[Feedback] Wide as a lake, Deep as a puddle : The case for more depth. Modular Modules of Modularity
But should we limit ourselves to just that? The answer to most, at least according to the few thousand topics on the forums that have been archived, is complexity. I'm not talking stationeers or space-station-13 grade atmospherics and plumbing, or Factorio levels of material processing. I'm talking simpler stuff that already uses existing frameworks, but *ADDS* onto them.
- Modular engines.
This lets us make engines with a wider range of use-cases from maybe 10 more blocks, rather than having to add a block for every additional thrust bracket. want a more powerful engine? Engineer it. Play around with this open system to your hearts' content and if you do it well, you get to make even a mountain fly in gravity.
- Modular weapons
- A heat system.
This is one I've seen a litany of other space games and especially sci-fi settings tackle in a variety of ways. Cosmoteer's method is probably the easiest to map onto SE due to the grid system and the at least passingly similar aesthetics. for SE's case, we can just simplify it to 2 part sets [with a small twist].
-Radiators can come in 2 types, combat and civilian. Combat radiators are effectively thrust vents without the thrust that, in exchange for high power, rapidly empty out a heat-pipenet, but are extremely fragile and thus must be protected from all but the environment-facing side or they will explode. Civilian radiators, while also fragile, work entirely passively, albeit at a slower rate, and are much cheaper to build as well as safer.
-Heat-pipe. functionally identical to a standard pipe system, but moves raw thermal energy. Unlike conveyors, doesn't require power to move things, but is dedicated to siphoning heat from components it makes contact with.
why have this?
a big problem with a lot of space combat in SE is that ships are forced into brick-like, spammed shapes to be actually effective in combat, resulting in borg-bricks that can only be countered with more borg-bricks. This has actually been proposed a few times, as I've found out, but I present a more cosmoteer-like answer: don't make heat management a requirement, make it a side-grade: Reactors get more powerful, batteries get even more efficient, weapons fire for longer, but you have to be a smart enough designer to know either how to shield these precious machines, or be willing to embrace redundancy as a feature rather than a flaw. Making it so that you need genuine comprehension of geometry and systems will filter out the more common offenders, especially trolls, while making combat much more interesting by presenting more considerations when designing ships. Depth through literally just 2 sets of blocks that changes the entire structure of the game's combat system.
Now for milder suggestions that probably don't fit as well here, but still would be neat
- More dynamic controllers
Blocks that do the function of scripts so that at least more complex grids aren't penalised when not relying solely on programmable blocks for everything
- More sensors
While I do not have faith every single system in this will be added, even one of these suggestions would massively alter the depth of Space Engineers 2 and actually improve on the overall experience through making the game more in-depth.
"But maybe players don't want more depth" My counter to that argument: Make them. When I got my younger brother into Space Engineers 1, he absolutely detested having to do conveyors on the grounds that "other games just make shit teleport into where you want it" but because he liked everything else, he got to learn the conveyor system, he figured out all the tricks of it, and most of all, how to make it so that when you ram someone else, your ship actually survives so you can brag about it, thanks to being able to comprehend how to manage the conveyors to his thrusters and reactors and how to place fuel tanks such that they're well-guarded. If learning something as comparatively simple and straightforward as SE1 conveyors can inspire that much joy, imagine how much more can be done with actually in-depth systems and engineering? I'm not asking for rocket surgery [well, maybe] but what I am asking for is that there's more than just mashing modules together. Most people tend to stick around past the "smashing shit with rockets" stage of space engineers. Those people will spend thousands of hours even with the simple systems we have. I myself got into SE because of the shit you could do with subgrids that literally no other space game at the time even came close to achieving.
SE in my eyes has always been the king of space-gaming, second only to Space Station 13. It has the best 3-D ship building as of starbase's death, it has one of the largest spaceship builders communities on steam, and it was the first to the punch on all these regards, but it will be the one getting knocked out of the park if we do not do something to give people more after 15-odd years of Space Engineers 1 on an engine that is old enough to drink in some countries. Marek wants the game to appeal to more people? Enlist the systems crowd and you will never go bankrupt. Do you have any idea how much money you could make from letting even more fellow autistic people build rockets at a finer grain than KSP allows?
KEEN SOFTWARE HOUSE. MAKE A SINGLE ONE OF THE FIRST 3 REAL, AND MY LIFE IS YOURS!!!! MAKE LITERALLY ALL OF THIS REAL AND I WILL DONATE MY LIFE SAVINGS AS OF WRITING THIS TO KEEN SOFTWARE HOUSE!!!!
I like this feedback
I completely agree. "Wide as a lake, Deep as a puddle" pretty much sums up space engineers. But in honesty I feel even that might be a bit generous. I wouldn't say it is quite "wide as a lake" but whatever. I just hope this 'game' actually becomes a 'game' with gameplay and entertaining stuff to do.
I completely agree. "Wide as a lake, Deep as a puddle" pretty much sums up space engineers. But in honesty I feel even that might be a bit generous. I wouldn't say it is quite "wide as a lake" but whatever. I just hope this 'game' actually becomes a 'game' with gameplay and entertaining stuff to do.
