Astronaut System Design Proposal for KSA

[M.SY]

I have developed some ideas about astronauts, but the characters exceed the maximum limit. The attachment can be opened with programming software

 

[Kiwi Shark]

With all due respect this feels more like a system for a free-to-play gacha-style mobile game than a desktop PC flight simulation game. Certainly with time gates on recruitment/progression and paying real currency to upgrade your kittens. Microtransactions have explicitly been stated to not be on the table.

I'd recommend you do a little more research on the existing philosophy behind the game's expected function and purpose. Stuff like skills and crew management can be good ideas! Their implementation just ought to closer fit the approach this game is taking.

 

[MrNeon]

I respect your dedication, but in my opinion, this system is bad because of one single thing - microtransactions. Microtransactions would turn a lot of people away from the game, especially because they would be included in a very important aspect of the game - the kittens themselves. However, ignoring the monetization - the system you made is interesting.

 

[M.SY]

With all due respect this feels more like a system for a free-to-play gacha-style mobile game than a desktop PC flight simulation game. Certainly with time gates on recruitment/progression and paying real currency to upgrade your kittens. Microtransactions have explicitly been stated to not be on the table.

I'd recommend you do a little more research on the existing philosophy behind the game's expected function and purpose. Stuff like skills and crew management can be good ideas! Their implementation just ought to closer fit the approach this game is taking.

I answered your speech in my post

 

[M.SY]

It all depends on your vision for the game. If the goal is to create a simulation solely for a minority—such as professionals in the aerospace industry or enthusiasts with prior knowledge—where the primary focus is achieving technically accurate results, then KSA runs the risk of becoming a 'private doll' for a select few. It might be a beautiful creation, brimming with the development team's passion, but it will remain out of reach for the vast majority of players.

I am from China, a country of 1.4 billion people. Here, most individuals do not possess specialized aerospace knowledge. For them, there is little initial motivation to play a game as complex as KSA. My idea is to transform the player's journey in KSA. Instead of framing it as a grand project of 'launching rockets to collect experimental data,' we can reframe it as a more personal endeavor of 'training and nurturing astronauts.'

"This approach not only allows players without expertise to quickly find enjoyment in the game but also provides continuous satisfaction through smaller, achievable challenges. Players wouldn't just be playing a space simulation; they would be acquiring aerospace knowledge naturally through the growth of their astronauts. This contrasts with the experience in KSP, where many players struggle to even achieve orbit, often self-deprecatingly calling the game a 'Firework Simulator' due to frequent failures."

"Furthermore, rare or high-tier astronauts could feature the portraits of real-life astronauts (contingent on obtaining the necessary rights and permissions). This would create a powerful, authentic connection to the real world of space exploration."

"Perhaps you hope for KSA to achieve the monumental success of 'No Man's Sky,' where immense hype drives sales. However, based on currently available information, my conclusion is that this is highly unlikely for KSA in its current trajectory. The barrier to entry is simply too high. If the game does not proactively lower this barrier, the community enthusiasm seen for KSP will largely remain confined to videos and forum discussions, failing to translate into significant sales.

It's similar to the public's relationship with SpaceX: everyone cheers for the spectacular rocket launches, but very few people can actually become SpaceX engineers."

"The 'gacha' mobile game model might be unpalatable to you, and that's understandable. It was merely one proposed mechanism. My core philosophy is what matters: to lower the game's difficulty and welcome more players.

Let players embark on a journey: starting with nurturing an astronaut, then progressing to launching rockets, reaching orbit, and finally landing on other worlds. This 'stair-step' approach allows them to gradually experience the mystery and vastness of the universe, one achievable goal at a time.

There is a saying in China that perfectly captures this philosophy: 'It is better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish.' (授人以鱼不如授人以渔).

Don't just give players a rocket and a complex physics engine (the fish). Instead, **guide them, through the relatable journey of their astronauts, on how to 'fish'—how to understand and master the awe-inspiring challenge of spaceflight for themselves."

 

[Sumessefui]

Don't just give players a rocket and a complex physics engine (the fish). Instead, **guide them, through the relatable journey of their astronauts, on how to 'fish'—how to understand and master the awe-inspiring challenge of spaceflight for themselves."

