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.

Why space engineers needs atmosphere

Discussion in 'Survival' started by Kylar_Reed, Apr 9, 2014.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Kylar_Reed Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    78
    Ok so I have posted two threads on atmosphere recently:
    • Why have atmosphere: http://forums.keenswh.com/post/why-have-atmosphere-6841775?pid=1282279979#post1282279979
    • More simple idea for atmosphere: http://forums.keenswh.com/post/more-simple-idea-for-atmosphere-6840483?pid=1282280703#post1282280703
    This post is in response the people saying that there is no need for atmosphere and that the game should be all about engineering, I figured this debate deserved its own post.

    The truth of the matter is that there is a game mode made purely for engineering called creative!

    Survival is a new game mode but to many people, me included, the hope for survival is that it becomes about survival in space, not about harder building.

    If "survival" is going to be about "Survival" we need to make the player more then an astronaught shaped robot that needs to plug into a wall socket every now and again to avoid a free and instant trip back to home or a new ship.

    A human player needs oxygen, sleep, water and food! And I think that needing these things will add to the design aspect hugely.

    Everyone seems to think that there should be some huge advantage to being out of your suit otherwise whats the point. This is bullshit. It would be like saying minecraft would be so much better without needing food or battlefield would be so much better with unlimited ammo. Challenges make a game. The advantage of having a breathable atmosphere should be that you can breath not that you have superpowers.

    Of course all of these features could be toggled on and off. I am not about forcing any feature on anyone who doesnt want said feature.
     
  2. Vermillion Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,131
    Stop posting the same thread when you don't get the desired response. Devs said no.
     
  3. Kylar_Reed Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    78
    If you have read any threads I have posted you will notice that they are not the same at all. They cover how a simple atmosphere could work, why we should have atmosphere and how atmosphere would add to the game. Too many things to put in one post.

    And I have gotten the desired response, creative input from the community. I am not looking for an army of yes men to force the hands of the developers.

    And the developers have not said no to amosphere. What you have above is an innitial post from the launch of survival where they said that they wern't currently thinking about adding oxygen food and water.

    The purpose of these posts is to discuss atmosphere and its benifits to the game.
     
  4. Crescent42 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    37
    If you read the replies all your threads talk about the exact same thing you're posting about now. We brought up all these topics already. Any one interested in this can visit those threads and keep up with the conversation.

    For the sake of clutter could you perhaps update your first threads post of whats been covered?
     
  5. Voqar Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    3
    Maybe the devs can come up with a name for the mode other than "survival" since it seems like quite a leap to get from where the game is now to having food, water, and oxygen systems going on. Would be cool I guess but doesn't seem like what the game is about.
     
  6. dpurgert Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    105
    Devs wanted to call it "Realistic".

    Community kept calling it "Survival" so the name stuck.
     
  7. Fixer Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    168
    ...and that is why crowdsourcing isn't always the best idea.
     
  8. cherv-saper Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    132
    I want potted plants in my livingroom. I do already have a livingroom on my station. It have no purpose. But now it have windows and beautiful view from them. Sun is on other side of station, and it is good, only few plants will tolerate direct sunlight...
     
  9. Gentry Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,167
    'survival' was a playbase colloquialism that the devs didn't pick. They just kept it because you plebs kept getting confused, as they said in the dev blog.
     
  10. Gentry Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,167
    the devs said that type of 'survival' is not in the direction the game is going.

    That is a pretty solid NO if i've ever heard one.
     
  11. Vermillion Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,131
    OMG, Gentry is back. Now we just need Kamoba.
     
  12. Ash87 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,977
    Are the people ready?
     
  13. Memphis Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    145
    I think the OP should look up the word "need," not sure it means what he thinks it means. Atmosphere would make mining (think of gas pockets, mining dust contaminating the air, fire ignited by friction of the drills, potential de-pressurization of the cabin, etc) and building (similar problems as mining) more difficult. If it is more difficult, then players will just opt out of creating pressurize chambers to avoid those hazards. That means that you are requesting a feature that people will avoid in game-play, thus not improving the game. I agree that there needs to be more of a challenge, but that will come with time. More hazards are in development. With dedicated servers, larger playable areas will emerge, creating a suitable world for player created hazards. Food and water might be a nice addition to the game but there are several several several more important things that would need to be in place before the developers can start to focus on that. Food and water can be generated by blocks that have little bio-domes on it; a pressurized cabin is not required. Given a list of additions including conveyors, factions, large ship weapons, more hazards, larger universe, performance optimization, radar, communications equipment, sector-to-sector travel, AI, defensive systems, trade opportunities, new tools, new materials, and atmosphere........atmosphere is at the bottom of the list. The others improve game-play and a capabilities of the engineer, atmosphere does not.
     
