Jump to content

Brofessional

Members
  • Content Count

    353
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

198 Excellent

About Brofessional

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Profile Information

  • Location
    Texas

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's a separate game and thus is not part of the "all future updates for free" thing that early adopters of KSP1 got. (Which we should be grateful for because most companies would not have honored that with regards to expansion packs.) It's not uncommon for publishers to offer a 5-10% discount for owners of the previous game when releasing a sequel, but you should consider that a pleasant surprise rather than an expectation.
  2. I would rather have contracts require the execution of various science objectives, and then you use the money and rep you get from contracts to fund your R&D department. Functionally science objectives wouldn't change much, just how they apply to tech tree progression. Kind of unrelated but along with such a science system I also think it would be neat if there was a government vs commercial choice in how you progress your space program. Like the government path gives you annual funding while the commercial path gives you more funds from completing contracts, and each would focus you
  3. The first time I achieved a nice circular orbit. Was not as easy back then with no map view or time warp.
  4. It's not a technical limitation, it's a gameplay design choice. Having a bunch of pieces to make wings out of adds to the "Lego" factor of the game. There is a strong argument that to many it's more compelling to combine a plethora of pieces to build a cool design than to just plop down the one [Procedural Wing] part and drag the sliders around to make the perfect shape. You can also get more interesting failures when the entire wing is not one single physics object. On the other hand procedural wings allow full freedom for creativity and reduce part count dramatically. It's just a decisi
  5. There are valid arguments both for and against procedural wings and other parts. If the devs decide not to have them there will no doubt be a mod to accommodate those who want them.
  6. That's one more reason it should be browser-based/app-based. Not everyone has a second monitor, but virtually everyone has a phone or tablet these days. Such functionality has already been done before on consoles with Fallout 4 and it's Pip-boy app.
  7. You should probably make a strawpoll or something. Anyway, yes I would use it but no it's not worth a delay. It could simply be added post-release. That said having multiple Unity windows up isn't necessary. Simple browser integration would be adequate. It has a very low impact on performance and extends the feature to not just those with multiple monitors, but anyone with a tablet or smartphone.
  8. Not true, it can work just fine on your local machine or network. You just connect to localhost or your own local IP in the browser. In fact that's probably the only way it would work because doing it through the internet is largely pointless and would only introduce latency.
  9. For most games multi-monitor support amounts to just having super a super wide FOV with the extra monitors being peripheral vision. Nice but not really all that useful. Games that deal with a lot of info and interface elements like KSP can make great use of it though. In War Thunder for example the browser map is just the same 2D map you see when you press Esc, but having it up at all times is incredibly useful for situational awareness. Like I said earlier in the thread I would be very happy just to get the info in a browser page that can be slid over to another monitor. I imagine that i
  10. Back when I played War Thunder it had a feature that let you open up the main map in a browser window. It was slightly buggy at times but it was incredibly useful. I've always wanted that sort of functionality for KSP. Not just for the map view but also for telemetry readouts.
  11. I would prefer a 1:1 scale system, but I don't expect it to happen. Rebalancing the parts and so forth to work with the new scale isn't all that difficult, but there are other issues. My info may be out of date so correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge new versions of Unity still have the same 32-bit floating point limit that KSP1 has which is only made worse by RSS scaling everything up. The glitches induced by RSS are forgivable for a mod but most would find them unacceptable for a retail game. As explained here:
  12. Options are necessary to adjust the difficulty for less experienced players. They could stand to reduce the number of options to a more concise "easy/normal/hard/extreme" choice though. Beyond that people can use mods and tweaks if they want to really fine tune things. Simplified difficulty choice would make the game more approachable for new players, and allow players to better compare their accomplishments and creations.
  13. I'm gonna say it's pronounced the same as "inertia." If not I'm disappointed.
  14. GDC is next month. We might get more news then.
×
×
  • Create New...