Jump to content

pandaman

Members
  • Content Count

    2,332
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pandaman

  1. If this is in the wrong place then moderators please put it where it should be.

    I have just seen a news report on the Mexico City Metro overpass collapse.

    I would presume that all forum members hope that all Squad staff and their families and friends are safe and well.

    And may I also extend our thoughts and best wishes to all those involved and otherwise affected, irrespective of any connection to KSP.

  2. In general I tend to agree with what @Kerminator K-100 said.  It is not practical to have memorials to every astronaut or otherwise significant person, I think is nice to remember or acknowledge them in some way, but the issue of 'where to draw the line' will be ever present unfortunately. 

    Naming features after the people, and using artifacts as anomalies to mark notable missions could be one way to do it, and KSP1 does this to an extent already.

    Whilst I do feel the Armstrong Memorial structure  itself is a bit 'out of place' I do regard it as a place of 'homage'.  I seem to remember the devs saying that it was intended mainly as a commemoration of Apollo 11 so they will possibly add Collins' name to it, and Aldrin's too when the time comes.  Also, unlike many other equally important missions (e.g. Gagarin), Moon landings do have an actual 'place', or at least coordinates, for a 'marker' to be located.

  3. I haven't voted as I remain pretty neutral, but my initial thought was, 'Erm ---NO'.

    However, on realising the suggestion was for your own save only then I'm not really against it.  It would make perfect sense for Kerbin's features  to be named, and maybe also for obvious larger features on the Kerbol system bodies though.

    That said, I tend to think 'dev defined' names is probably the best plan overall.  And there is no reason why a player can't use 'pet's names for things anyway.

  4. 35 minutes ago, Master39 said:

    Now that I'm thinking about it it doesn't have to be a gameplay mechanic or something unlocked with time (I would hate not being able to land somewhere because I don't have the right EVA suit) but just a graphical settings, with the suits, modules and buildings change automatically to adapt to certain environments.

    As an idea this works for me.

    The logic behind having to develop a distinct 'high pressure environment' suit as opposed to a 'vacuum resistant' suit does make sense though. 

  5. Hi @Nirgal welcome.  And here's your first 'like'.

    IVAs are nice, but for me it's not such a big deal although many other players want much more of that, so if it's a practical thing to do then why not.  For me wandering around inside my ships or buildings is not really the focus of the game or what I want to do.

    The different 'levels' of EVA suit for different environments is an interesting idea, and very logical, I like it a lot.   But it would add another level of complexity which may or may not be worthwhile.  If it were limited to say 3 types max with the 'higher' levels as part of the ship's inventory that Kerbals automatically use when needed, and can't leave the ship if one isn't available, either because you forgot to bring them, or already being used by others, it could work.

  6. 7 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

    That sounds like a good idea. Having a window pop up would be annoying if the feature is near where you decide to do some long term operations thou. Maybe a floating name that is clickable or the name only shows in the info screen from whatever mechanic they use for resource hunting.

    Yes, I agree, the 'mechanics' of the pop up or label would need to avoid it being too intrusive or annoying.

  7. Assuming that KSP2 will include references to notable people and missions, in the form of named features, memorials, anomalies etc...

    Why not have a 'pop up' menu/window appear, when a kerbal (or probe?) is suffiently close, that gives a very brief 'introduction' to the people or events it is mamed after?  This could then either give a link to a more in depth 'KSPedia' article, and/ or hints as to what to search for out of game.

    So, for example...  Harvester Massif in KSP1,  Getting within say 50m of the dish brings up a window...

     'Harvester Massif, named after the original  creator of KSP'  - Click 'Tell Me More' button for more information'.

    This opens up a KSPedia page with more details,  and (if relevant) a list of things to search for away from the game. 

    This could engage players curiosity, and give them pointers as to what to search for to learn more about the named persons or events, without needing everything on an 'in game' enyclopedia.

    Edit...  Not sure if a 'pop-up' window is the best method, as it could get distracting.  Maybe a small 'icon' that shows in map mode and/or the 'Kerbnet' window (a bit like anomaly question marks) would be less intrusve.  And rather than opening a window or link immediately it adds it to a 'Read later' list to be browsed at your leisure.

     

  8. In general I tend to agree with what @Kerminator K-100 said.  It is not practical to have memorials to every astronaut or otherwise significant person, but I think it would be nice to remember or acknowledge them in some way.  Naming features after the people, and using artifacts as anomalies to mark notable missions could be one way to do it, and KSP1 does this to an extent already.