But how do the astronauts teach orbital mechanics? It seems to me that what you are suggesting is effectively a different game in-game. If that is so, I would say that it is something best left for modders to do afterwards if people want it. However, I must admit that I am not entirely clear how your system would work; I read your document, but didn't fully understand it.

 

[M.SY]

My whole idea is about changing what the player is actually working towards. Instead of the huge, kinda overwhelming goal of "conquering the solar system," we make it about "raising your astronauts."

Think about it – in normal KSP, how many people ever land on Eeloo? Almost no one. And with the super hardcore RSS/RO mod, landing on Pluto is basically a legend. If most players only ever see a tiny bit of the game because the rest is too difficult, then maybe we're not making a game for everyone, but a super niche simulator for experts. If that's the goal, then fine, make a professional tool for labs and universities.

But if we make the game about the astronauts, everything changes. Players won't get frustrated and quit because they can't reach some crazy planet. And they won't get bored and leave after finishing one big goal. It gives players a reason to log in every day, a kind of satisfying loop – like the "planting and harvesting" feeling in Stardew Valley. You check on your crew, train them, send them on missions, and watch them grow. That's the daily hook.

Now, about teaching players the actual rocket science: here's my simple plan.

When you start the game, it straight-up asks you: "Do you know what you're doing?"

• If you say "Yes, I'm a pro," it'll quiz you with a few questions. Pass it, and all the tutorial hand-holding disappears. You get the pure, hardcore experience.
• If you say "No," or fail the quiz, then you're in guided mode. Learning the game becomes part of your astronaut's career. Every new challenge comes with instructions.

And these instructions need to be impossible to mess up. I'm talking about a tutorial that holds your hand so tightly, it's like "instructions for a toddler." You must do what the prompt says before you can do anything else.

If a player who admits they don't know anything still can't get through this kind of tutorial, then that's on them, not the game. The game did its job. It's the developer's responsibility to build a teaching system that's this solid from the start – we shouldn't need to rely on modders to fix it later.

But how do the astronauts teach orbital mechanics? It seems to me that what you are suggesting is effectively a different game in-game. If that is so, I would say that it is something best left for modders to do afterwards if people want it. However, I must admit that I am not entirely clear how your system would work; I read your document, but didn't fully understand it.

 

[Sumessefui]

Think about it – in normal KSP, how many people ever land on Eeloo? Almost no one. And with the super hardcore RSS/RO mod, landing on Pluto is basically a legend. If most players only ever see a tiny bit of the game because the rest is too difficult, then maybe we're not making a game for everyone, but a super niche simulator for experts. If that's the goal, then fine, make a professional tool for labs and universities.

I have never landed on Eeloo until just after I saw your post. I opened the game, and in stock (which I haven't played for ages) in 50 minutes (mostly time warp) I designed and flew to Eeloo a lander. I didn't end up with enough fuel to get home, but the reason people don't land on Eeloo isn't because it's too hard, it's because it's too easy. The sense of achievement isn't worth it. And the KSP tutorials do something similar, in that they teach people all the basics, but without the added complication of the astronaut system you describe.

 

[M.SY]

I have never landed on Eeloo until just after I saw your post. I opened the game, and in stock (which I haven't played for ages) in 50 minutes (mostly time warp) I designed and flew to Eeloo a lander. I didn't end up with enough fuel to get home, but the reason people don't land on Eeloo isn't because it's too hard, it's because it's too easy. The sense of achievement isn't worth it. And the KSP tutorials do something similar, in that they teach people all the basics, but without the added complication of the astronaut system you describe.

You know why Steam tracks playtime, right? It's because playtime is a direct measure of how engaging and popular a game is. Like I said before, players quit for two reasons: either the game is too hard and they give up, or they achieve a goal and have nothing left to do. The end result is that space sim games always end up with a pretty niche community.

As for why you found it easy to land on Eeloo... well, that actually proves my point about the 'curse of knowledge.' It means that once you've mastered a skill, it becomes impossible to understand the perspective of someone who can't do it. Let me give you an example: Can you even imagine that someone might genuinely believe that '5 million times 8 million equals 40 million'? In their mind, the logic checks out.

