KSP Weekly: The flight of the Norge and forging missions

[danfarnsy]

1 hour ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

It's just a one-line post, but it's stated in a way

Next week this becomes somebody's post: "But Squad promised there would be a KSP 2!"

[HebaruSan]

1 hour ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

In the KSP discussions on Steam (I know, I know; not the most reliable place for information). Read the KSP Making History thread. As the discussion goes on (though "discussion" may be a strong word; I think it was mostly one guy complaining that he wasn't going to receive the expansion for free; his rants are pretty comical), Sal_Vager (this is just before he left; literally, like a couple of days before) pretty much confirms that there will be a KSP2. It's just a one-line post, but it's stated in a way (in the context of the discussion) that I think can only be interpreted as a confirmation.

Got a link?

[danfarnsy]

2 hours ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

Sal_Vager (this is just before he left; literally, like a couple of days before) pretty much confirms that there will be a KSP2.

I found the quote. I get what you're saying, which is why I won't post a link, but there is no "pretty much confirms" anything about anything. Future plans that a former Squad employee hints at are the worst kind of rumor-mill, wishlist, barracks gossip that our community has ever been hyped up about. Good rule of thumb? Don't believe anything until you see it, and even then only half the time.

[Majorjim!]

On 05/13/2017 at 4:40 AM, regex said:

it's not like someone isn't going to mod it to make it work better anyway.

KSP in a nutshell.

[Majorjim!]

18 hours ago, regex said:

I don't expect "realism" from vanilla KSP so I literally don't care whether there are bolts on a pressure tank.

The DLC is an official mod not part of the core vanilla game.

7 hours ago, Iamsodarncool said:

What? Where can I read these rumors and whispers?

LOL no such thing exists or ever will sadly.

[klgraham1013]

40 minutes ago, Majorjim! said:

The DLC is an official mod not part of the core vanilla game.

When did expansions from the developers become mods?

Semantics: The most dangerous weapon.

Edited May 14, 2017 by klgraham1013

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

6 hours ago, danfarnsy said:

I found the quote. I get what you're saying, which is why I won't post a link, but there is no "pretty much confirms" anything about anything. Future plans that a former Squad employee hints at are the worst kind of rumor-mill, wishlist, barracks gossip that our community has ever been hyped up about. Good rule of thumb? Don't believe anything until you see it, and even then only half the time.

I know it as well. Which is why I didn't post a link to it last night. I was following that conversation real-time (when the expansion was announced I was incredibly excited, and jumping back and forth from this forum to Steam to check all the chatter), and it was just what I felt as I followed along. He didn't comment again, though a couple people asked for a confirmation, and it just hung out there to give that impression.

I've read other chatter about a supposed sequel as well, but a rumor is just that, as you point out. It would make sense, though. But maybe it's another game that they're working on. I have no idea. But they've gotta be working on something, right? I doubt they're putting out the expansion to grab some cash and split town.

But maybe it is just another game. Anyway, I'll try not to mention it again. I'll just quietly hope for the best.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Cpt Kerbalkrunch

[Kerbart]

8 hours ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

In the KSP discussions on Steam (I know, I know; not the most reliable place for information). Read the KSP Making History thread. As the discussion goes on (though "discussion" may be a strong word; I think it was mostly one guy complaining that he wasn't going to receive the expansion for free; his rants are pretty comical), Sal_Vager (this is just before he left; literally, like a couple of days before) pretty much confirms that there will be a KSP2. It's just a one-line post, but it's stated in a way (in the context of the discussion) that I think can only be interpreted as a confirmation (...)

Or perhaps he was just mentioning sequel because the discussion veered off in the direction of "extension," "add-on" vs "sequel" (as the-lack of-ability of the DLC to run without the original game was discussed)

The way I read it, was "that would be a sequel and that is not what this is"

perhaps I'm wrong and S. disclosed something he shouldn't be disclosing (DLC would see lower slaes if KSP2 is around the corner) but I cannot imagine Squad having the resources to develop a new KSP from scratch.

[RoverDude]

Going to leave this out there.  

When someone asks a question and a developer says NDA, or says that they can neither confirm nor deny, or they go silent... it is us quite literally following our NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement).   It in no way confirms nor denies any theories or questions regarding future plans.  Sometimes you guys have good guesses.  More often than not, they are wildly inaccurate with no basis in reality.  Sometimes they are so incredibly wrong, we would love nothing more than to step in and quietly correct you guys.  But in all cases, the answer is the same.  We have an NDA, and can neither confirm nor deny anything until approved by Squad.

