what kind of ksp DLC would you like?

[John FX]

This is the funniest thread ever. Every version of KSP (content) got into my computer via the internet (down loaded).

Technically, the game itself is not content for the game but as has been pointed out, there is a whole mod forum where content can be downloaded for free.

Easy there, there's not even any indication that there ever will be any DLC. That license term was a concession to the community going nuts when DLC and expansion packs were mentioned in an offhand developer comment.

I must say though that at the time I had not heard of KSP and hearing the news on other sites that the DLC would be free if you bought before the end of the month made me download the demo and buy the game so I would qualify.

I know paid DLC are unlikely but I didn`t want to take the risk. Things often change.

I also was of the mind where I wanted the possibilities of the game to be realised and the only way that would happen is through people paying money for the game.

[11of10]

Imagine an expansion for the game called "Space Race".

It comes out once multiplayer is already implemented and matured.

Add RSS/RO to it.

Get a friend to see who'd get to the Moon first (or the Mun, depending on you preferences)

With the game then becoming more like BARIS.

[zeel]

This thread makes me sad. We seem to be stuck in this rut of thinking that anyone making money is evil, and only indie devs who are barely scraping by are worth our notice. Not to mention that we assume the worst possible outcome when someone mentions the term "DLC".

Lets get something straight: DLC is not inherently evil - in fact, it's actually pretty awesome. The problem is that some developers have used it as a way to cheat their customers. I don't believe for a second that SQUAD would do such a thing.

In recent times a number of companies have committed some serious breaches of trust against the gaming community. Microtransactions for pointless fluff content, pay-to-win, and on-disk "DLC". Those things are bad, dishonest, and generally distasteful. But "DLC" is not necessarily bad because companies do that.

Good DLC has and still does happen. When you have a full complete game (KSP is scope complete, upon 1.0 we will have what we paid for), and the developers then produce even more content for that game, it is reasonable for them to expect further compensation. Developer time is not free, nor is it cheap. SQUAD could call it quits at 1.0 and be perfectly within their rights, because they finished the game. The idea that we somehow deserve anything else they produce is absurd! What if they made a new completely unrelated game? Would we be entitled to that as well? Of course not. So why do we expect to get all future KSP content for free as well? That's insane.

I for one fully support DLC (so long as it's not microtransactions). And to get back on topic. . .

I would like to see interstellar content; airships and ocean going vessels would be cool; multiple competing space programs (AI run, as well as multiplayer) and multiple launch sites; and more content for rovers and stations.

There are so many suggestions in this forum that are really cool, but tend to go beyond the scope of what the game is about - but they would be perfect as DLC. I want to see those things become a reality.

[Whirligig Girl]

Squad's not gonna have DLC. They're gonna have huge featuresets of expansion packs if anything.

[tntristan12]

Like I said: other star systems, massive physics updates (e.g. relativity), high concept science stuff, and the ability to properly establish colonies on other planets are all things I believe would fit the scope of expansion packs that Squad is referring to.

[Rath]

The problem with this is that if they real ease DLCs somebody will just go and make a mod THAT IS THE DLC, the only way to stop that would be to kill modding for the game which squad will not do because that is one of the core features (They won't remove Jeb because he is very important to the game, same here)

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

The problem with this is that if they real ease DLCs somebody will just go and make a mod THAT IS THE DLC, the only way to stop that would be to kill modding for the game which squad will not do because that is one of the core features (They won't remove Jeb because he is very important to the game, same here)

Thing is though, the developers have more access to the code than the modders. Which means they can add more than anyone else can. And that's what the DLC will be

- - - Updated - - -

Squad's not gonna have DLC. They're gonna have huge featuresets of expansion packs if anything.

Expansion Pack = DLC

[r4pt0r]

Thing is though, the developers have more access to the code than the modders. Which means they can add more than anyone else can. And that's what the DLC will be

- - - Updated - - -

Expansion Pack = DLC

what could they add that modders cant? Modders already have done more than they have.

[Starwhip]

This didn't go well, I see. The point was to talk about what you would want to see in a DLC, if one was made, not to argue about whether SQUAD should release one.

And who says SQUAD needs to release the DLC? We could be here inspiring modders to make new content, instead of inspiring the moderators to come shut us down.

Personally, I'd love a storyline of some kind. Some guided purpose to an otherwise sandbox game.