Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mcwaffles2003

  1. Well Im happy you found the reason. Do you remember which file? Could be helpful in the bug reports I wasn't taking you at 100% seriousness but I assume you were trying to make a point of some sort, [snip]? Your point here wasn't a jab at the OPs statement about mindset changing and how that's not possible when the game is literally unplayable? Which is extrapolating OPs point well beyond its intention to make a point of your own.... But hey if people use sarcasm then it makes sense that no one should contradict that opinion and its intent leaving it out out of the realm of critique.. [snip]
  2. Uhh... no... it hasn't. This planet has never been in the game and I suggest you seek immediate help for your hallucinations
  3. Landing gear are unstable while retracted Windows 10 5800X, 1080 ti, 32GB RAM
  4. Its discovered because of a bug... but the KSC following us through space shows us something important... water can exist in this game as a separate terrain as opposed to only a sea level layer. Surprised I haven't seen someone mention this yet. So theoretically we could build lakes at the top of mountains...
  5. Windows 10 5800X, 1080 ti, 32GB RAM little light circles can be found in shadowed areas jumping around Log: https://github.com/mcwaffles2003/KSP-2-log/new/main
  6. Could be nice, but having exact piece lengths for these parts matters a lot for symmetry and higher part count matters for simulating flexibility
  7. Uhh, no it hasn't, Dres is new and there was no such planet in KSP 1, are you crazy? I did now, not much changed
  8. I think you're extrapolating a bit here. I don't think anyone's saying it's okay that a game literally becomes unplayable to the point that you cant even interact with it. I believe the objective of this thread was to point to those trying large missions or complex builds with a clearly nonperformant game as though it were stable. @TundraThat's genuinely a bummer and I hope you can find a way to get the game working again and it's strange that even a full uninstall doesnt help when you've had the game able to play before. What kind of system are you playing it on?
  9. I'd prefer a larger overarching narrative not be present. I'd like the planets and colony gameplay mechanics be enough to give people the drive. City:Skylines doesn't need story, Planet coaster doesn't need story, MSFS2020 doesnt need story, and I don't see why KSP 2 does. That said, little tidbits here n there letting they player know the universe has existed before we the players arrived is nice, I don't think it should be the drive, but as long as it stays vague I think it could be something cool.
  10. So I wen't to the new planet thats in KSP 2, think its called Dres In going there I landed on it and looked up at the rings... They are thin and tiny... but pretty. But then I thought, hey, lets go crash into them (fully expecting to not actually crash). As I got close to the rings I noticed its made of little non-interactive bits flying by, how neat is that? But then I went on to make my orbit the same as the rings and I noticed everything still flies by at the same speed. I get that this is just a cinematic for them and Im happy the rings have stuff in them and I know now isn't the time to be adding little BS features... but I hope this changes in time so that the stuff in the rings moved at its actual velocity instead of being an environmental render or animated skin or something. Also, happy the rings aren't just a flat image in space...
  11. This is still presuming the state of the game from short clips which is what @CastleKSide was getting at. You're talking about the state of the game 3 years ago from cherry picked clips, you have no clue what the actual state of the game was 3 years ago. So comparing what we have now to then isn't really possible Also, as data miners have found, there is a LOT more built in this game than we currently get to interact with. Those systems are just detached currently as the devs want to limit the scope of our play (I believe they want to find all the bugs in what we've been given before they move on to systems that depend on the mechanics we are presented with now)
  12. What is this EA build? I believe it is just the absolute bare minimum most basic functions of the game with no purpose beyond giving us an idea of what the game is and finding the most basic bugs in the game. I believe that much of the upcoming features in the roadmap are already developed to a similar level of performance and polish (which isn't much but the basic features are there). When will this game be released? My absolute amateur opinion is that the game will complete the roadmap in about 2 years, I think the phase 1 we are in will last several months as we find bugs, receive patches, find more bugs etc until the base game is in a playable and performant state. When Science is added I am assuming the patching process will take less time as I believe the science system will be less complex comparatively to phase 1. I think the colonies update will put us in a similar situation as we are now. I think colonies will have an assortment of hilarious or frustrating bugs depending on your patience and sense of humor. I cant wait to see peoples colonies they've meticulously build get stomped like a sand castle by the kraken. The Interstellar update I believe will go smooth as I don't think it will add many new systems, just new planets/star systems and engines which should all be dependent on systems in the game right now being fixed. The exploration update adding resources and logistics systems I bet will be buggy as again, like the colonies update, it will be introducing new mechanics to the game. Supply routes will disappear and scouted patches dense in minerals will have nothing in them. The mechanics to retrieve resources will be be exploited to the utmost and a lot of balancing will occur. Finally, the multiplayer update I think will be a hilarious crapshoot as connection issues become great concern and people phase in and out of others realities possibly destroying plenty of thing (it will be a great time and meme content will be heavy) What happened since this Alpha Build from 2019? Besides graphical changes and maybe better performance (new hardware would probably also run the old build better)? Possibly a lot, maybe even a near total rewrite of the game. Anything here from me would be purely speculation. Will the target systems specs drop dramatically - what is the plan? I think very likely. There seems to me a lot of inefficient processes going on and as those get worked out hardware