  14. Grim Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    341
    The forums just aren't the same without them.
     
  15. JamesL86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,091
    While I agree with your point in general Memphis, I have to say that part of your logic seems a bit flawed to me. Yes I agree that many many more things "need" to be added before an atmosphere system. However, to say that it is a waste to add a feature that some folks will not use is a bit, well, wrong. We have engine damage and meteors and I know there are plenty of folks that don't use either of those. Likewise there are many folks that don't even play survival at all. So to argue that it is a waste to add atmosphere because it won't get used by some of the SE players is illogical considering the evidence to the contrary. Like I said though, I do agree that many more things need to be added and polished before we start venturing down the road of extra fluff, regardless of how awesome that fluff might be.
     
  16. Utterbob Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    1
    Dev's haven't actually said 'no' they have said that as long as it doesn't add something to the game it's wasted dev time. The long and the short of it is... it needs to add to the game.

    With that in mind just adding it now, even in a simple form, is pointless. However if it were added as part of something bigger then it may be worthwhile.

    Couple of options off the top of my head;

    1. Reduce maneuverability and/or fire accuracy while in a suit to give a purpose to atmosphere for PvP situations (and by maneuverability I mean 'agility' since you cant really beat the jet-pack for raw maneuverability :p ). Depending on implementation this could still force a focus on the engineering aspect since breaching the atmosphere area would be a viable tactic. Not the best example maybe, now that I write it but I'm sure you get the idea in general!

    2. Add more survival elements that fit the games direction. Something that you need to survive (rather than just power) that requires involved industrialization (probably more relevant once conveyers are in). This means the focus is still on the player's creations and it's not a bodily functions survival game (as the devs want to avoid). Atmosphere could be a part of a larger system here and once it's in it a logical step to allow the player to conserve energy by taking the helmet off.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is... Atmosphere is a great idea in general but I also support the dev point of view that it's currently pointless. What I would really like to see is both sides happy here but that's my personal preference.
     
  17. Memphis Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    145
    I disagree. I don't see how atmosphere adds anything to the game, now or in the future. Creative mode is not "a way to play the game," it's the design function for people to create blueprints and test ideas. Some people like building more than mining so for now they mess around with creative until there is a need to use those designs. I don't believe thruster damage should be able to be turned off at all. The only reason it is an option is because people that made bad ships before, cried about their designs being bad. (Thusters behind thrusters? Come on. Can't trouble yourself to make your landing pad out of heavy armor?) The only thing atmosphere adds is the ability for engineers to "hang out" without using energy. I doubt many people will jump into SE and be "Let's just sit in our nice pressurize cabin and talk about the meteor showers." People can do that out-of-game. When players log in, they will want to do something. Atmosphere just gives player the ability to do nothing, for as long as they like without recharging. I'm just sitting here in my pressurized cabin (my house) right now...I don't really need a game to simulate that.
     
  18. cherv-saper Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    132
    Inquisition?
     
  19. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    It is, has, and always will be a way to play the game. To play in a purely creative way and build what you can and see how they handle in the game's engine (Take a look at the Monthly contests and tell me that this is not a way to play the game.

    Wrong. I have it turned off partly for legacy reasons, but mostly because the thruster damage is still slightly bugged and causing odd damage to some of my new designs that should work perfectly with thruster damage.

    But wait, if only you could do something with that energy, like build inside a pressurised shipyard that you engineered... Also this adds support for RP communities, which can be sizable parts of game communities if nurtured correctly (Minecraft for example is great for RP with it's ability to shape the world completely to what the creator wants. SE can do the same but in space, which is way more awesome).
     
  20. Memphis Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    145
    I'm not bashing creative mode, I enjoy building and testing designs, but the end goal is usually to create something that would be useful in survival (ie mining ships, battle ships, tram systems). Some people use it just to create funny, useless stuff. But creative mode is not a "game" it is a engine.

    Thrusters for legacy? I don't even understand that. If your current designs don't work with thruster damage, then you can engineer better designs......that's literally the name of the game.

    If RP is the ONLY reason to have atmosphere, then can't you just pretend there is an atmosphere without making the devs put countless hours into creating the physics mechanics to make it so? I think RP is great, but atmosphere is not required to achieve that goal. I can see a RP clan using a large room in a space station for a promotion or whatever, but that can happen without atmosphere, just as easily as with it.
     
