Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Please Help Save The Pressurization Feature

Discussion in 'General' started by Malware, Jul 20, 2018.

  1. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    In the multiplayer major Keen moved the airtight / pressurization feature into the new Experimental mode.

    It's been put in no uncertain terms, on the various streams and even Marek's blog, that stuff in experimental is not likely to be worked on any time soon. He is also saying, and I quote: "It’s still possible that in the future some features could move out of experimental mode if we discover a way to make them viable and performance-friendly.". I'm asking for that to be made a priority for the gameplay major, to actively try to find a solution to this. I'm asking for this to become a primary survival feature.

    Please help me tell Keen that this is a feature we want as a primary feature, and not something put off to the side.

    https://useresponse.keenswh.com/spaceengineers/general/topic/save-the-pressurization-feature

    Thank you!

    [Add.]
    We have gotten some slightly encouraging responses to our plea already. Keep the votes coming, it might actually be working!!!

    Let's turn that "slightly encouraging response" to a definite yes!

    [Add. 2]
    We won through. They listened.

    A huge thank you everyone who voted and made sure they knew this is something we want!
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 48
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  2. Dax23333 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    624
    The pressurization system is what enables what I think is probably the most fun way to play space engineers survival - with no helmet. That changes the game of this amazing feature from something convinient (don't have to go back to fill suit up as often) to something vital and so the accociated airlocks and safety systems are so much more important.

    Without this I would never have been able to make the RAVEN I found into a compartmentalised pressurized ship capable of brawling with an Argentavis and not venting the battle bridge, and then being able to repair it later. Would not have bothered making self closing doors, or oxygen alarm lights, drones that can fit through sliding doors. The list goes on.

    I'd give you an upvote on the thing but I can't seem to create an account.
     
    • Agree Agree x 13
  3. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    Thank you, @Dax23333, I agree. As for the account... seems like some people are having trouble with the confirm email getting dropped as spam...
     
  4. chrisb Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,421
    There are quite a few items removed for the 'non' experimental version. The complete setup of our game has gone. Now you can only setup our games in experimental mode.

    I can see what they have done here, its a very underhand way of doing things. Basically moving things into the experimental mode to be able to say, well they were not features for the game. Then leave a basic 'New Vanilla version' which they can take to release sooner than they may have and say goodbye to SE. Move on and produce another half finished game.
    Its pretty bad practice, but he's done it before, so its to be expected.

    I agree with the airtightness being in the vanilla version, but we need all the setup options back..
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  5. Zoladen Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    102
    You've got my vote. Part of me wants to look at the code to see if any ideas spring to mind, but I've got a baby at home so the time to do... well anything really, outside of work is near non-existent currently.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. beelzerob Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    429
    Airtightness does add significantly to gameplay and engineering considerations... IF something encouraged the player to take off their suit from time to time. I don't want to say "like in real life", but you get the idea. There should be some tangible benefit to having an airtight ship and base...more than just proving you can do it. I'd love to see the no helmet challenge as the extreme use of air tight design, instead of the only use.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  7. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @beelzerob True, I agree, but my current priority is simply to save the feature from obscurity.
    --- Automerge ---
    What I'm saying is; if it stays in experimental mode, it's not unlikely there won't be any more updates to it any time soon. So I want to find out if - and for Keen to know that - we actually find a pressurizing system important. I know I do, but does a sizable enough portion of the community find it important? Because that's the only way it'll be taken out of experimental before release, I'm sure of it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Morloc Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    235
    <unable to hear my post due to lack of atmosphere>
     
    • Funny Funny x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Calaban Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    576
    The "back burnered.. if even on the stove at all anymore" of the Air tightness feature makes me sad. I was the one that got Dax trying no helmet survival (I think). Taking the helmet away in space and then trying to survive, work everyday problems, and even thrive, makes the game play so much more interesting- so many challenges, that all involve the player having to actually (space) engineer a solution to overcome... was what I thought was the heart and soul of the game.

    To any who may have missed/overlooked the story and descriptions of the challenges to face with Never a Helmet- in space:
    https://forum.keenswh.com/threads/a...orld-load-challenges.7400865/#post-1287093630
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    We have gotten some slightly encouraging responses to our plea already. Keep the votes coming, it might actually be working!!!

