How to kinetic void Videos

+Sherk That might be because you don't have enough space left in the hull? Try adding another hull section and then seeing if you can select one. They take up quite a bit of hull volume and the game automatically hides stuff that won't fit in the remaining space.

+reapzilla FL Studio for the DAW, and the paid VSTs were Komplete 8 Ultimate, Garritan Personal Orchestra 4, and iZotope Ozone.

Interesting, but not all that surprising. I was wondering how they were getting away with letting fans upload music anyway. Oh well.

+Artem Bank Grooveshark has been shut down //www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/01/grooveshark-shuts-down-labels-music

+Barre De Vie What?

+Artem Bank The Website is closed

+Barre De Vie I got the tracks pulled.

+Artem Bank wow that sucks hope you can easily fix that

+Barre De Vie Uhhhh... seeing as I've never put my music onto grooveshark, I'm 100% certain that someone else did and is now getting paid for my music being played on there... so that will be removed soon.

Thanks!

+Artem BankOh, okay.

Thanks for the compliment - though, you do know I don't actually work on the development of the game past the music, right?

+reece punch Quite possibly yeah. Certainly would have been an appropriate name for this thing.

+SeniorB As far as I can tell it's just a bunch of royalty free music. I don't think they had/have their own composer.

Yeah, I completely understand your view point on it. Thus why I'll mention to update the site.

+Imurashi yeah but takes one person 5 minutes to update a website site like that. Be good if they worked on the actual game. Seems to of had good sales since launch. They can take their time, people are patient, most understand development can take years for a game, all they have to do is get their shit together and most of the community will support them even if it is months between patches. Seriously does look like a good game, but I for one cannot buy it if it's not  supported and feature lacking so soon after it launches..

+DoomedTVN I actually work for the owner of the company of this game. I'll talk to him about updating the sites. He's just got a lot on his hands as his crew is down to only 2 people.

I certainly agree with both your points. The day of demos that were competent seems well in the past now for whatever reason. The only recent game with a solid demo that I can recall is Kerbal Space Program. Rather than being some sample level it actually just gives you a stripped down version of the full game so you can actually see if the game is something you would want to put money behind or not. If more games put out demos like that, I'm sure that would help alleviate some of the early access issues. That said, the new steam refund policy may potentially help for regretful decisions as well.As for monitoring of games on Steam, that is something that seems to have gone as you say because of Valves decision to be less involved in actually curating what's on their service. Greenlight, reviews, tagging, etc all seem to have been implemented more so the community does the job so that Valve doesn't have to. Part of that I'm sure is down to the sheer volume of stuff being put on steam these days. When Valve made it easier to put stuff on there the floodgates opened and I don't think even their full control would be able to stem the tide these days. What they can do to fix this though I'm not sure. The platform has its benefits sure but also the old reputation of Steam being a place for quality games is gone now (just look at garbage like Air Control and Grass Simulator that were on Steam, greenlit no less).

