Jump to content


New Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


2 Neutral
  1. Admittedly, we are talking about planets for players to land on, and not story or puzzle-based content. What challenges do planets pose to players? Gravity, atmospheric conditions, terrain, distance from Kerbin, (and maybe in KSP2 with the inclusion of planetary rings) other objects in and around planets. I am sure there are many others, and with the addition of features like colony-building, many many more. Most (not saying that all) of these things are very easily incorporated into a procedural generation system. What if the procedural generation system uses static random sampling of a given set of very strict quality-checked variables to ensure that its planets aren't just bland floating rocks? [Realistically, most stuff out there is probably that] I understand the majority sentiment around procedural generation. It is negative because the procedural generation systems we have gotten have been bad. But proc-gen systems are everywhere in game design. Devs aren't going to meticulously place every single stone, mold every single mountain of every single planet. There are systems for that- strict systems- that ensure the end result is just as great (and for all intents and purposes as meaningful) as something hand-placed. It's simultaneously a roll of dice, and a thought-out, tested, designed process. Regardless, KSP2 wont have any procedural planetary generation systems, and I can't wait to see what wonderful things the devs will come up with in the planets we get. But, I do believe some form of procedural planet generation system in KSP2 could be, good.
  2. Not arguing with everyone's completely reasonable (and most likely correct) statements, but if "the ones that are in the game are visible in the sky" then KSP2's cosmic background is going to look really empty! The comment made in the video was probably an exaggeration then : ( You'd be surprised to see how diverse and robust random generation systems can be! Space Engine is, in my opinion, the single best planetary-procedural generation system because of its adherence to physics and unbelievable simulation diversity (check it out if you haven't yet, it has a free and a paid STEAM download). Given any large enough sample size, of course things will repeat, but that doesn't mean a good procedural generation system couldn't be introduced to KSP. It's literally the only way to allow you to "visit any star in the sky". Plus, what percentage of all celestial planetary bodies in our universe are really *that* unique from each other?
  3. Akin to SpaceEngine, KSP2 procedurally generating star systems? (If the comment made on KSP Episode 5: Interstellar Travel is true, this seems the most physically plausible) Thoughts?
  4. First of two submissions for the contest, thought the forums needed a little more abstract in their life.
  • Create New...