    Let's turn that "slightly encouraging response" to a definite yes!
     
  11. Ronin1973 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,468
    Pressurization is a feature I find necessary. It gives any spaceship or base the feeling of being a human existing in a hostile environment rather than an avatar in some random collection of flying blocks.

    For some reason, we've given the astronaut a face... now we're putting efforts into passive facial expressions (like blinking) and even gender. This is great because it adds immersion to the game.

    Having a pressurized living environment does... even more. Playing as the avatar you do not see your own face as most play is in 1st person. Design considerations have to be taken into account to create a livable space. I think back to 2014 when a window was just a grate and there was no difference between the inside versus the outside of a ship.

    @Malware

    I'm not sure of the coding, but a space being air tight doesn't need to be calculated on the server side of things. My feeling is that it can be asynchronous and calculated on the client side of things. If a space isn't air tight, from the player perspective, it only concerns THAT player. When and how often this is checked doesn't have to be synchronized, even for players occupying the same space. If a door is opened to a vacuum, I don't see the worry if player A feels the effects a second or even two after player B. The only time it's even a concern to a player is if the visor is up and the space becomes/is a vacuum.

    If the air tight feature can be calculated asynchronously from the main thread... especially on the client side... then put it in. It's worth it from an immersive standpoint. It's hard to feel that I'm in a space game unless there's that particular challenge in space. Everything we know of leaving the Earth's atmosphere requires creating pressurized spaces from suits to spaceships to space stations.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @Ronin1973 As far as I'm aware it's already asynchronous.
     
  13. Ronin1973 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,468

    But can/is it contained on the client side in multiplayer? That would be the perfect home for any of the calculations since during server play, the bulk of the heavy lifting is done by the server, freeing up a lot of calculation power on the client side. Can you investigate? I don't mind being wrong about it. But if we can present Keen some possible pathways to solving the problem, it increases the likelihood of success, IMHO.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @Ronin1973 I doubt it is as it's not how they do things. I can't answer whether it can be done that way tbh as I haven't studied how it works today (and I don't really feel like doing that either :p ) I certainly agree in principle that this is one place where distributed calculation might be harmless enough...

    Why don't you just add that in a comment on the site? Can't hurt.
     
  15. odizzido Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    633
    Air tightness is one of the very few challenges in SE. I would hate to see it go.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  16. Tharatan Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    22
    Helping to admin a fairly established server, air tightness is a feature that we get asked about every time we make a new map. Players always want it, for many of the reasons that people have gone into already: it gives an advantage to offset the challenge of working in planetary gravity, it makes ships "feel" like actual spaceships, etc. We try to have it enabled every time, but once we're a week or two in and sim started to drop, we have had to turn it off on map after map. Maybe with this update we can keep it a few days longer, but its always immersion-breaking when we remove it.

    Please, put the effort into fixing air tightness! Make it a toggle in the Info pane of a grid like ship/station, just "check for pressurization" - and have it default to "off" in order to save running calculations on all the armor slabs and gantries that never were intended to be sealed anyway - but let us have it on the grids that need it!
     
  17. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,390
    Imagine Subnautica where it didn't matter if your ships were watertight.

    The support site didn't think I was me, but if it ever gets its act together, I'll vote yes. Having to maintain and manage pressure because you live and work in space is more fundamental to the core game than planets. We got planets, soooo.....
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  18. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @Stardriver907 You actually need to make a new account there, and the confirm email sometimes end up in people's spam filters apparently...
     
  19. Corundum Guy Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    104
    Space Engineers doesn't have many survival elements (energy is trivial). That's fine, doesn't have to be the focus. But I'd really like to see *one* challenging survival element. Better just one fleshed out one than half a dozen half-baked ones. Pressurization is pretty unique to Space Enginers, it fits the theme and it's already halfway there, just unoptimized (and, if measured against its potential, unfinished). Pressurization could also sync well with (somewhat improved) meteorites, in that meteorites are especially dangerous to pressurized areas. More advantages to working in pressurized areas would be nice, but I never really needed any more incentive for having pressurized areas than simply that I could have them. Entering my ship and flipping up the visor feels as natural to me as entering my home and taking of my pants. My hat. I meant so say hat. I don't have a hat, actually.