+Denodon Yeah I think that approach is good, kind of like the shareware days, when you got a good demo that was a true representation of the complete game, even if said game was not yet completed.I understand crowd funding is problematic as many are trying to get funds to actually begin production and the tools required. And In many ways I have no issue with that. It's a case of people being generous to help others achieve their goals.It's when products are then released on store fronts like Steam as Early Access, and it's no longer a donation, but actually buying a commercial product, regardless of the state it is in.I think when it hits greenlight and Early Access the problem is an easy one to fix, Surely Valve and most gamers would know if a game is a a game or some half assed cash grab. As Steam is Valves business and they make money from every purchase, it should be on them to thoroughly review products it intends to sell, not the public, sure let the public vote, and if a game gets enough votes then Valve themselves should check out the product themselves, and step in and say, okay the product is popular in theory, but as it is clearly broken and has no gameplay we cannot release it. Come back when it is at the least playable.I mean often we can only go by a products sales pitch and images etc, and little else, while Valve can surely test the game out. Seems they rely a bit too much on the public to do their work for them for free. We're expected to review greenlight for them without anything to actually review, then we're expected to review Early Access for them, at our own cost and then when a game is clearly broken or a scam they do very little about it, like removing it from the store. Making them seem they are more concerned with the profits they can skim off the top of titles than their reputation or users.After all as long as a title, even a bad one keeps getting sold, they keep making money themselves. Sure people can read reviews and make a judgement, but unless a game is completely negative review wise, it can be hard to tell if a game is worth a shot, not helped by devs giving out keys for reviews and making alt accounts themselves and getting friends and family to also help out. Valve themselves and similar could easily step in before it is even an issue. I mean most of us can tell a game is a dud, I am sure an actual game developer like Valve could tell if a game is one.2 solutions could be, compulsory demos, allowing users to try before they buy. Seems these days demos are getting fewer and fewer. Even before the internets we could buy a magazine with a disk on the cover and try out games before we splonked our cash on them. If a company refuses to provide a demo, then they cannot release on the store.Second would be Valve reviewing any games that have a high negative review rate, especially once it falls below mixed and into negative or worse, or at least have a more readily available option for players to report a scam game. Have a team looking into reviews, then trying the game to see if the reviews have substance, then removing the game if a game is determined to be technically bad/unplayable, incomplete or an obvious scam until such time the devs patch it up or fix it, or as seems to be the case with many indie titles these days make the game complete.I think the solutions are fairly simple, but it requires companies like valve to step in for their consumer base and like us also earn their money.It would also help if Governments would bring in regulations for the gaming industry that apply to other industries too. While the gaming industry is above most consumer protection laws they have no incentive to step up themselves. Being more accountable for their stores and the products they push would make them change their tune I am sure.

+DoomedTVN I agree in that before a game can be sold on steam or on a kickstarter or such, it should at least be reasonably playable and not a bare bones cobbled together tech demo of half-finished mechanics just to make something that looks appealing.The issue is how to regulate that and what level is considered to be sellable. In the case of a game I was involved in writing, we held back on putting an indiegogo campaign together until the actual first full section of the game was complete and available. Sure it wasn't final but it at least had all the elements we were promising actually shown to some extent in implementation. In other words, the playable game we offered for a demo was more than just a collection of assets with promises to one day add the rest of the game to those elements.

+Maciej KamińskiFor me it's just a case of Small/Medium Devs give us a complete game, no extras required. Heck I'll happily buy addons and keep funding them if the developers show they're committed and deliver a decent product.+DenodonGood points you make, and I understand issues might come up like Kinectic Voids, that sucks for them and their customer base, but I also feel there could of been ways around it. I mean check out this story by the developer of Orion: Prelude.//www.co-optimus.com/editorial/1475/page/1/indie-ana-co-op-and-the-dev-stories-games-cannot-fail.htmlHe always found a way. Only took him almost 2 decades from concept to today. lolI think my main problem is with indie devs like those who made Starforge, abandoned the game short of delivering much of the promised content with some excuses like they were not up to the task, despite the game seeming to sell rather well,  yet then have the cheek to make a new game Reign of Kings that many of those who bought Starforge say is pretty much exactly the same game in a medieval skin.Not sure if there is an easy solution. Without funding many of these indie developers never get a break and can launch, but those who fund kickstarters or buy Early Access risk losing their money if they back a game that is just a cash grab or the developer is not up to the task.I think one solution is making any games applicable for greenlight, early access or Kickstarters should have at minimum a playable game maybe? More than a tech demo. I mean most gamers know games take years to make, we've seen the pressures modders have faced etc, so I just cannot understand how in this day and age development teams do not know what they are getting into or the commitment they need to make.Maybe editing tools for games should return to how they used to be? That way if a game dies or the devs cash in and run, the community can attempt to complete the game? Heck it's worked for Bethesda for nearly every game they've made lol.For a game like Kinetic Void I am sure their would be plenty of volunteers out there willing to help make it the game what it should be if the tools were available and the devs reached out.Again I don't know, but the way things are currently has to change as the system is broken and making people jaded I feel. I've supported indie devs for a long time and even I am now more and more overlooking them until they're games are complete, tired of being a pay to test for games that go no where.

SO in short. Smal Devs/Medium Devs: YES EARLY ACCES, BUT ONLY IF YOU GIVE US SOMEHTING EXTRA WHEN THAT GAME IS OUTBig Devs: Get your Shit together, work on a Game longer than 12 months and create a Fucking Masterpiece with the Tech we got now.

