Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alexoff

  1. Imagine how fun it would be if, at a high level of development in KSP2, enemy red tomatoes' starships flew into our system...
  2. Apparently the trees are either part of the space center, or the beginning was filmed on another build. Clouds from space are not so interesting. Perhaps they stayed on another build too.
  3. And where are the clouds, trees and good fps?
  4. So what about price localization? Exchange rates are not very stable this year
  5. This is plagiarism, I posted this news a few days earlier!
  6. Here it is! KSP 2 Dev Diary #15
  7. There are 35 parts for wings in the game, I think they can be converted into 5-7 procedural parts. 11 solar panels that can be turned into 3. Probably, the number of tanks can still be reduced by 3 times and there will be 200+ parts from the original game. But of course I would love to look at new details, for example, a large command module, I would look at the IVA mode. There are probably a million reasons why we shouldn't be shown this.
  8. Twice as many as in KSP1! Although not sure if this is enough for parts for bases and megaships
  9. Now the mammoth is almost no different from the mainsail
  10. Is this video shot in the game or in the editor? The engine lying on its side cannot be in this state, it must turn down the exhaust pipe
  11. My friend once said that children should dream of becoming homeless. When they grow up, their dream will come true or everything will be even better for them. As I wrote, the main problem of KSP2 is disgusting PR. First silence, then a deafening announcement and a promise to release the game in less than a year, an interview with the developers. Wow, it's time to abandon KSP1 and wait for a new game, I want it! And then the news that the team was reorganized, the previous leaders were fired. Then the game was delayed, we saw some very basic things on the forum, for example, the texture of kerbals. Now they show us almost nothing and another delay of the game. From the outside, we can confidently say that the development of the game is not going as expected, and it is taking twice as long as expected. I'd really like to know what else can be done on the planets, excepting to stick a flag and jump.
  12. What is absurd in comparing the graphic performance of planets or spaceships? After all, this is similar to declaring the comparison of facial animations in HalfLife 2 and Mass Effect Andromeda as absurd. After all, in HalfLife 2 the player travels along the corridor and does not have the possibility of alternative passage, which means that facial animations cannot be compared. We are not comparing the dialogue system or RPG component of KSP2 and Starfield, because it is obvious that they will not be in KSP2, and it may be good that they will not be.
  13. Why is it possible to discuss the shortcomings of any games, but you can not compare the graphics of KSP 2 with any other games? And if the graphics in KSP2 were better than in Starfield, would you also say that this is pointless to discuss? It's enough to just accept the fact that in KSP2 the graphics won't strike us with cyberpunk or Starfield looks, but for rocket science fans this is not so important. Or walking around the city on the other side of Kerbin.
  14. Well, it may look prettier, but it does not affect the gameplay in any way. The terrain is more rugged on other planets, but on Kerbin as a whole as usual. It certainly sounds great that it will not be more boring than before. We don’t know what will happen to the resources, but you know from somewhere that this is no worse than cities and other things. We know that this is exactly what KSP1 would not have been without. It's like shooting in the doom, no one will buy the game without it. The question is how well it will be done, and the other question is what else will be, which we would not see in a game with a bunch of mods. But when compared with other RPGs, there are few such elements. Compared to VTMB, cyberpunk is not an RPG at all. GTA was never going to become an RPG, but the creators of cyberpunk for some reason decided to compare themselves with GTA, no one forced them to do this. No, because attention was absorbed by other things, we simply did not have time to be distracted by the inhabitants, we were constantly in worries. The witcher had crossbows, swords, roaches and cities, which is almost the same as guns, cars and cities in terms of mechanics. With the latest patches in cyberpunk, there are significantly fewer people and cars. But, of course, that's not the point. It has more to do with whether the player is willing to put up with the issues in the game. If there is something cool in the game, then something is forgiven, if something is done very well, then we will not pay attention to many imperfections. But these problems can be seen if you discard emotions after some time after the game. The plot in the Witcher is good, the plot in cyberpunk is good too (the issues of the plot in both cases are similar, towards the end of the game some kind of stupid nonsense began), the plot in GTA is so-so. The graphics are pretty good everywhere. So you can compare KSP2 with something in some areas. We have almost a year ahead of us! Everything must be discussed! And so it's all meaningless, of course. In the end, we will sit in front of monitors and move our fingers on the keyboard to change the color of the pixels. There are no kerbals in nature and no one will fly to Dres, it all happens in our imagination.