The astronaut system I proposed is just a progression layer—a way to keep players invested. If it's done well, it will directly lead to better sales and a more active community. And when it comes to the bottom line, that's what really matters. Arguing about difficulty misses the point when there's money on the table.

 

[Sumessefui]

You know why Steam tracks playtime, right? It's because playtime is a direct measure of how engaging and popular a game is. Like I said before, players quit for two reasons: either the game is too hard and they give up, or they achieve a goal and have nothing left to do. The end result is that space sim games always end up with a pretty niche community.

As for why you found it easy to land on Eeloo... well, that actually proves my point about the 'curse of knowledge.' It means that once you've mastered a skill, it becomes impossible to understand the perspective of someone who can't do it. Let me give you an example: Can you even imagine that someone might genuinely believe that '5 million times 8 million equals 40 million'? In their mind, the logic checks out.

The astronaut system I proposed is just a progression layer—a way to keep players invested. If it's done well, it will directly lead to better sales and a more active community. And when it comes to the bottom line, that's what really matters. Arguing about difficulty misses the point when there's money on the table.

a) What is the problem with a niche community? As an education tool, it is accessible to anyone who looks, and if they don't, why push them towards it?
b) I can understand that someone might believe that 5 million times 8 million is 40 million. I can also understand how someone can find orbital mechanics hard. I myself only started playing around 6 months ago, and remember that I had enormous problems simply getting to orbit. And I wouldn't say I have mastered the skill; I'd say I have learnt the basics, but fancy KSP antics are far beyond me.
c) A progression system is a good idea, but I'd say a career mode is enough. And better sales probably aren't relevant - from the OP of "Development Recap One Year On": "This would also open up contributions to the project, for the first time. The aim for this, hopefully, will be to secure the future for the project. We'd be able to establish if the projects mission would work: making the game completely free and API independent." This makes me assume that what will happen is that in practice only the "pretty niche community" that is deeply interested in all the game will provide significant funds to Rocketwerkz. Therefore there isn't money on the table - an extra astronaut system won't significantly change revenue.

 

[M.SY]

a) What is the problem with a niche community? As an education tool, it is accessible to anyone who looks, and if they don't, why push them towards it?
b) I can understand that someone might believe that 5 million times 8 million is 40 million. I can also understand how someone can find orbital mechanics hard. I myself only started playing around 6 months ago, and remember that I had enormous problems simply getting to orbit. And I wouldn't say I have mastered the skill; I'd say I have learnt the basics, but fancy KSP antics are far beyond me.
c) A progression system is a good idea, but I'd say a career mode is enough. And better sales probably aren't relevant - from the OP of "Development Recap One Year On": "This would also open up contributions to the project, for the first time. The aim for this, hopefully, will be to secure the future for the project. We'd be able to establish if the projects mission would work: making the game completely free and API independent." This makes me assume that what will happen is that in practice only the "pretty niche community" that is deeply interested in all the game will provide significant funds to Rocketwerkz. Therefore there isn't money on the table - an extra astronaut system won't significantly change revenue.

I think you're missing the fundamental difference between a "space flight simulator game" and a "professional space simulation tool."

A game, at the end of the day, is a form of entertainment. It needs to be accessible and fun. A professional tool is all about precision and realism. We can certainly make a game more realistic and in-depth, but we can't lose sight of the fact that it's still meant to be enjoyed by regular players.

If KSA is truly meant to be a professional tool for labs and university research groups, then what's the point of this forum? Why are we even here discussing player experience and tutorial design? I believe the developers created this forum as a place for players to connect and share feedback – not to serve as a slide in a business report for investors.

 

[Sumessefui]

I think you're missing the fundamental difference between a "space flight simulator game" and a "professional space simulation tool."

A game, at the end of the day, is a form of entertainment. It needs to be accessible and fun. A professional tool is all about precision and realism. We can certainly make a game more realistic and in-depth, but we can't lose sight of the fact that it's still meant to be enjoyed by regular players.

If KSA is truly meant to be a professional tool for labs and university research groups, then what's the point of this forum? Why are we even here discussing player experience and tutorial design? I believe the developers created this forum as a place for players to connect and share feedback – not to serve as a slide in a business report for investors.