+DoomedTVN You make some very good points and I agree with many of them, especially the strange exceptions we seem to make for the game industry that we wouldn't make even for other media industries such as film or television.The big challenge of course though with anything like early access is because they are all a gamble, some more successful than others. Under the old formula a game would be developed and we would only hear about it when their marketing started promoting it or if it just appeared on the shelves as a finished product.Those days however appear long gone where both big names and Indie studios can use the explanation of updates through your internet connection to basically deliver an incomplete game and then 'fix' it by finishing it after they already have a revenue stream coming in.In the case of Kinetic Void, one of the devs recently made a post on the Steam forum page for it where he explained the situation in their case. Apparently a bunch of the devs were no longer interested in the game so they left after the game moved out of early access. The two of them left are apparently unable to continue development with both lack of knowledge, skill and funds to continue working on it.Something like this can and probably did happen in the past only we as customers would never have seen the game until its 'release' state. Communication about the studio was basically non-existent so all we'd have and know about is the game as it came 'out of the box'.Does this excuse them? Probably not. Does it make them guilty? I'd also say probably not. Game dev is a hard long process that is often not terribly rewarding. I enjoy creating game experiences but how do you make money doing that? What happens if the money dries up or you find yourself unable to finish your product? Who knows.I think that is the biggest thing that needs to be taken about all the 'drama' around early access games, kickstarters and the like. They're all very new processes and nobody really yet seems to have any idea of what works and what doesn't. Whilst voting with your wallet is one solution, I tend to also view things from not just the potential or promise but also what actually exists. I got KV because the shipbuilder looked nice and it is fun to play with. Am I dissapointed the game isn't being developed further? Sure. Would I complain about it and never support other devs in future? No. It's a gamble and I'm willing to support those with passion, whether the result ends up well or not.

Wall of text ahead!+Maciej KamińskiAgreed, it is pathetic seeing big devs and publishers jumping on the band wagon of Early Access, pay to test. but like anything, they do it because people let them. As long as people are willing to drop their cash on anything and everything it'll keep happening. I think the part of the problem is younger people have been raised with Pre-Orders and DLC as being normal since the original Xbox. Big business has groomed them nicely. I am from the days when you could of waited years for a sequel, got full expansions in between and what passes for most DLC these days were player made mods.I mean games like Quake 2 and Unreal Tournament I got years out of them, especially with mods and total conversions. yet modern titles you're lucky if you get 12 months, if even that, before the next game of a franchise is out. Heck many companies like iD Software and Epic gave you plenty of freebies on top of a complete game as a thanks for supporting them.  e.g extra deathmatch maps and player models and skins. Now we get charged for such things and many games no longer release modding tools because people won't buy what they can get or make for free.How I miss those days. It pisses me off that I these days I am expected to pay for player and weapon skins that I once could make myself in photoshop.+DenodonI have sympathy for modders and paying customers, those making additional content for games on their own time and money for no profit, but Indies? Not so much, unless they're making a free game.Indie or not, once you make a profit from a product I think you're obligated to deliver on what the consumer expects and was promised, after all they have worked for the money to pay for the game, devs should also earn it. No excuses.Seems to be one set of rules for the game industry compared to other industries. If car manufacturers or similar had the same sort of attitude, lawsuits would be rampant and government bodies would be shutting them down.I mean imagine Ford took pre-orders for their newest car, gave people early access to it in an incomplete state, promising they'd send out the parts required to complete the car over a 3 year period, then the CEO stubs his toe 6 months later, or decides to move house and leaves people with only a chassis and engine. It would not be acceptable as an excuse.Only mod makers who have no obligation to anyone should be able to use 'real life got in the way' as an excuse.I mean could you just stop working because life got in the way and still expect your bosses to pay your wage for the next 2 years?Yes it is a risk of Early Access, but there have been many games that have had a lot of sales, so money is clearly not an issue where the devs drop it without a word or excuse, just 'games full release now' and then starts on a new game, usually using the funds from previous games that should be used to finish said game. Screwing over consumers who have no way of making the devs accountable made worse by companies like Valve not looking after their consumer base and holding those they allow to sell via their store accountable and need to manage things like green light and Early Access better than expecting the consumer to do their jobs for themIt's even worse when the dev then makes a sequel to original dropped game......After all this is why we have kick starters, they're a donation with no obligations, but Early Access you're selling a product. So consumer protection laws should apply, I am protected when buying a dodgy $30 product from a retail store, I should be protected when paying $30 or more for a game, not to mention when games can get up to $100 where I live.People say speak with your wallet, and it's good in theory, but those who do are outnumbered by the 'shut up and take my money!' generation sadly.

