Breaking windows, Bug or feature ?

[SkunkMaster]

So I've been thinking, breaking windows in rockets is it an intended feature ? 

 

I know many think it's a bug, i did too for a very long time, but now klei has had it's second brushover with rockets and fixing us getting free steel/diamond from disassembling a rocket, yet the window decon "feature" remains. 

First time they fixed something with rockets, they fixed the walls bein replaceable and then deconstructable but they left this feature with the windows.

This might seem like an oversight at first, but usually oversights are fixed within a few days, this how ever was not. 

All those things set aside, the spacefarer module also states it's suited for 10 dupes, yet arguably anymore then 2 dupes would crowd it, so what gives? 



I'm personally starting to believe this is an intended feature, not a bug not an oversight but intended. Something the devs let be for us / new players to discover. - Atleast i don't see how you would viably keep 10 dupes in such a small space for an extended period of time. 

Also i like to add: We have to remember this is Klei we are talking about, makers behind Don't Starve which is RIDDLED with things to find and discover. 


What do you guys think? are you maybe starting to think it might actually be a feature, or do you still firmly believe this to be a bug/oversight ? 

[Yunru]

No, just like last someone brought up a way to break the confines of a capsule. 

 

It makes no logical sense, and is clearly unintended, since if they wanted us to have bigger space to work with they would of just given us a bigger space. 

 

It's a nice insight into the hoops jumped through for self-justification though. 

[SkunkMaster]

17 minutes ago, Yunru said:

It makes no logical sense, and is clearly unintended, since if they wanted us to have bigger space to work with they would of just given us a bigger space. 

Why would they "just" give us a bigger space? would it be "balanced" if you got such a big space for free to use at your will?

And again, i don't see how it's "clearly unintended", I've given many reasons as to why i think it might be intended, but yet you have given none. 

Stating what you think WITHOUT a reason or argument behind it would be like saying "i think the world is flat - I just do".

18 minutes ago, Yunru said:

It's a nice insight into the hoops jumped through for self-justification though. 

No reason to act demeaning.

Seeing how this is a SINGLE PLAYER game i would argue there is no need for "self-justification", only one motive should act for reason behind your decisions, FUN. - You don't think it's fun, don't do it. It increases your enjoyment of the game? - Do it!

[Tytan]

kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

[sakura_sk]

4 minutes ago, SkunkMaster said:

And again, i don't see how it's "clearly unintended", I've given many reasons as to why i think it might be intended, but yet you have given none. 

One reason it is "intended" is window tiles POI and window tiles. If these need to be deconstructable maybe rocket window tiles end up also deconstructable but not necessarily have to be

[Yunru]

19 minutes ago, SkunkMaster said:

Why would they "just" give us a bigger space? would it be "balanced" if you got such a big space for free to use at your will?

Because what you're arguing is that have already just given you the extra space, but then for some reason decided to gate it not behind a technology or building, but behind a secret trick. 

 

19 minutes ago, SkunkMaster said:

I've given many reasons as to why i think it might be intended, but yet you have given none. 

Yeah sure, keep justifying it to yourself that way. Let's ignore the fact that the size limitation exists solely because the developers designed it that way is both a valid and major point, because it doesn't fit your narrative. 

 

Not to mention your position relies on the supposition that they patched out most of the other ways to break the capsule confines not because they didn't want players to do so (the obvious answer), but because it wasn't the "correct" way to do so. 

[SkunkMaster]

16 minutes ago, Yunru said:

Because what you're arguing is that have already just given you the extra space, but then for some reason decided to gate it not behind a technology or building, but behind a secret trick. 

YES! This exactly this. Klei does this, putting secret tricks into their games for the players to discover. 

 

The tiles are called "Rocket Windows" after all, they do have their own settings, just like the "rocket walls". 

If this was not intended, why would Klei let numerus posts appear about it? - The tiles being replaceable is 1 line of code that needs 1 value changed, just like the walls. So why not fix it?

Why didn't they change it when they changed the walls?

16 minutes ago, Yunru said:

Yeah sure, keep justifying it to yourself that way. Let's ignore the fact that the size limitation exists solely because the developers designed it that way is both a valid and major point, because it doesn't fit your narrative. 

Yes, the size limitation is there, you get what you pay for. - But on the same side you are also able to increase it in size for an additional cost on your end.

But at the same time this module, which is hardly around twice the size of it's smaller brother, which is designated for only 1 dupe, has a 10 dupe limit. Why would they set it THAT high, if there wasn't some "trick" behind it to make it viable? - If it's not supposed to be increased in size, not even possible in any way, why not just set the limit at 5? even at 5 it would be very crowded, but 10?

Also they could've cut of the space around the module to make it impossible to even path outside, yet they left us all this space around the module, Why? 


I'm NOT arguing that this is NOT a bug/unintended feature, I'm arguing that it MIGHT be intended and saying that I'm Personally starting to get convinced that it is.

I am still a bit on the fence about it, but will also say that I will be convinced this is intended if they don't change it the next time they give rockets a brushover. 

[Electroely]

35 minutes ago, SkunkMaster said:

I'm NOT arguing that this is NOT a bug/unintended feature, I'm arguing that it MIGHT be intended and saying that I'm Personally starting to get convinced that it is.

I am still a bit on the fence about it, but will also say that I will be convinced this is intended if they don't change it the next time they give rockets a brushover. 

Personally, I think the introduction of this bug was definitely not intended, but the devs either have fixing it low on their priority list or don't mind it being in the game since it doesn't actively hurt the game experience and allows for some really cool builds.

