Talk:Planned features

From Kerbal Space Program Wiki
Revision as of 06:48, 11 October 2012 by Thecoshman (talk | contribs) (Protection on this page)
Jump to: navigation, search

Hey, shouldn't the EVA feature be in green, because it's the main focus of the next update? And maybe Long-duration smoke trails and Fuel-dependent larger explosions too, because Silisko is working on better particle effects for 0.16? Trbinsc (talk) 19:28, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

As this page is currently arranged, probably. That said, A 3rd color for features in the next update might be clearer. UmbralRaptor (talk) 04:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


Causeless - I decided on a new colour due to the new update cycles not guaranteeing features any more.


Wouldn't it make sense to remove the features that have been added (green). After all, these are the planned features.The-Bean (talk) 10:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Causeless - Nah, I think it's nice in showing how far the game has progressed.
That's what the Version History is for... --The-Bean (talk) 12:41, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Causeless - I'd say it's much easier to that a quick glance at this page for an overall idea than needing to hunt through the update :::history. Not to mention that newcomers may be confused when they only see one planned feature and won't realize the game may be near :::to completion. Sure, the title of the page implies only planned features, but it's really a question of either fitting the technical :::details perfectly (in expense of both ease of use and simplicity), or doing the simpler, easier, and really more intuitive option.

Faster Game Loading, done, really?

I hate to come across as snarky here, but surly improving the load times and general game performance is an ongoing thing? Thecoshman (talk) 11:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Protection on this page

Perhaps this page should be protected so that only users marked as 'Squad Employees' are able to edit it. Maybe some sort of elevated users as well, who can help keep it formatted and tidy. Thecoshman (talk) 07:43, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why that's necessary.--Craigmt1 (talk) 18:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Well, I guess for now it is ok, but I can see it becoming a problem with people editing it to list 'planned features' that are made up. I know that at the moment, there is only one Squad employee on the wiki. It's something we might have to consider though. Thecoshman (talk) 06:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)