Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shdwlrd

  1. That's not a good picture to infer scale from. If you use this one, you can better guesstimate the size of things.
  2. It doesn't matter game version, the concept is the same. Mods run outside but with the core software, which can lead to massive problems and poor performance. DLCs are considered a part of the core software and don't usually suffer from the same problems with increased performance. So if Intercept decides to add terraforming after release because of user demand. They spend thousands of man hours for the team to create, balance, and debug the expansion, it should be released for free? So the developer's shouldn't be paid for the time and energy put into the project? Intercept won't last long with that business model. They can't support a title for very long unless they find a way to pay for it.
  3. Mods won't be able to cleanly change the whole environment for a whole planet. Mods won't be able to cleanly expand on a gameplay mechanic. There's more than parts that can be done for DLC ideas. For example; you can use mods to add runways to Kerbin, but they look out of place most of the time because you can't edit the terrain. If a DLC added runways to Kerbin, the runways will look like they belong in the area because the terrain around the runways would be edited to help the assets fit better.
  4. 3rd paragraph, Paul discusses increasing the size of the playable space within the Kerbal universe to add more star systems to the game.
  5. It wouldn't be KSP without the ability to control every aspect of your flight. The devs also has said they increased the playable area substantially. Why increase the playable area if you were not going to utilize it?
  6. So you're wanting KSP2 to be delayed even further and have the possibility of becoming vaporware?
  7. that's a vast improvement from last years images.
  8. What's trivial to you maybe necessary to someone else. You may be able to do math in your head, I need a calculator or pen and paper. You may never need spell check, I rely on it. At the end of the day, if you want support after release, Intercept will have to find funding. So DLCs is the most palatable option for most people. You think of it milking money from the players. In the business sense, it's funding a continuing project. Remember, it's your choice to buy it or not. Of course you may not want support of KSP2 after release and Intercept to start a new project. Or is it you want Intercept to add everything that everyone suggests and further delay release until it becomes vaperware.
  9. The only cut scene that was mentioned was the launch count down, but it's supposedly optional if you want it or not.
  10. @SciMan You're comparing a badly configured 9th gen I7 desktop PC to an ultrabook classed processor. It's comparing apples to oranges. Even if the processor/GPU combo Valve is using (equivalent to a Ryzen 3 5000 series APU) can run most games at playable frame rates with reasonable details. (30+ fps, middle to high details) Most people wouldn't expect the Steam Deck to run anything like KSP completely perfectly anyway. It's basically an ultrabook. People who have played KSP on potatoe PCs or are not demanding perfect performance won't care anyway. They will except it as it is.
  11. With a screen that small, you could get away with running a game at 720 and get better performance.
  12. Valve did a video with a peek inside. I'm linking the LTT video because I couldn't find the Valve video. If someone else can find it, cool.
  13. Well, since it's a Willie's or CJ style, maybe just a cargo rack for the hood and some decorative gas cans and spare tire for the tailgate. The older styles of Jeeps didn't have all the crazy stuff like the modern Jeeps do. Oh, some extra lights, but those can be done easily. Just MM patch a duplicate of the Illuminator Mk1 with the proper scale and that should be it.
  14. I do understand that this is your opinion, but Nate has already said that there will be limits on dimensions and weights for the land based VAB and launchpads. The only VAB without limits is the orbital VAB found on orbital colonies. Which makes sense. You can only build so large in a building, whereas in space, there is no limits to size and mass.
  15. Have you looked at the takeoff weights for RL rockets? (Delta IV max takeoff weight is 566,855-1,613,784 lb, 257,000-732,000 kg depending on configuration. The STS was 4,498,000 lb, 2,041,166kg. The Soyuz is 680,400 lb, 308,624 kg. The SaturnV was 6.2 million lb, 2.8 million kg.) Have you looked at the OEW for some of the common commercial aircraft flying in the skies today? (The B737 MAX OEW is 99,360 lb, 45,070 kg. The B747-8 OEW is 485,300 lb, 220,128 kg. The A-320 OEW is 93,900 lb, 42,592 kg. The B777-2 OEW is 353,800 lb, 160,530 kg.) In real life, the vehicles that take us around the globe and into space are really heavy machines. I think Squad did an excellent job on properly representing the masses for the constructed crafts. The individual part masses may not make sense, but the combined masses do. I think you are over analyzing the USI is good statement. The implementation for USI sucks. What USI does well is there is only 2-3 steps that go from raw material to useful product with little or no intermingling of the intermediary products. (Remember that Factorio and DSP starts at 4 steps for the beginning level products and there is a ton on intermingling of the intermediary products. Why does Kerbal society and practices have to mimic the human society? Maybe the Kerbals have moved beyond the need for currency? Maybe the KSC is so well funded that the amount they spend isn't worth tracking? Maybe money doesn't matter for their want and need to explore space?
  16. I would be onboard for those style on DLCs. Not always, I've seen DLC's break the game. (Surviving Mars terraforming DLC was half broken.)
  17. I think I can see where you're going. Basically like Cities Skylines model of DLC. All the basic functionality is in the base game. The DLCs expand on the functionality and environment of certain areas of the game. To use your ocean example, when the game releases, Kerbin's ocean are as they are now, barren, lifeless environments. Basic and crude parts are available to explore it. The DLC gives the ocean fauna (plants, reefs and such) to make it more exciting to visit. More specialized parts to make it easier to explore the ocean floor.
  18. So you're suggesting that Intercept not include anything related to future tech, water exploration in the stock release? Or do you mean they have the basic support for future tech and water exploration upon release and expand on the tech later as a DLC?
  19. Mental note, don't visit Rask and Rusk unless you have a torch drive.
  20. With the conversations with the specific areas of the "career" mode. (Probably won't be named that.) I'm wondering on how to guide the new players without boring the veteran players? Does the game feed you missions step by step until you establish a base on the Mun and/or Minmus; then give you broad goals for the next step? Once you unlock new tech, do they have you do a couple familiarization missions (simulated or real life) before you can use it unlimitedly? At what point does the hand holding end and you're truly free to do what you want? How are you going to tie the resources into missions without it feeling limited? All resource systems can be abused unless they are limited in some way. But limiting resources will lead to unnecessary complexity and frustration and possibly a failure state in the early game. This is a tough nut to crack. There are many ways to do every part of the career system. None of them are wrong, but none seems to fit either.
  21. Depending on how patient you are, I would say it's possible.
  22. Patched conics with limited n-body simulation
  23. What's wrong with Legos? I can agree with procedural adapters. The selection of adapters in KSP sucks. Either for ascetic reasons or you really need to adapt two odd sizes, procedural adapters would be really handy to have.
  24. @SciMan so you personally would like several options for every part you can use in the game? I wouldn't envy your play through. As you said, too little complexity can be boring. But for the lazy or time strapped players, something that's not straightforward or is overly complicated will cause them to pass on the game. To use DSP for an example, I've completed about half of my Dyson sphere and haven't had time to go any further. I don't have time to wait or to increase my production rates. The same goes with Factorio. I've never built the rocket because the production gets too complicated. There has to be a balance to the complexity of the resource and production chains and the time it takes to complete them. USI or Pathfinder have acceptable production chains and resources without being overwhelming. If KSP2 does does something akin to one of the above mentioned mods, it would be complicated enough without feeling overwhelming with the resource collection and conversions.
  • Create New...