    Whilst I do feel the Armstrong Memorial  itself is a bit 'out of place' I do regard it as a place of 'homage'.  I seem to remember the devs saying that it was intended mainly as a commemoration of Apollo 11 so they will probably add Collins's name to it, and Aldrin too when the time comes.

  9. I don't think it matters that the planets and moons will not be 'the same' as KSP1.  The fundamentals of the Kerbol system won't change (afaik), the details will naturally need to be different in some ways because they are improving the graphics and surface details, and tweaking the colours etc is a part of that process.

    From what I have seen so far, I have no doubt they will look good.

     

  10. 3 minutes ago, FruitGoose said:

    Because as I said it’s never down for maintenance and it keeps your purchases in a library (all games not just KSP). When those things are something the alternative doesn’t do (ie the main site) I don’t think it’s so unreasonable to imply it’s better at it? (Although i actually said a major advantage). 

    You don’t use steam for your own reasons so would never agree with any pro-steam statement anyway so the argument is pretty pointless.

    But to address your gifts comment. Yes you’re right might have been gifts. Might be a collector. Might be mentally ill. From now on I will be sure to list every possible consequence of every possible scenario to avoid confusion :confused:
     

     

    Yeah, whats 'best' for one person may not work so well for another.  

    I do have a Steam account, and appreciate how it can be good for those with several games, for the reasons you gave, but as I have so few I hardly use it, and would prefer not to be forced to use it to play the single player game I needed it for.

  11. Perhaps naming terrain features after such notable people would make more sense rather than a large artificial structure.

    Arnstrong Crater,  Collins Crater etc.

    Perhaps an anomaly (similar to the 'curiosity cam' on Duna) to mark the landing site instead of the memorial used in KSP1.  Like a half buried descent stage.

  12. 1 hour ago, FruitGoose said:

    :o how/why?! This is one major advantage of using Steam; that never goes down and it saves your purchases.

    Why is it you think Steam is so much better? 

    Maybe the multiple purchases were through choice, like for other people as gifts, or just because... reasons.

    I bought it once from thè KSP store (8 years ago) and never lost my purchase.  The only issues I have had are slower download at a busy time, and the occasional 'maintenance' outage.

    I agree though, a bit of communication would help.  They may not have an ETA to give, but a brief explanation would be welcome.

  13. I don't think they will completely.  I expect many, if not most players, will switch over though.

    I have a feeling that the two 'games' will be different enough in 'focus', and have a different enough feel, to carry on in parallel for quite a while.

    KSP1 will most likely cease development at some point, but I bet some will still play it.

  14. I think there is a valid argument for undersea exploration, and therefore some appropriate parts etc so that it can be done 'properly'.  

    Several places will have oceans.  Exploring those oceans 'for science' is just as valid as exploring the dry bits, just different (and probably a little harder).  By enabling undersea operations the gameplay aspect is enhanced by having extra stuff to do and discover, as well as not rendering a large portion of any planets surface area un-useable.

  15. I have two theories..  

    First would be 2, possibly 3 additional solar systems at launch.   Each with 5 to 8 planets and a selection of moons.

    Second, would be maybe 5 or 6 additional systems.  One with 7 to 10 planets (+ moons), and the others  with upto 5 planets (+ moons), but generally more 'exotic'.

  16. I seem to recall that it was confirmed officially somewhere that this will not be possible.

    My thoughts...  Even if it was somehow possible to load up a KSP 1 save (with craft automatically 'converted') all of the planetary surfaces are going to be re-modelled, and therefore different everywhere, however similar the basic geography may appear, so anything on the surface could potentially be a major problem.

    There may be a chance of a mod that can sort all that out reliably, but frankly I very much doubt it. 

  17. @Martian Emigrant.  I get what you mean, I suggested the same thing not too long ago.

    You want it smaller for 'normal' use, but then you want it larger to help with more 'delicate' tasks.  The little 'hide' tab is great, but it does what it says and hides it (as it should).   Whereas an extra toggle to switch between two custom sizes would allow that functionality too.  Or perhaps use the existing 'hide' tab to cycle through the three options to avoid an extra button.

  18. The  'Unity sucks, shouldn't KSP use a different engine?' question seems to be one of those 'grass looks greener over the fence issues to me.  You may possibly get greener grass over there, but will the flowers in the borders grow as well?

    Sure, all game engines will have their strengths and weaknesses, but changing to a different  one (apart from the immense amount of work involved) could just as easily create new unforseen issues  that are worse than those that are improved.

×
×
  • Create New...