requirements for the same performance should lower in kind. Some people on this forum I've talked to that work say they work in the industry have mentioned obvious graphical inefficiencies that can definitely be made more performant in time and the current state is predictable assuming its development stage. I think KSP 2 can either go the route of similar fidelity with greater performance, greater fidelity with a slight performance improvement, or somewhere in the middle (but I believe we are seeing the worst state the game will be in right now) What type of MP is planned for this game? They've already announced in the Matt Lowne interview that there will be 4 agencies players can play from and each agency can have up to 4 players working cooperatively. As far as time sync goes, anybodys guess still though many will argue for their preferred system no talk of the matter has been official. Why was the game released as EA and not as a pre-order with alpha/beta Access? no clue, semantics? Is the funding of this game secured? Do the sales of the EA Version in any form impact the future of funding? I doubt T2 will abandon a project they've sunk 10s of millions in so far very easily, I think we'll make it to 1.0 and sales after will tell us how much more we will get. I think if the game hits numbers like KSP 2 but faster after release we will see plenty of free updates and DLC made available in the coming years post 1.0 release. If sales don't show though I can see the game being left behind. (I don't work in the industry though so...) Why was the starting price for this EA game set so high - what are the chances of it going down to a more reasonable level before release? I think if they brought the price down too far a lot of people would just buy the game and ignore it only to play it closer to 1.0 at a steep discount hurting long term revenue. Also, I don't think IG necessarily wanted the game to get flooded with new players yet either as they probably want less total bug reports and ones of higher quality which would be more easily found amongst the more hardcore player base that would get this game at such a price tag knowing they will keep playing it no matter how it looks at the start. I think our community is uniquely capable of assisting the devs as a lot of people who play this game are engineers or engineering minded.. For instance, how many games have successful mods that introduce coding as a mechanic to play the game (kOS)? I think people like that will be of the greatest assistance to the devs as a whole and even the current community manager said our community is less likely to threaten murdering devs and instead write a short angry essay about a bug they encountered and how to specifically reproduce it with speculations as to what may be causing it (the entire forum right now).
  13. So would it be better in your opinion if the game was just not released yet into EA?
  14. Well yeah... the games not finished. I'm still hyped for when it is finished and expect the game to function much better than its' predecessor, but for now Im just treating EA like an interactive dev diary. My expectations for the final game aren't lowered because EA isn't what my expectations were projected at. But hey, I guess optimists will be optimists regardless of the situation, but at least I'm enjoying the time I'm having. Also, this wasn't in KSP 1 :
  15. Flew threw the rings of the new planet they added This is gorgeous...
  16. Agreed, I feel like they have a bit more character to them overall. Though the expanding plumes in space in KSP 2 are nice.
  17. While optimizing my dragster I walked away before it loaded and when I came back I saw Bill was on an adventure. Reverted and recorded it. This time he went in a different direction and just watched it through.
  18. Same, I don't expect this game to be KSP 1 cause it isn't KSP 1. Things are about to get much weirder and unintuitive for a bit when the genuinely new type of content comes out. For now I get that things get funky in space and when trying to make larger missions so instead I've been working with low count ships and land vessels, playing in a region I don't normally focus on. The game has issues with high part numbers and attachments? Make simple things.. This games in it's infancy and Im playing it with that in mind instead of finding the extremes and getting mad when I find the outer boundaries aren't that far yet
  19. I mean there's not much new as it is, the game in its current state is just a basic foundation and I don't believe it's really representative of the scope the rest of the game will encompass. We've been shown the incomplete current state of the base game with none of the features applied. When more features appear and less bugs exist I think player #s will rise in turn
  20. I like them, they're a good preface to the journey we are going to go on. The game is currently in the worst state it will ever be in and it will only get better. We've seen what they remade of KSP1, after science that will be where KSP 1 stopped. Everything after is new ground. Sure we got it early... but I'd prefer that to having nothing and still waiting and wonder what touching the game is like. Dev updates aren't just videos and posts now, we can finally interact with what they've been working on. So long as they keep working on it I see some cool stuff ahead.
  21. the ellipses that makeup orbits are conic sections, hence patched conics. 3 body gravity would not be made of ellipses, nor is it predictable in the way patched conics are
  22. This is being paranoid >.> There's 10's of pages of user submitted bugs on the forums, were you expecting them to list every bug in a short novel or something? Idk how the devs could have more blatantly shown the game has bugs. They openly stated about bugs before release as you referenced (what studio does even that?), they had streamers record during unrestricted play which showed a bunch of bugs, they releases a minimum specs list beyond any other game to date, and everyone on the forum knew there were going to be lots of bugs And now people are angry that the game has a lot of bugs, as if no one had the capacity to sit a day and see what the games state is before buying it or getting their money back refunding it after personally verifying the resounding chorus around the interwebs screaming the game has performance issues and bugs. What more needed to be done to alert the community that this game would have a bunch of bugs on release? I feel like people wouldn't be happy if Nate sat on camera, stared the camera dead on and repeated "the game has bugs" like a mantra for 30 minutes
  • Create New...