Too often, with any of the examples above, people insert their own wishful thinking and turn a 'Sorry, no comment' into a "*wink nudge* I can't say anything but draw your own conclusions *hint hint*".    This is harmful, and sets people up for disappointment and misplaced rage.  

On the flip side, folks complain that we keep our cards pretty close.  This is because stuff can change.  And given that anything said in an official capacity is taken as a hard commitment (and history has shown folks get pretty grouchy when plans change), it's best to only reveal those things after we're pretty sure they are not going to change (drastically).  Though the usual caveats apply - everything is subject to change based on player feedback, direction of the business, QA, experimentals, or any one of the numerous monkey wrenches that tend to get thrown into the development process (and why I don't envy @nestor his job )

As for anything regarding KSP or Squad not explicitly laid out in a KSP Weekly or unambiguously by a *current* developer:  Don't feed the rumor mill, and take anything with a really large grain of salt.  Hype, speculation, and discussion are all fine and good, but let's not all get too caught up in trying to read the tea leaves.

 

 

Edited May 14, 2017 by RoverDude

[SpaceOdissey]

Those engines are so BEAUTIFUL, hope they had a lot of thrust!

[tater]

7 minutes ago, SpaceOdissey said:

Those engines are so BEAUTIFUL, hope they had a lot of thrust!

I'm pretty sure an F-1 analog has rather a lot of thrust.

[klesh]

2 minutes ago, tater said:

... an F-1 analog...

 

That begets the question of is this an F1 Engine, or will it be something like the L-1F Wildebeest

[regex]

3 hours ago, Majorjim! said:

The DLC is an official mod not part of the core vanilla game.

So I suppose you're expecting "realism" from it? I'm not, this is a game that still uses "units" of fuel instead of an actual measurement of volume and boasts a toy solar system that cannot physically exist.

[Raptor9]

I generally avoid commenting on KSP Weekly threads outside of the occasional excitement-driven "That new part looks cool" post.  However, after seeing how consistently the KSP Weekly thread devolves into a knife-throwing contest, I want to humbly point out something (to no one in particular): Kerbal Space Program has been a game that has reached across many communities, nations, and even professional space agencies...but it is just a game.  I know that may sound overly simplistic considering the level of impact it has had on not just people's lives but also the amount of times KSP has proven to be a bridge between the vast international public and real-life space agencies such as NASA, ESA, and SpaceX.

But let's have a down-to-Kerbin pragmatic look at how the future of KSP impacts all of our lives.  Whether KSP continues to be a sound financial investment for Squad or not, their decisions as a company will determine whether or not Squad employees will be able to keep their jobs and support their families.  How KSP impacts us as players is how we are entertained.

Now there is some middle-ground there, such as professional Twitch streamers that may rely on KSP as a means to generate income.  But the main message I'm trying to portray is to maintain perspective.  Let's remember that the KSP development team at Squad need to make the best decisions to ensure the survival of their company.  If KSP (as a product) goes away, only our entertainment is affected; however Squad's employment is affected.

TL;DR - We play fictional space game for fun, Squad plays real-life Game Dev Tycoon with real-world consequences

Edited May 14, 2017 by Raptor9

[klgraham1013]

10 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

snip

You could say...there are Full Life Consequences.

[Pthigrivi]

2 hours ago, regex said:

So I suppose you're expecting "realism" from it? I'm not, this is a game that still uses "units" of fuel instead of an actual measurement of volume and boasts a toy solar system that cannot physically exist.

For the love of god this isn't Human Space Program. This is a game in which cartoon aliens go to space. It always has been. Its designed to be fun for kids and adults alike, to teach some real world physics in a deliberately manageable, toy-like fashion. Sure, there are elements of hard science and real history that it draws from and that's totally cool and adds to the learning experience, but its also a balance. If you're feeling so self-serious that there is literally nothing about the fun, cartoon nature of the game that you can handle go play orbiter or mod the stupid green guys out. But stop imagining that all of sudden the game is going to become something it isn't and never was. 

[regex]

6 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

For the love of god this isn't Human Space Program. This is a game in which cartoon aliens go to space. It always has been. Its designed to be fun for kids and adults alike, to teach some real world physics in a deliberately manageable, toy-like fashion. Sure, there are elements of hard science and real history that it draws from and that's totally cool and adds to the learning experience, but its also a balance. If you're feeling so self-serious that there is literally nothing about the fun, cartoon nature of the game that you can handle go play orbiter or mod the stupid green guys out. But stop imagining that all of sudden the game is going to become something it isn't and never was. 

