KerbolExplorer

NMS: They pretty much made a sequel to the original game at this point. KSP2: Devs took 3 weeks to get a patch out for a botched EA release. Both games haven't had the best of starts, and I'm sure both dev teams are doing their best, but you simply can't compare NMS to KSP2 at this point

Nice to see it's a long one!, Can't wait to try it out!

It's not news that updates are coming slow, for a game in early access I am vastly disappointed not in the bugs but it the lack of action fixing them, yes I know that the devs are hard at work fixing them, but it's been two weeks, and the game is exactly the same as it was when it came out. Most early access games would ha e been updated, a few times by now(take Son's of the forest, the game came out in ea a day before ksp2 and has already had a few updates, other early access games like subnautica below zero had updates when they were released). "But Kerbol!" I hear you say "The devs said that they are going to fix them in a big update!, be patient!" And to this comes my suggestion, an experimental development branch, where users can test the latest changes to the games code. That way the impatient users(me) can get the bug fixes earlier, but also catch new bugs and issues before they hit the main branch(and we have to wait a month for a bug fix). Experimental branches are common on early access, Ravenfield, Stranded Deep and both Subnauticas used them(Subnautica's received daily updates with the stuff the devs did that day) Microsoft flight simulator, while it is a complete game, uses a beta branch to test new updates(the devs had a history of breaking half the game after an update). TL:DR: Add a separate branch for users that gets updated more frequently and with minimal testing, users get the bug fixes earlier and find new bugs before they reach the main branch, win win) Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

Re-installed RSS+RO while waiting for ksp2 to mature, during my playthrough I made a mach 2.5 capable plane, mach 3 capable if you use the power of friendship (and a burnt engine) I though making planes with FAR would be a pain, but it turns out it's similar to stock, the flying is a bit different, but it's really fun!. (just don't pull too many G's at mach 2 or you'll be pulling that red handle)

Welcome to gaming on 2023, you are most likely to need a proper GPU now. That being said, KSP2 is nowhere near the graphical fidelity of needing an RTX card

Seems to be a general issue with the orbits, I've noticed timewarp can drastically change orbit, and the AP and PE can fluctuate without you doing anything.

- The soundtrack is absolutely stellar, I love that every planet has it's own theme for landing (Especially the drums on the Mun, it adds tension as it's likely to be the first place you land on) - The Skybox is lovely, love how it looks. - Kerbals having more variety, I like that they have different hair, but I'm not too fond of the asymmetrical eyes. Would like to see more surnames (Unpopular opinion ik)

Looking at the game requiring a 3080 for 1440p, I could see a 4090 struggle at 4k

5/10 I recall seeing your profile pic around, but that's about it

I'm fine with a game asking for an expensive card, as long as it is justified. In Cyberpunk's case the game is rendering an entire city, with it's people and such. KSP 2 however doesn't justify needing such specs to run, probably the 8492th time this has been said, but the game looks like KSP1 modded, and even with that it looks worse in several places (Compare KSP2's clouds to EVE's beta clouds). I get it's early access, optimization tends to be left behind, but the amount of red flags on this game is outstanding, first the huge delay (this was supposed to come out in 2020, with all of it's features), then the studio change stuff, and now specs being way to high than they should really be of course the game isn't out, so it could be(and I hope) the devs vastly overestimating what the game needs to run.

What resolution and fps are this specs based on?, an rtx3080 on recommended seems to high considering that the graphics aren't that groundbreaking

Been playing a ton of Il-2 lately, for those who don't know it's a flight sim set in ww2, been having some great fun in multiplayer with it And by fun I mean getting jumped by 2 spitfires and dying instantly.

Thanks for this!, really against having a launcher, inside my launcher

Steam itself is a launcher, has forums and is a source for news, is this really needed or useless bloatware?

I didn't find anything odd with the video on the segment, so I went straight to the audio(KSP has a spectogram easter egg, and it's a typical way of hiding stuff) sadly I didn't find anything odd when manipulating the audio tried changing speed, changing pitch and ol' reliable, reversing the audio, couldn't anything outside the ordinary. However, when I slowed it down the sound did remember me of one of a Helicopter's propeller, but I can't relate it to anything on the video segment. Left the initial spectogram here in case anyone can find anything interesting in it https://imgur.com/a/2so5JdB

Been pretty much all year flying fictional aircraft, for some reason it's fun

283

The Twin otter, it can pretty much go everywhere.

Thank you so much for these amazing years! I can't wait to see what KSP 2 has in store!

Do keep in mind that it's for an older KSP version so it might not work if you try to use it in the most recent version.

There is no exact release date yet, but according to Steam it will be sometime in 2021

Are you playing with mods?, I think Kopernicus makes the sandcastle appear always.

When is a thread decleared a megathread?

Loving the new commets. I arrived a bit to late at the end(we were at dres level orbit) to see the vapor up close.... Also I'm starting to really like the Xenon engines.

Thanks for the update!, it's good to know that devs are hearing us. I'm exited to see more info about the game!