[SkunkMaster]

1 minute ago, Electroely said:

Personally, I think the introduction of this bug was definitely not intended, but the devs either have fixing it low on their priority list or don't mind it being in the game since it doesn't actively hurt the game experience and allows for some really cool builds.

Yeah i'm kinda in that group my self. It was unintended at first, the devs how ever thought it was kinda cool and unexpected, and therefor let us have this way as a "secret trick" or easter egg for us to find.

One of those things that started as unintended, but because it actually improved the game it was left in the game in some way. 

[dacio_ultanca]

4 hours ago, SkunkMaster said:

If this was not intended, why would Klei let numerus posts appear about it? - The tiles being replaceable is 1 line of code that needs 1 value changed, just like the walls. So why not fix it?

 

Why would Klei delete posts?  That doesn't make sense and isn't a good supportive case to your argument.

 

I don't think you know how many lines of code it would take to fix it.  I think it's more likely something they just haven't gotten to because it doesn't really matter in the larger sense of the game.  Is it intended? Probably not.  Will they leave it in game?  Maybe, but only because it's a game that has a sandbox that let's you do whatever you want.  If people choose to exploit this game mechanic to make the game easier for them, then cool, whatever.

But arguing that building outside of the rocket is somehow intended behavior is silly.  You don't want them to fix it, so you argue it is intended.  Klei will get to it and make a fix if they want to.  People who think building outside of the space module is cheating, will continue to not do it.  People who don't think it's cheating, will continue to do it.  Arguing on this forum about if it's intended or not is a waste of time.

[zach123b]

you can break the rocket tiles by pressure or melting them. so yeah, unless they make them out of neutronium and 3 tiles thick (or unbreakable like solar panels) , we will be able to break through

like the 10% through pipes not phase changing thing, i consider this a feature

[TuxSam123]

4 hours ago, SkunkMaster said:

Why would they "just" give us a bigger space? would it be "balanced" if you got such a big space for free to use at your will?

And again, i don't see how it's "clearly unintended", I've given many reasons as to why i think it might be intended, but yet you have given none. 

Stating what you think WITHOUT a reason or argument behind it would be like saying "i think the world is flat - I just do".

No reason to act demeaning.

Seeing how this is a SINGLE PLAYER game i would argue there is no need for "self-justification", only one motive should act for reason behind your decisions, FUN. - You don't think it's fun, don't do it. It increases your enjoyment of the game? - Do it!

No need to act rude there buddy. This is a discussion forum. Everyone's opinions matter, even though some seem a bit weird and far-fetched.

[Gurgel]

Calm down people. Unintended side-effects are very common in simulations. Breaking windows is possible because Klei violates the principles of the simulation for better aesthetics and immersion. The simulation-conform way to do this is obviously encasing the rocket capsule in Neutronium. But that would not look nice and would make windows nonsense. Hence they would need to code a special case for this (non-buildable space or making these Windows POI elements or transparent Neutronium ("Hello computer? Hello computer?") which may require some effort. It is also clearly non-urgent, since everybody is free to leave the windows in place.

That said, I do not believe breakable windows are intended by the rocket module design, but they are, of course, intended by the overall simulation.

[Magheat2009]

7 hours ago, Electroely said:

Personally, I think the introduction of this bug was definitely not intended, but the devs either have fixing it low on their priority list or don't mind it being in the game since it doesn't actively hurt the game experience and allows for some really cool builds.

I have not been impressed by any wall-breaker build I have seen so far. They do not appear the result of significantly different gameplay than normal colony gameplay. It seems to me that the lack of space is what makes rocket dupe survival different from normal colony gameplay.

[SharraShimada]

I can just guess, but i think it was introduced intentionally, but not to stay forever. They gave us a possible workaround if something changes, and we need that extra space really bad. That way, they do not need to make changes to the command capsule at first sign of trouble. I guess, this will be removed, at release, when they are confident the command capsule space will be enough for everything.

[n_t_p]

It's just early access jank. Expect it

It needs to get fixed. idc when though

12 hours ago, SharraShimada said:

I can just guess, but i think it was introduced intentionally, but not to stay forever. They gave us a possible workaround if something changes, and we need that extra space really bad. 

This is what debug is for.

[SharraShimada]

4 hours ago, n_t_p said:

It's just early access jank. Expect it

It needs to get fixed. idc when though

This is what debug is for.

Nope. Debug is cheating. And it disables achievements for the player. And you have to activate it manually. When the devs wanted to give us a valid option without this, this would be the way. 

And thats beside the fact, debug mode can cause all kinds of other problems.

[n_t_p]

3 minutes ago, SharraShimada said:

Nope. Debug is cheating. And it disables achievements for the player. And you have to activate it manually. When the devs wanted to give us a valid option without this, this would be the way. 

And thats beside the fact, debug mode can cause all kinds of other problems.

Debug is for fixing bugs. If your game has a bug, say in this case an update inadvertently disabled battery modules so you can't get power in your crew module, then using debug to put in a solar panel would not be cheating. It would be fixing the game so that it's in a playable balanced state, instead of a broken buggy one.

I use debug all the time to teleport dupes to safety from the stupid floating dupe bug. I don't know what causes it or any other workaround. Building a ladder where they're floating sometimes works, but it's inconsistent and the dupe usually dies before you can do it without using debug. I only use debug in my real worlds to identify and fix bugs. That's not cheating. Using debug to spawn in 150t of thermium on cycle 2 is cheating.

[Yunru]

10 minutes ago, SharraShimada said:

When the devs wanted to give us a valid option without this, this would be the way. 

No, they'd just... Give it to you.