What exactly does this have to do with the conversation? Did you put my comment in context or are you just knee-jerking because someone said that big scary "realism" word?

Please take a moment to reflect on your reply to my post and how it has precisely zero to do with the current conversation. Thank you.

[Frybert]

Alright folks, deep breaths and back on topic please.

[Pthigrivi]

5 minutes ago, regex said:

What exactly does this have to do with the conversation? Did you put my comment in context or are you just knee-jerking because someone said that big scary "realism" word?

Please take a moment to reflect on your reply to my post and how it has precisely zero to do with the current conversation. Thank you.

Look, Im very happy that you've found ways to mod the game to your liking. Given that I just don't know why discussions about the stock game need to be flooded with 'pft-whatever' grumbling about toy physics and lego parts and how Squad is constantly insulting our intelligence. Sorry to get snippy but christ. 

[Majorjim!]

1 hour ago, regex said:

So I suppose you're expecting "realism" from it? I'm not, this is a game that still uses "units" of fuel instead of an actual measurement of volume and boasts a toy solar system that cannot physically exist.

he he, no of course not. You misunderstood as I think I was not clear in my post. I was just stating that the DLC is not 'stock', not part of the core vanilla game. Nothing more.

[regex]

Just now, Majorjim! said:

he he, no of course not. You misunderstood as I think I was not clear in my post. I was just stating that the DLC is not 'stock', not part of the core vanilla game. Nothing more.

Well, yeah, that's obvious.

[Majorjim!]

4 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

When did expansions from the developers become mods?

Semantics: The most dangerous weapon.

It is an official mod. Ie, not part of the the stock game. If it was everyone would get it. For free.

Just now, regex said:

Well, yeah, that's obvious.

See my reply above, as for some it is not.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Majorjim!

[cfds]

Will the expansion add some kind of "real solar system"? For the stock system, a Saturn-5 is _slightly_ overpowered (unless you do want to visit Mun, Minmus, Bop, Pol and Vall in one go...) and a F-1 engine seems quite pointless as a consequence.

[panzer1b]

I think the new parts are pretty nice, and the few personal issues with them i can always photoshop out (not a big fan of that green color on engine butt that seems random and doesnt fit with any other stock KSP part).  Granted i dont care one bit about the other things in the DLC (mission builder is kinda pointless when i play sandbox all day and make up my own missions as i actually have an imagination and creativity), i think ill probably get it just to support a game that i really enjoy as its arguably my fav game atm, especially since its unique in that i can do anything from arcade style combat flight sim (BDA + planes/tanks/flak guns) to starship battles (and even the very rare occasional peaceful mission that doesnt involve vaporizing something), at least when using the correct mod.

That said, my one biggest issue with this game over the last year or so has been the utter lack of old part overhauls.  While im not one to say the old art is worthless, id really like to see some sort of consistency in the game, and right now its all over the place with parts from porkjet, nova, and other developers thrown into the mix with little thought on how they'd look together.  The biggest issue is really the modeling, which is completely broken in a few places (mk1 and mk1-2 pod are prolly the 2 biggest eyesores to the point i NEVER use them unless its a pirate/rebel/redneck vessel that i intentionally want to look like it came out of a garbage can that was in a garbage pile) and could seriously use an overhaul.  Especially annoying is the fact that (i may be wrong as i dont know everything thats being worked on) it seems that DLC parts are being made to look good, and most of the old parts are basically being left behind to be forgotten.  I understand the DLC is priority, but id really love to see the mk1-2 pod redone in a similar style to that capsule that was released last week in the art preview.  That feature alone would really make KSP 100 times better and more enjoyable, where every part was at least somewhat good looking and most of all didnt look off when combined with other parts. 

That said, its probably nothing more then a dream of mine that will never be done, a point where every stock part looks reasonably together and there are no more obviously broken models that dont even match up correctly (why do some of the old pods have different sized end connectors that mook terrible with anything attached but the parachutes that are too small anyways or the 1.2m docking port that is also too small for proper 1.2m connection)...

[Kerbart]

50 minutes ago, cfds said:

Will the expansion add some kind of "real solar system"? For the stock system, a Saturn-5 is _slightly_ overpowered (unless you do want to visit Mun, Minmus, Bop, Pol and Vall in one go...) and a F-1 engine seems quite pointless as a consequence.

Perhaps it's a scaled down Saturn 5? (Hint: take a good look at the LM pictures from a few weeks ago)