

[panzer1b]

The only thing worth paying extra for in this game would be a optimized and bug free 64bit windows version until they can do that I'll never give squad another dime towards KSP.

I dont think squad has any intention to SELL bugfixes......

From what ive heard, x64 is going to be added once squad presumably ports the game to unity 5, which at least on paper would offer better performance, multithreading, and overall smoother gameplay, and possibly better graphics in general.

[tntristan12]

While i have nothing against the idea of payed DLC, i strongly encourage caution with how its implemented, as i really would not like to see communities fragmented by the DLC. Many games have alienated users, and force their community int DLC users and non-DLC users, with those that dont have DLC to often be unable to play alongside or with those that have it.

Now DLC such as other solar systems, visual upgrades, ect, wouldnt cause issues. But any DLC that gives certain users new parts, would, despite best intentions from squad, fragment the community into those that payed for teh DLC and have access to the parts, and those that dont.

To be fair, the revised ending to ME3 was free.

[MrJacobean]

The way that KSP has evolved over its development, creating any DLC would be a massive mistake as 1) someone could pirate the DLC into their game, as you don't have to be online to play. 2) There is hardly anything that Squad could implement (such as parts or planets) that would need to be in its own DLC.

However, it could be possible to have some kind of expansion that would add things that are not in the current scope (such as terraformation, interplanetary travel, and multiplayer to name a few). I have a few ideas on how multiplayer would work, but here is not the place to discuss it.

The difference between DLC and expansion packs is that DLC contain less than expansions, so a multiplayer expansion or a colonisation expansion could work.

[Frank_G]

I would like a DLC focused on discovery (telescopes and satellite stuff to find new planets, probably new systems) and the parts you need to get there. I would also pay for a new set of parts, science equipment and mission that would bring more depth to space stations and ground bases.

I see a lot of people lamenting about a paid DLC... from my point of view, i gave 20 bucks to a handful of people and they worked about 3 years to get me entertained... who the hell would care about giving another 10 bucks to them? Even if i dont get anything for it?

[Roderik]

It's been mentioned a few times, but instead of getting involved in the discussions of what content would make for good DLC, I'd like to reiterate our stance on DLC as a whole: there are currently no plans for DLC and if any DLC were to be developed in the future it would be in the form of a massive expansion pack, not small features or fragmented pieces of content. For now, we're focussing on our 1.0 release and the free updates that will be developed after that release, including amongst other things the multiplayer.

thnxs good to know.

sorry for this discussion then

[John FX]

I'd pay for completely new set of planets

Wow... I just...

I looked at the OP and thought "A completely new set of planets" then went straight to the last page and your comment was right at the top.

Maybe themed total conversions could be a thing. Not sure what themes though.

EDIT : Then I saw kasper's post.

[Joonatan1998]

The game wasn't really that expensive (compared to most games.)

so I think an expansion pack would be fair (Like they used to do before DLC and endless patches.)

if:

1. It doesn't prevent modders from doing anything. (no ban on modiying planets after planet DLC release.)

2. It actually is an expansion, not what is usually called DLC.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Joonatan1998

[jman508]

i honestly think if they introduced dlc it would do a few of these things

1. people would stop buying ksp.

2. the dlc's would burn and fail

3. so little purchase would be made on the dlc that squad would give a refund and give it out for free

4. the dlc would work out so well they would turn into EA ,at least in their dlc tactics.

5. people would stop playing ksp and petition to remove all current and planned dlc.

[Masochist]

I would pay for the following DLC...preferably as one reasonable expansion pack instead of micro transaction crap

1. More planets/another galaxy (combined with #2)

2. Future technologies/more super late game content

3. Colonization options/more space station parts, preferably with benefits and colony simulation mechanics

4. Multiplayer

5. toggleable aerodynamic models (default and advanced), other toggleable difficulty settings (random failures to give engineers jobs, life support systems with food/water/waste/ etc)

Obviously there are all mods for these things and I use those and love them...but I think we all can agree that nothing beats the smooth and proper integration of such systems when put into the game by the people making it rather than piggy backing off the game as a mod.

i honestly think if they introduced dlc it would do a few of these things

1. people would stop buying ksp.

2. the dlc's would burn and fail

3. so little purchase would be made on the dlc that squad would give a refund and give it out for free

4. the dlc would work out so well they would turn into EA ,at least in their dlc tactics.

5. people would stop playing ksp and petition to remove all current and planned dlc.