  21. pyroim Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    4
    To be fair I believe gravity already handles the physics in atmosphere...So I would consider that to be a moot point. Its more about the energy factor during transferring goods between items which are clearly ENCLOSED within a station or a ship such as between a storage unit and a assembler , think International Space Station, we have atmosphere there, the real life space engineers don's just live in their suits.

    That being said there is always creative!
     
  22. Fedor Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    67
    Will you like to feed your character every round in counter-strike?
     
  23. Hawthorn Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    191
    Honestly, if realism is meant to be a large part of the game, wouldn't they add pressurized interiors? The space shuttles were pressurized, the ISS is too.
    Also, pressurized interiors could be totally optional, and would satisfy the more immersion/RP oriented players (like me). You could, if you wanted, run around your oxygen-less ships interior like a robot, if that's your thing.
     
  24. Vermillion Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,131
    The ISS isn't likely to be subject to rapid depressurization from coming under fire by rockets. If we had military spacecrafts in real-life in a combat-prone location, they would spend all their time in suits, and only take them off inside a sealed, armored bunk or the mess hall. Better to be uncomfortable than dead.

    If you're so intent on Role-Playing, just "Role-Play" that your ship is pressurized.
    Running around a ship full of oxygen and running around a ship void of oxygen... There's no difference. It looks the same, it acts the same and you still look like an idiot running around your ship in both instances.
     
  25. JamesL86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,091
    Well we know one person we won't be seeing in the community's RP servers. YAY, more bandwidth for the rest of us! :woot:
     
  26. Gentry Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,167
    The type of RP servers that request people to run around pretending are often underpopulated anyway.

    The only type of RP servers that are actually decent are those with some narrative context, goal or some kind of factional system.

    Not "oh no you opened both airlocks at the same time by mistake! go back and do it properly!"
     
  27. JamesL86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,091
    Yea I don't really go for the whole super-strict RP format. But in the few RP sessions I have had in SE I can tell ya that there seems to be something that automatically clicks in most people's minds when they see two doors with a passage in between them. Even when I am not in an RP game, its so funny to watch some of my friends, who clearly have little interest in RP, come across two doors with a passage in between them and automatically open one door and close it, then open the other door and close it. Especially when I point it out to them and they get can't figure out why they did that.

    I always assume that I need airtight compartments and build my designs accordingly. It just feels right to me. It feels more true to life.
     
  28. Gwindalmir Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,006
    The devs have not said 'no' to atmosphere. They've simply said they are thinking about it.

    See the recent Reddit AMA they did: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/21fsj9/we_are_the_developers_of_space_engineers_ask_us/


    <div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-type: none;" id="siteTable_t1_cgcmjmj" class="sitetable listing"><div data-ups="19" data-downs="3" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px;" data-fullname="t1_cgcn9a4" class=" thing id-t1_cgcn9a4 comment ">
    </div></div>
     
  29. Spets Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,214
    Somebody make a pool, Im sure there is more people playing Survival than Creative, if not all. I use creative when I have something in mind, and I want to see how it will look/work quickly, and then, maybe replicate it on survival. same as I do with MC. I only play Survival, everybody plays survival, most of the videos on youtube are survival, because it is definitely more fun.
    Atmosphere or whatever... anything that add some challenging to this mode will be very welcome. Glass windows, a beautiful decoration, maybe more later, like a desk, computers, big doors, cables and pipelines, blinking lights, rotary lights, laser, torpedoes, text/letters to paint over your ship, maybe logo stickers, more hazards, like micro debris at high speed that will instantly kill you, but you have the antenna or radar that will send you a warning with a sound/red alert blinking light coming from your pad in your wrist, a radiation storm, huge moving asteroids, and yes, food you get from a cultivation (isn't space cultivation also engineering? maybe not) that also makes oxygen, water you get from an icy asteroid maybe or... a planet, little planets to explore build your base, jump/travel to another sector... and so on...
    Devs said, even after the final release they will be still working and adding stuff to the game, so hope is not lost
     
  30. cherv-saper Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    132
    Part of a totally agrreable post:
    And how about a bio-technologies? Right now in game not presented organic materials, such as rubber, paper, teflon, even a free carbon not used, but what about future develoments? Refinig of organics to carbonhydrates, using gene-modified plants for decomposing stone "ore" to elements (pizunda pine does so) free of energy cost...
    New ground for ideas, isn't?

    P.S. Survey "How do you play Space Engineers" was in couple of weeks ago...
    http://blog.marekrosa.org/2014/03/results-of-how-do-you-play-space_31.html
    55.65% plays only survival, 30,48% - both modes.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.