But that difference is fundamentally illusory. It does need to be accessible and fun, but not to everyone - only to those who are interested in true spaceflight, a rather niche community. If people want just a "spaceflight game" there are many others. The point about KSA (or KSP) is that it's a spaceflight simulator. The better the simulator, the better the game. Being able to simulate highly doubtful concepts like FTL travel is fine, so long as it's internally consistent. But the whole "any random person who plays any game should be able to play this right out of the box" is a bit of a waste of time. A tutorial is good, but only if someone needs it, and it should be as small as possible, since the joy of finding out for yourself is much greater than being shown. Therefore I'd say that the KSP tutorials are very close to optimal, and KSA should follow that path. This is (IMAO) a better idea for a mod for anyone who wants a different astronaut system. After all, in reality there is no need for complicates astronaut attraction programs - you need to train them, but there is no shortage of applicants.

 

[M.SY]

But that difference is fundamentally illusory. It does need to be accessible and fun, but not to everyone - only to those who are interested in true spaceflight, a rather niche community. If people want just a "spaceflight game" there are many others. The point about KSA (or KSP) is that it's a spaceflight simulator. The better the simulator, the better the game. Being able to simulate highly doubtful concepts like FTL travel is fine, so long as it's internally consistent. But the whole "any random person who plays any game should be able to play this right out of the box" is a bit of a waste of time. A tutorial is good, but only if someone needs it, and it should be as small as possible, since the joy of finding out for yourself is much greater than being shown. Therefore I'd say that the KSP tutorials are very close to optimal, and KSA should follow that path. This is (IMAO) a better idea for a mod for anyone who wants a different astronaut system. After all, in reality there is no need for complicates astronaut attraction programs - you need to train them, but there is no shortage of applicants.

Look, I keep coming back to this: a game is a commercial product at the end of the day. We know the primary audience is regular players, so while the skill ceiling can be sky-high, the floor needs to be accessible to ensure they have fun.

This astronaut progression system I designed is meant to be that core loop for the average player. It's like Stardew Valley – the joy isn't in extreme challenge, but in that reliable satisfaction of "planting and harvesting." It turns major milestones from just a badge of honor into actual resources—stuff that unlocks rare content and drives your crew's growth. It creates a positive feedback loop.

Why is No Man's Sky more popular than ever? Because it pivoted to include robust collection and base-building systems that are easier to engage with and keep players hooked. And Minecraft? If it was only about complex redstone contraptions, without the simple joy of building a cool house that anyone can do, its community would be a fraction of the size it is now.

 

[LongLiveKSA!]

I think you're missing the fundamental difference between a "space flight simulator game" and a "professional space simulation tool."

A game, at the end of the day, is a form of entertainment. It needs to be accessible and fun. A professional tool is all about precision and realism. We can certainly make a game more realistic and in-depth, but we can't lose sight of the fact that it's still meant to be enjoyed by regular players.

If KSA is truly meant to be a professional tool for labs and university research groups, then what's the point of this forum? Why are we even here discussing player experience and tutorial design? I believe the developers created this forum as a place for players to connect and share feedback – not to serve as a slide in a business report for investors.

I think you are missing the point of the game idea. Look at Kerbal Space Program! That game is amazing, and highly successfully, while still being very niche and deep. Microtransactions are not ethical in a game like KSA. A game can be both entertainment and highly educational and realistic. The mechanics of your idea are ok, but some decisions do not make sense. I would advice you rethink your idea. As said by employees and moderators, microtransactions won't be in KSA.

 

[LongLiveKSA!]

Look, I keep coming back to this: a game is a commercial product at the end of the day. We know the primary audience is regular players, so while the skill ceiling can be sky-high, the floor needs to be accessible to ensure they have fun.

This astronaut progression system I designed is meant to be that core loop for the average player. It's like Stardew Valley – the joy isn't in extreme challenge, but in that reliable satisfaction of "planting and harvesting." It turns major milestones from just a badge of honor into actual resources—stuff that unlocks rare content and drives your crew's growth. It creates a positive feedback loop.

Why is No Man's Sky more popular than ever? Because it pivoted to include robust collection and base-building systems that are easier to engage with and keep players hooked. And Minecraft? If it was only about complex redstone contraptions, without the simple joy of building a cool house that anyone can do, its community would be a fraction of the size it is now.