Also I think responses like this are kind of silly...and annoying mostly because they are so unfounded in logic and just seem like whining

People would not stop playing KSP...you don't like DLC? don't buy it...but there are TONS of people that play it...only a very small number of people would full on stop playing the game as some form of protest

The DLCs would do good...for many reasons...people would want them for what they offer and then there are also people who like to have everything a game has to offer and will simply buy DLC for "completeness"

it makes no sense that a company would make a DLC, then refund and give it out for free just because it did poorly

It is narrow minded to assume that a company consisting of a small team would turn into a corporate giant with marketing and finance teams breathing down developers backs to push out DLC #100203895 for more money. Not that it is impossible...but I think Squad deserves a little credit...seems a bit rude to just assume they are going to turn on their fan base with aggressive monetization. They have done nothing so far to deserve such a negative assumption

No one is going to petition to remove DLC or stop playing...as explained above...even if a petition was made it doesn't mean it would get enough support to warrant changes and at best might influence future DLC/expansion decisions and habits.

I personally hate DLC *IF* it is clearly over priced for what it does or is out to nickle and dime everyone. Otherwise DLC isn't the worst thing to happen to gaming...overall certainly not the best but it isn't ending anything...just changing the way things are done. Expansion packs of the past are the exact same thing as DLC of today. They just have a more convenient delivery method (the internet) than what used to be available 10 years ago which means they can release smaller expansions (DLC) instead of only large expansion packs. Same goes for patching...it used to be a much larger undertaking to make and deliver proper patches so they came slower and bigger...now a developer can make one small change and push it out to all players in a near instant.

The only thing worth paying extra for in this game would be a optimized and bug free 64bit windows version until they can do that I'll never give squad another dime towards KSP.

*SIIIGGGHHH*

Squad can't fix this...it is a unity issue...do you always throw such demanding fits?

Edited February 17, 2015 by Masochist

[KSK]

Yeah, pretty much.

The culture of DLC and microtransactions is killing gaming. Games used to be about the game, not about how much money you could milk out of your blindly loyal fanbases.

So what about free-to-play games? Whether you like the model or not (I don't personally), its a very successful one, it depends entirely on micro transactions and it's hardly killing gaming. If a blindly-loyal fanbase is the problem, maybe that fanbase needs to be a bit less blind and a bit more discriminating.

Back to KSP. Squad are in a tricky position regarding expansion packs because they are competing with a lot of high quality mods. But if they add new and interesting stuff to the game and package it up into a decent sized expansion, I'd be tempted to buy it. If it included mod written content, I'd still be tempted to pay for the convenience of official support and having fewer mods to keep track of.

[viktor19]

How about a solid middle finger to DLCs?

If you agree, I'll make this part of my sig.

[basic.syntax]

In another thread asking for improvements to KSP water, I offered that this would be a good area for a paid expansion. "Inner Space" - submarine stuff - could benefit from a new UI for navigation and plotting courses under water. It would need a new Assembly building on the water near KSC, and entirely new parts categories for making surface and submarine ships. The ocean would offer new types of science and exploration content. All of this is outside the scope of the current "outer space" game.

[RabidMonkey]

In another thread asking for improvements to KSP water, I offered that this would be a good area for a paid expansion. "Inner Space" - submarine stuff - could benefit from a new UI for navigation and plotting courses under water. It would need a new Assembly building on the water near KSC, and entirely new parts categories for making surface and submarine ships. The ocean would offer new types of science and exploration content. All of this is outside the scope of the current "outer space" game.

I'll just leave this here.

[Engineer of Stuff]

I am ok with DLCs, if it is a huge part pack and fundamentally changes KSP. There are some great suggestions here that I would pay for.

In another thread asking for improvements to KSP water, I offered that this would be a good area for a paid expansion. "Inner Space" - submarine stuff - could benefit from a new UI for navigation and plotting courses under water. It would need a new Assembly building on the water near KSC, and entirely new parts categories for making surface and submarine ships. The ocean would offer new types of science and exploration content. All of this is outside the scope of the current "outer space" game.

No mod has successfully added submarine parts that function like real subs, and an official boat part pack would be awesome.

---

The problem with DLC and a game that can be modded very easily is that if Squad created a DLC, there is probably already a mod for that. I would not pay for an EVE Online DLC, but would pay for a KSP DLC.

---

How about a solid middle finger to DLCs?

This is getting a little too extreme. If you don't like 'em, don't buy 'em.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Engineer Of Stuff

[Doctor Axel]

I'd be wary of using DLC to simply introduce part packs - unless they were in addition to some kind of completely fundamental game change.

With that said, I would express interest in:

-A planet forge DLC, that lets you build your own custom solar system with custom planets (or even randomly procedurally generate one on game start).

-A space race DLC, rival NPC space programs that also compete for contracts / race to achieve goals.

I say those two because they would probably be a LOT of work, the core product would not be greatly damaged by their absence, they wouldn't step on the toes of existing mods very much, and they'd be friggin awesome.