  15. And what exactly do biomes, scientific experiments and resource extraction mean in KSP 2? I don't remember the details from the developers. If it's like in KSP 1 - getting numbers out of thin air, then this is a fairly straightforward mechanic that developers will spend very little time on. And cities, caves and other places of interest in Starfield will spend a million times more time and effort. I think that we can compare some large parts of the gameplay. Starfield will have huge beautiful planets filled with all sorts of different things. Will the planets in PCB 2 have anything other than the same surface textures to the horizon and one boring easter egg? We do not know. But I haven't heard of any interactive objects in the game. The fact that the game was postponed for almost three years greatly increased expectations. And there was the same problem with cyberpunk: the living world is no worse than in GTA, the developers told us. In The Witcher 3, the world was not very alive, but no one cared because of the lack of incredible expectations and the presence of a beautiful story and a million good quests. Of course, in KSP 2 there will be something so interesting that it will outweigh the lack of graphics on the planets and we will not pay attention to this either. But it is not forbidden by law to compare parts of the game.
  16. The fact that you can build quite realistic rockets in the KSP is a definite plus of the game, without this the game would not exist at all! But there are some principles for creating generated planetary surfaces in other games. Somehow the developers were able to create them? Why not make it at least as good in KSP 2? Does the presence of real realistic rockets somehow prevent the grass on Kerbin from swaying in the wind? Such conversations are reminiscent of stories that you can not compare Cyberpunk2077 with GTA 3.
  17. Looks great compared to what? Compared to KSP 1 from 2012? Besides one texture, multiplied to the horizon, and stones with the same textures, we don’t see anything else on the planets. There are cities on the planets in Starfield. The resolution of the surfaces of the planets corresponds to the quality of the textures in games 2005-2008. By the way, they also look great, crysis for example. Parallax is great, but the resource consumption of graphical mods is incredible, cyberpunk at max settings requires less.
  18. I think everyone will agree that KSP is not about graphics at all, compared to Star Citizen or No Man Sky, our game is outdated by at least 10 years.
  19. Absolutely agree! I think that the developers should no longer tell us anything about the game, because this can spoil the plot and the ending!
  20. Paying for beta testing is too cheeky, although some companies do this for those who pre-ordered the game in the ultra deluxe edition. I hope KSP 2 will not come to such a disgrace. In hindsight, I would say version 1.2 was the most complete, made by fans of the game before they left the company in 2016. After that, there were few good innovations and many bugs, many still have not been fixed.
  21. With beta, there are two extreme situations for many. If the game is already playable then many players will decide not to buy the release version, but stay on the beta version. This is wasted money! And if the beta is buggy, then the PR will be bad, because the game was supposed to be released in the spring of 2020 and the question arises - what did they want to release then and what have they done over the past two years? But most likely, a couple of months before the release, the game will be given to several YouTubers and they will fly to Mun and somewhere else. Something similar happens with 99% of games, open beta versions for finding bugs are very rare, especially in T2.
  22. I remember something similar happened with GTA 3, which was released by the same publisher as KSP 2. And also KSP 1.0 was almost the same beta version, which was completed for a long time, and the number of bugs in the game remains large, no one is going to fix them. The disgusting PR campaign of KSP 2 and the delay in the release for 3 years led to the fact that only true believers in the grandiose plans of the developers and the success of KSP 2 remained on the forum.
  • Create New...