Missingno200

I'd find it hard to justify that price, unless it came with a joystick or something... I already find it difficult to justify 60 dollar games today. There's a reason why I had way more DS games than Xbox and Wii games.

It's the year ROBLOX released for open alpha so I'd say so

I wish you guys would stop relying on concurrent player counts as a meter for success, especially for singleplayer-only games. It's a horribly skewed and atrocious meter, as people will buy the game and then set it down once they feel they have completed it. It's a singleplayer-only, early access, controversial sequel experience. All three of those combined act as effectively a one-two-uppercut for any concurrent playercount. It'll most likely get way better as time goes on and they fix issues, with its peak no doubt being 1.0's launch week. The concurrent will likely STAY above KSP1's permanently once multiplayer is introduced, at least until MP is shutdown.

Definitely legacy, Windows spent 36 years trying to be backwards compatible with its very first version. It's why there's so many DOS-isms, and why DOS-era batch scripts still work to this day. Enterprises love that stuff, and so do I. But still, it's strange, no %lowappdata% or anything.

I was about to mention %LOCALAPPDATA% but it turns out that goes to Local, not LocalLow. Weird, I wonder why.

The actual quote is "we are going to kill the kraken." You shouldn't try to wrap reality just to fit your pessimistic views. Oh I got it wrong too, though mine is much closer to reality. And somehow I missed the fact you were replied to moments later. My apology.

Not proof enough. Similarity and reuse of assets are two totally different accusations. (Why are you even here? You're not Frostiken.) Then please, provide evidence. A part name that I can compare in both KSP1 and KSP2! There's plenty of parts that KSP2 does share with KSP1, but I can guarantee that I can show that the models and textures are totally different, thus sinking this asset reuse accusation once and for all.

And also completely false. 2 fold, actually. EULAs aren't legally binding(as of US law,) and also we literally have counter-evidence it wasn't built on top of KSP1. https://old.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/11b8s6f/i_looked_into_ksp2_code_here_is_what_ive_found/j9wm3dd/ Whether or not you believe it, the fact is that at least this Reddit post SPECIFIES what is different, which is more than dazoe ever said.

There's really no proof that the "extreme core fanbase" would've bought the game with or without the lego parts. I don't recall the extreme core fanbase even asking for the parts, actually, it was more the casual audience who jumped to the defense of the building style. The so called fanboys were more in favor of procedural EVERYTHING, including solar panels, structural parts, and of course tanks. Your second part's also a mess. It sounds like you're complaining about the reuse of old mechanics that were proven reliable from the previous game. I mean honestly, "the entire decision to bring back no unit limits in Command and Conquer Tiberian Sun was based on the demands of the extreme core fanbase, not because they wanted to make a new, interesting game with new, interesting design as a new, interesting installment." Or hell, how about "the decision to bring back the fire flower in Super Mario Bros 3 was based on the demands of the extreme core fanbase, not because they wanted to make a new, interesting game with new, interesting design as a new, interesting installment." You really sound like you just want to complain. You've made the claim! The burden of proof has fallen upon you! You're gonna need evidence to prove that they did this, because so far, it seems incredibly unlikely that they did.

Firstly, single core performance is a pretty big issue. That's why KSP2 is multithreaded. Secondly, that's not even the fault of lego design. That's the fault of using exclusively flexible connectors. They could take the Juno approach and then make all tanks merge into one(or have rigid connectors between them.) That would remove the flex and wobble if that was REALLY your problem. Actually, your argument doesn't seem to understand the problem isn't "lego parts", but rather unusual physics implementation, combined with a bottleneck.

Actually, this thread opened with "KSP2 is too much like modded KSP1." You're asking for RP or Juno. Lego stacking was a huge part of the appeal to KSP1. Furthermore, "limit creativity?" I disagree. Limitations breed creativity. Why would this suddenly limit creativity? We had this debate during the hype thread. It turns out, this was a HIGHLY controversial option and we couldn't come to a consensus. Someone brought up(at some point) that it's even ridiculous to suggest that lego stacking was a bad system, as it would emulate real life flexing, which happened quite a bit on old rockets. I don't recall that ever happening, but then again I admittedly only played KSP1 once in a blue moon back in the day.

Well, the former... I'm not sure what that's about, but the latter I can give an answer to:They didn't want to change that because that's what made KSP the game that it is. They were pretty upfront about making KSP2 a lot like KSP1, but with better onboarding, performance, and more features integrated in a very well balanced manner. So far, 2/3 are out, and the first one is still a bit of a stretch. Hoping that improves.

Oh so we get a marginally okay and a somewhat bad space simulator, instead of just one somewhat bad space sim, and the marginally okay one is only "complete" with 331 dollars worth of DLC? Yaaay... Looking forward to that one...

Timewarp stopped the spinning for a split second, and froze it like this...

I'm pretty sure they explicitly said they weren't going to add MJ in order to avoid overly simplifying every mission. I can't recall their exact words but it was something along the lines of "we don't want the game to play itself."