Progression in a game is all well and good, and I agree that KSA should have good progression systems. However, lessening the complexity of the game and adding microtransactions betrays the original intent behind KSA. I don't understand your point, you are just reiterating your prior point, and pivoting to try and avoid discussing the issue with microtransactions.

 

[LongLiveKSA!]

By the way, your system is pretty good apart from the microtransactions. Just edit it a bit, and perhaps rethink the point of a space simulation game.

 

[LongLiveKSA!]

My whole idea is about changing what the player is actually working towards. Instead of the huge, kinda overwhelming goal of "conquering the solar system," we make it about "raising your astronauts."

Think about it – in normal KSP, how many people ever land on Eeloo? Almost no one. And with the super hardcore RSS/RO mod, landing on Pluto is basically a legend. If most players only ever see a tiny bit of the game because the rest is too difficult, then maybe we're not making a game for everyone, but a super niche simulator for experts. If that's the goal, then fine, make a professional tool for labs and universities.

But if we make the game about the astronauts, everything changes. Players won't get frustrated and quit because they can't reach some crazy planet. And they won't get bored and leave after finishing one big goal. It gives players a reason to log in every day, a kind of satisfying loop – like the "planting and harvesting" feeling in Stardew Valley. You check on your crew, train them, send them on missions, and watch them grow. That's the daily hook.

Now, about teaching players the actual rocket science: here's my simple plan.

When you start the game, it straight-up asks you: "Do you know what you're doing?"

• If you say "Yes, I'm a pro," it'll quiz you with a few questions. Pass it, and all the tutorial hand-holding disappears. You get the pure, hardcore experience.
• If you say "No," or fail the quiz, then you're in guided mode. Learning the game becomes part of your astronaut's career. Every new challenge comes with instructions.

And these instructions need to be impossible to mess up. I'm talking about a tutorial that holds your hand so tightly, it's like "instructions for a toddler." You must do what the prompt says before you can do anything else.

If a player who admits they don't know anything still can't get through this kind of tutorial, then that's on them, not the game. The game did its job. It's the developer's responsibility to build a teaching system that's this solid from the start – we shouldn't need to rely on modders to fix it later.

Also, it is a sandbox game. The whole point is you do what you want. If you want to land on Eeloo, you will. But with KSP, once you've bought the game, revenue is earned. It doesn't matter whether someone does everything in the game if they don't want to.

 

[M.SY]

Also, it is a sandbox game. The whole point is you do what you want. If you want to land on Eeloo, you will. But with KSP, once you've bought the game, revenue is earned. It doesn't matter whether someone does everything in the game if they don't want to.

I think you're misunderstanding my role and my point. I'm just a player, not a developer or an investor. My proposal was just an idea—one way to add a simple, engaging progression system for the average player.

You seem to think I'm demanding the developers add microtransactions, which is not my point at all. If the developers are against paid services, they can absolutely create a progression system without any in-app purchases. Why would you think I have any power to force them to listen to me?

What we should really be talking about is this: a game needs players to have a vibrant community, and that community drive sales. This is a commercial reality. Making a game isn't just about building a cool thing, selling it, and being done. It requires an operational team for long-term maintenance, and developers to continuously fix bugs and add content.

Look at Cyberpunk 2077. It was heavily criticized at launch, but thanks to the developers' persistent fixes and updates, it's now become a benchmark in China for testing PC performance.

Then there's No Man's Sky. It was also criticized early on for being repetitive. But the team kept at it, and through years of updates, it has transformed from a pure exploration game into one focused on collection, building, and progression. They can afford to keep adding new content precisely because maintaining community interest drives ongoing sales that fund that development. That's a healthy business cycle.

 

[LongLiveKSA!]

I think there has been a major misunderstanding. I thought that you think the game needs microtransactions, and that clearly isn't true. I apologize. Clearly this debate/argument has no real purpose, and we are arguing for the sake of it. I agree with your points, now that I understand them. The developers are clearly taking these things into consideration. As said prior, your progression system is well though out, and you clearly worked hard on it. I was being somewhat illogical, as the developers won't add microtransactions if they do not wish to.

 

[LongLiveKSA!]

With that said there is no reason to be somewhat hostile. Perhaps you should consider this in future conflicts. I believe we should leave it at this.