I agree that it should be possible to create more complex systems without having to use a programmable block. I like Minecraft's redstone circuit system which allows to connect sensors, logic blocks, actuators and more to create complex systems. Preferably these blocks should be as small as possible (25 cm). A 2.5m block event controller is massive just for a simple trigger. As an example for a block, I would like to have: A PID-Controller block would be a great addition.
I agree that it should be possible to create more complex systems without having to use a programmable block. I like Minecraft's redstone circuit system which allows to connect sensors, logic blocks, actuators and more to create complex systems. Preferably these blocks should be as small as possible (25 cm). A 2.5m block event controller is massive just for a simple trigger. As an example for a block, I would like to have: A PID-Controller block would be a great addition.
The core takeaway from all of this is the need for interesting, interconnected gameplay systems—systems that interact where it makes sense, remain balanced, and support a coherent and motivating survival experience.
That said, this is hard to do—and it’s not something that can realistically be achieved on day one. Adding more systems comes with significant risk, which is why I understand the developers’ hesitation to introduce them too early. In fact, this caution is a sign of a good development approach.
Right now, Keen appears to be focused on building the core engine features first, which is technically the most challenging part. Things like water, stable multiplayer, volumetric weather, voxel manipulation, and stable physics are extremely difficult problems to solve and are well suited for the kind of vertical slices we’re seeing.
Then there’s gameplay.
Gameplay may not be as technically challenging as engine work, but it is arguably the most important part of the game and requires even more attention. Unlike engine features, gameplay development isn’t a vertical slice—it’s very much a horizontal one 🙂
It touches everything: space travel, environment interaction, voxels, fluids, progression, and survival. In the end, it’s gameplay that makes us return to a game again and again.
I want to emphasize just a couple of key areas I hope will receive major attention from the devs:
1. Interaction with Voxels
One of the engine’s most prominent features is fully destructible planets and asteroids, and gameplay needs to leverage this to its fullest potential.
Voxel interaction in survival should go far beyond simply removing material with spherical drills. Players should be able to place, shape, and manipulate voxels in many ways, while still integrating naturally with progression and survival motivation.
2. Planets and Water Should Matter
Planets shouldn’t matter only because they’re beautiful—they should matter for gameplay reasons.
A thermal system could play a major role here. Planets and water could provide natural cooling environments, giving players reasons to build powerful reactors cooled by water. Ore deposits could be larger, encouraging big mining outposts.
Rovers should be genuinely useful—ideal for transporting heavy loads compared to unrealistic flyers. For that, we need ways to build roads, ramps, and bridges, as mentioned before.
Conclusion
We might not need more blocks—and I understand why adding many blocks is difficult—but we absolutely need systems.
Carefully crafted, well-balanced systems that:
These are the kinds of systems that make a world you’re happy to return to—over and over again.
The core takeaway from all of this is the need for interesting, interconnected gameplay systems—systems that interact where it makes sense, remain balanced, and support a coherent and motivating survival experience.
That said, this is hard to do—and it’s not something that can realistically be achieved on day one. Adding more systems comes with significant risk, which is why I understand the developers’ hesitation to introduce them too early. In fact, this caution is a sign of a good development approach.
Right now, Keen appears to be focused on building the core engine features first, which is technically the most challenging part. Things like water, stable multiplayer, volumetric weather, voxel manipulation, and stable physics are extremely difficult problems to solve and are well suited for the kind of vertical slices we’re seeing.
Then there’s gameplay.
Gameplay may not be as technically challenging as engine work, but it is arguably the most important part of the game and requires even more attention. Unlike engine features, gameplay development isn’t a vertical slice—it’s very much a horizontal one 🙂
It touches everything: space travel, environment interaction, voxels, fluids, progression, and survival. In the end, it’s gameplay that makes us return to a game again and again.
I want to emphasize just a couple of key areas I hope will receive major attention from the devs:
1. Interaction with Voxels
One of the engine’s most prominent features is fully destructible planets and asteroids, and gameplay needs to leverage this to its fullest potential.
Voxel interaction in survival should go far beyond simply removing material with spherical drills. Players should be able to place, shape, and manipulate voxels in many ways, while still integrating naturally with progression and survival motivation.
2. Planets and Water Should Matter
Planets shouldn’t matter only because they’re beautiful—they should matter for gameplay reasons.
A thermal system could play a major role here. Planets and water could provide natural cooling environments, giving players reasons to build powerful reactors cooled by water. Ore deposits could be larger, encouraging big mining outposts.
Rovers should be genuinely useful—ideal for transporting heavy loads compared to unrealistic flyers. For that, we need ways to build roads, ramps, and bridges, as mentioned before.
Conclusion
We might not need more blocks—and I understand why adding many blocks is difficult—but we absolutely need systems.
Carefully crafted, well-balanced systems that:
These are the kinds of systems that make a world you’re happy to return to—over and over again.
I completely agree. "Wide as a lake, Deep as a puddle" pretty much sums up space engineers. But in honesty I feel even that might be a bit generous. I wouldn't say it is quite "wide as a lake" but whatever. I just hope this 'game' actually becomes a 'game' with gameplay and entertaining stuff to do.
I completely agree. "Wide as a lake, Deep as a puddle" pretty much sums up space engineers. But in honesty I feel even that might be a bit generous. I wouldn't say it is quite "wide as a lake" but whatever. I just hope this 'game' actually becomes a 'game' with gameplay and entertaining stuff to do.
Replies have been locked on this page!