    I'd comment on the new support site but I just can't get a confirm email. Checked that nothing got caught in the spam filter, tried to create an account again, nothing. Will try again later.
     
  20. ZhakalenDk Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    22
    I want to sign it.. But it says I need authentication to perform the acces. How do I get that?
     
  21. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @ZhakalenDk You need to register a new account. You'll (hopefully) get a confirm email where you can click a link to activate that new account.
     
  22. ZhakalenDk Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    22
    Okay. And where do I do that? :-D

    Nvm. I figured it out :D
     
  23. Commander Rotal Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,942
    @ZhakalenDk sounds like it wants you to check your emails for a verification-email, try your spam filter.

    So. Pressurization.
    You know my oppinion on Survival? "It's got so little to survive, you've finished the game the moment you learn when to open and close your helmet."
    And... now they're taking away Pressurization.
    "Rotal, it's not GONE, it's just been shoved into the Experimental Mode that new players won't ever see!"
    Yeah. Heh. 'member how many, many, MANY players didn't even realize the game had several branches? "Out of sight, out of mind" actually works and they shouldn't get away with it.
    ... If i find myself less lazy tonight i'll make an account there too.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  24. GrindyGears Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,787
    Well, I personally don't care one way or the other about pressurization, but I'll say good luck. Getting safety lock actually fixed instead of just removed had lots of support, unfortunately I don't see this being much different (in keens eyes)
     
  25. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @GrindyGears I know you don't want to hear it, but there's a huge difference. The safety lock as it was had major technical flaws all the way to the core, by the very way it functioned. Not something that could just be fixed. This isn't the same, as this feature is being put on hold or stopped because Keen doesn't believe people care about it. We're trying to prove them wrong. We got 150 votes in just 24 hours. It's up to 162 currently. This is something that people really want. Also, we've already had some encouraging feedback, so if we keep this up, we have more ammunition to throw at them.

    You're right, it might still not happen. But we have a better chance than the safety lock did, and if we don't try it will definitely not happen.

    I'm sorry you couldn't get your safety lock, I really am. I liked it too. Nothing is stopping you from trying again on the new feedback site though. Get enough votes and they might look at the safety lock again too.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
  26. Corundum Guy Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    104
    So, I try to make a new account for the new feedback site, again. I get the green bar at the top that says a confirmation email has been sent, again. I never activated the spam filter provided by the email-site and my local spam filter only moves emails but does not auto-delete them. But there is no email, again. Sorry for asking here, but any ideas beside the spam filter?
     
  27. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @Corundum Guy I don't know, sorry... Apparently they're aware of the problem though. Of course, it's the weekend, so... probably not much gonna happen with that until monday at the earliest
     
  28. GrindyGears Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,787
    From my point of view though malware were at the same type of point, I'm aware that the actual safety lock code was a crude cudgel at best, but the utility of Havok welds was an amazingly useful feature.

    The way I see it: both are big nasty code problems, that keen realistically doesn't want to pay out to fix, if tomorrow one of the devs wakes up screaming because they had an epiphany and they can make it work, that's great, fantastic even.

    But unless that does happen I have doubts, that your concerns, or of those that voted for it will be heard by deaf ears.

    To me safety lock was a feature that could benefit everyone, pressurization is nice, but it's only a bit of immersion at best, and a tax on CPU at worst.
     
  29. Saphi Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    33
    I never started a new Surival game without airtightness. So this feature is one of the most important for me and for my friends I play with. In the most cases we play with realistic settings, so airtightness + oyxgen is one of most important things for us.

    This feature often makes the differnece between SE or an other Space Sandboxgame.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  30. Malware Master Engineer

    Messages:
    9,032
    @GrindyGears I think you're vastly overestimating the number of advanced builders over the people who just wants a bit of immersion ;) We'll see. After all, the safety lock they did put in actually works for a lot of people. It just doesn't for the more advanced builds.

    Like I said, there's every chance you're right. But there's also every chance you're wrong.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1