+Maciej KamińskiYea indeed. I have more sympathy for Indies doing it as I know the feeling given I work in Indie game development. Sometimes things come up or you run out of resources so you can't continue even if you want to.AAA studios on the other hand have the resources and numbers where neither of those things should ever prevent them from being able to finish a complete and  polished game. After all, that's where the AAA title comes from to begin with.

+DoomedTVN Hey. I agree, but what i dont understand is the BIG companies doing this. The AAA games are games that have funding from previous games, I mean LOOK AT ASSASSINS CREED or example. They have 4 instances of their game, working for money. the FIRST game still on sale on steam. It's not like they lack cash. I understand however SMALL companies or Indie devs doing this. They have to get QUICK cash to keep going. So they release a game and stop working on it. And realease another, and another and so on. Until a hit comes out and they concentrate on that one game for a while. Thats how it works and i understand fully.

+Maciej Kamiński Yeah seen many games go this way. I tend to not support those kinds of devs.Insane how many do this, launch a beta as complete and go onto a new game and people still then go buy the new game.....I'm very much a speak with your wallet supporter ; )

+Denodon Still more Finished than Most of the Games that come out. We should praise for that. Also the guys working on this apparently are working on another project right now and barely touch this. Thats what I read somewhere on Reddit.

+DoomedTVN Indeed. It certainly appears to be that way more than anything else, or they're just not very good communicators. Least there's a somewhat complete game out of it for once.

+Denodon  "Updates every month"Yet I see the last update was January this year, and well the official sites news and blogs etc are much older, the sites forums link takes you to the steam forums which are just as dead. So yeah I would say time has told.

+DoomedTVN Certainly seems that way at the moment yeah, time will tell I suppose

I've not actually tried starmade yet as I've not gotten around to getting a copy. It's on my to-do list though as it does seem like a reasonable game to compare it to. Though starmade from the outlook seems closer to Space Engineers I think?

ah ok thanks and is star made or kinetic void better?

+Its Atrixx It's dependent on what drone you choose. Each one has a different size category listed. The heavier drones do more but obviously are heavier and larger so you can only carry less of them.

+Helen Keith In the shipbuilder click the Hangar Systems option (it looks kinda like a drone) and then ensure you've selected the hangar option (it shows as a square/rectangle). Note that the smallest hangar is a Size 3 part so you'll need to be using size 3 or larger in the selection to see it. You'll also need to add a drone control module of the same size to go with the hangar (the other option next to where you pick the hangar).

Awesome dubstep

+ChromeFilms77 Yeah the sounds could do with work IMO. You should hear what a ship that's nothing but guns sounds like when they fire all at once!

As in travelling

They will 100% be putting it in a near finished / finished version... The time it takes to do anything in this is rather slow though

+Affinitytank Yeah it certainly would be. I'm not a huge fan of multiplayer games personally but KV would really benefit from having multiplayer support. That with the workshop would allow lots of opportunities.

And mabey skypeif you have one

Ok i found it btw in in creative (Just started)

+Supercooper28Are you playing creative or career mode? When you right click a module and select the subsystem window, the top left should have a bunch of options including Kinetic Field Generator.Check to make sure you have the module space free and the options to pick a few different types of field should show there.If none are there and you are playing Career mode, you will need to open the 'Store' window (Top middle of the screen) and buy one from there.

Oh ok well today i got kinetic void im just super confused becuase i cant find my kinetic generator so well i use the already made ones but other than that i think kinetic void is one of my all time favorite space games and OMG HE IS TALKING TO ME!!!!

+Supercooper28Dreadnought is a game I'm looking into to see if there's much I could make from it. It looks promising so we shall see.I've managed to fix an issue I was having with Kinetic Void so hopefully I can record some more videos in it as soon as it's quiet enough to record the commentary.

Oh and not forcing you to but i would love to see new kinetic void videos and mabey dreadnought

hey i treat people with respect

Thanks! I really need to get back in the habit of recording more frequently.