Jump to content

drhay53

Members
  • Posts

    438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

227 Excellent

Profile Information

  • About me
    Bottle Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I suspect some of this list was already fixed prior to launch, and that there was a freeze period. That said, this is quite a list even if it covers an extra week or two of work. From one dev to another, well done team and keep making the vision happen.
  2. When MSFS first came out one of the big knocks on it was that it struggled to produce high frame rates on normal hardware even on low graphics settings. It's almost like it's been out for a couple of years now and had a lot of optimizations.
  3. This is from discussion earlier in the thread, but I'm personally expecting 1.5-2 years before we are getting close to a performant game that is approaching the roadmap vision. I'll in fact be pleasantly surprised if we have playable, fun colonies in 2023.
  4. I suppose I didn't mean it was their entire job, just that there is probably one person allocated some of their time to reviewing the forum bug reports.
  5. My guess is there's one person in QA/testing whose job it is to go through the bug report forum, attempt to reproduce, and file internal tickets. If there's not enough info in the post or it's not easy to reproduce, it's probably just ignored.
  6. I agree that the graphics just feel.....weird. Something is off that I can't quite put my finger on. Playing on a 3070ti and a ryzen 5 3600. That said, the stock rovers and planes feel pretty good to control, and exploring KSC is pretty fun. No real plans on anything major to do, just exploring.
  7. flew a stock plane out to the island airfield, landed, and came back. It was fun and the plane took off and landed quite easily. Don't think I ever experienced that in KSP1. I hated flying without mods.
  8. That's not what the OP says. It says "What is something you wish to be modded into the game, day-one?" Edit: meaning, this is my wishlist. Which is what I thought was being asked.
  9. To answer the original topic: A reliable launch profile and autopilot like GravityTurn. Other forms of autopilot like mechjeb. Edit: KerbalJointReinforcement Complain if you want, but doing everything manually gets boring after a while. I'll do it a few times but after that I'd like a mod that creates proper maneuver nodes for common patterns and automates launching. I suspect this is going to be the first thing that sends me back to ksp1 while waiting for more ksp2 content.
  10. I share your concern, but my response to it is to give them my money in the hopes that the vision laid out by the dev team is given the resources to reach that vision. I know a lot of people don't share my opinion on that, and think that buying early access is bad for gamers, but as a software developer myself, I accept that this model is not ever going away. As a consumer, I accept that sometimes I'll give a company my money for a vision I'm hoping they reach, but they fall short. In my opinion, they way for KSP2 to become what I want is for me to buy it, play it, stay positive, and give constructive feedback. For some games that I've played, that hasn't worked and I'll hold a grudge for a long time. I'll just summarize by saying that, as a software developer, I really don't understand the people who take a game they want to love, and just shower it with negativity all over the internet for not reaching their expectations. I'm not saying there's never a time to go there; after a lot of burned bridges on Elite Dangerous, I'm at that point myself. But we're nowhere near that point on KSP2, and the best thing we can do for the game at this point is support the devs and give them a chance to actualize the vision they've presented to us.
  11. The comparison to No Mans Sky is an interesting one, and it's a path that I think we should be rooting for KSP2 to take. Yes, they overpromised and underdelivered at launch, but they stuck to their vision and added enormous value to the game with free updates, and there is no longer any real negativity around the game. It is well-respected as a game that supported its players and just quietly kept moving forward. Much more so than it's competitors in the genre.
  12. Based on other videos, my suspicion is that it was heavily strutted.
  13. Using OPM in 1.11.1 and seeing the same list-reversal type issue in the VAB. It was not present in 1.0.7.2. I moved to the beta because I noticed that Antenna Helper was using the comms of my probe core for it's "Total Power" in-flight, instead of the power of the external antenna. This behavior persists in both 1.0.7.2 and 1.0.7.3-beta Logs: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1owefb-UYPJsqvo02zkFfDOgu9qXWDQu5/view?usp=sharing screenshot: notice the incorrect "Total Power" in the Antenna Helper window, it is 5000 and should be 500,000. Also notice the discrepancy between the Antenna Helper signal strength and the stock signal strength. edit: the issue also applies to the map view with the colored circles. Also, a craft with a relay antenna correctly uses the relay antenna power instead of the probe core's direct antenna.
  14. looking at the guides that are popping up on the wiki and the sheer number of WOLF parts that are likely to be needed, it does seem to me like the most convenient progression will be to start on kerbin, then construct the next wolf modules and their transport vehicles in space. Just sort of leap-frog your way out from kerbin to reduce the sheer number of launches that would likely be needed. That's looking to be my plan, anyway.
  15. I haven't yet decided exactly which version of KSP I will be playing on. Concerned that 1.11 will be missing some stuff that I consider required, but still looking into that at the moment. Does the pre-release still support KSP going back to 1.8? Also just not sure if starting a save with a pre-release is the best idea for me.
×
×
  • Create New...