Jump to content

t_v

Members
  • Posts

    470
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

623 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I mean, it hasn’t really changed anything, previously we were at a wishy-washy 6-9 months and now we’re at a more solid 7-10 months. I get if hype is low at the moment, but that is usually a personal thing and doesn’t really warrant the entire thread being closed. If you want some hype, this means more show and tells, and more looks into the systems with Dev Diaries (hype!..?)
  2. That makes sense, but how about an estimate that is stuck at 6-9 months away but delays get increasingly smaller and the estimate gets increasingly specific and solid? Like the one we saw today, where the period shifted by 3 months instead of 6, the actual period got cut in third, and the evidence that this is the final shift is very strong.
  3. This is why, despite my expectation for the release date being later than it used to be (because I was taking the calendar year 2022 announcement into account), I have more hype than in the last few months. This is a more concrete decision than any others, because now T2 is under a lot of pressure to deliver on this and cannot wait for the next earnings report to cancel it. The smaller this date range gets, the more excited I’ll get for the release.
  4. Thanks for that info- I was under the assumption that LTS would be a longer time, like a decade or so. In that case, the devs will definitely have to update themselves. Oh, that’s great then! Thanks for updating my understanding of how Unity is, and in that case, than yes, updating the engine would be beneficial, but I’ll maintain that re-doing their bespoke solutions to implement the standard Unity clouds would not be a good use of time at the moment. On the technical side though, updating sounds like a good thing.
  5. Did you just take an image of someone in the middle of a blink to make a point? Who does that!? I have personally only seen that in the absolute worst of political arguments, and I was not expecting you to debase yourself like that. In case it was not the blink: beards are fine facial hair for someone and making a point off of what someone chooses to do with their appearance is equally lowly, yes the background is different and there isn’t a big ol’ smile because this isn’t a reveal, it is a delay that Nate is probably not happy to announce off of the teleprompter. Criticizing people is not a good way to work through whatever is going on around this announcement.
  6. Seeing the page you linked, I’m not sure that conversing with you is a good idea… but to clarify things: This is not a delay in any official capacity. To the shareholders, the game is coming out at the time it always was, because it is still slated for FY 2023. Your theory that this is a cover-up only works if you imagine that the devs and fans are in a vacuum, and things like budgets, companies, shareholders, financial expectations, etc. do not exist. I encourage you to look at evidence that does not fit your theory; that is how all great theories are formed. Secondly, when you say ‘no real gameplay’ what do you mean? If you mean the graphics and look of the game, that is already discussed in a lot of detail. If you mean the user interface, we have seen that, both in vehicle construction and flight, and the devs have made the mistake of showing us too much of that, as we have seen multiple iterations over time. If you mean the user experience, try playing KSP 1. It will be sort of like that but with the UI that we have already seen. So, what would you like them to show? Someone looking at a spaceship while in flight mode? Look at that tutorial shader video, you get the UI. Someone flying in the middle of space? There is lots of footage from inside the game with the UI turned off, which should be fine since you have seen it already. The devs have communicated quite a bit with us. Did you know that HOTAS support is being developed? Try looking through the videos again to see where that was shown. There are lots of details that the devs have given us about how playing the game will be like, so beyond just another video of someone looking at a ship and doing random stuff like changing the throttle while the UI is visible, I don’t see what you feel that you are missing out on.
  7. Just a quick correction - you are talking about Fiscal year 2023 here. Fiscal year 2022 ended in roughly April 2022. This isn’t the typical fiscal year so it’s easy to get it mixed up, but for any fact-checkers, KSP 2 is releasing in FY 2023.
  8. This sounds great- I do think this will be implemented at least for the planet side of things, as in the interstellar video they mentioned that distant stars would be rendered, and if they can do that for stars, it is only one small step to doing it with planets. I also think that ships will probably have improved rendering and won’t just disappear outside of a small range, but I’m not sure how the devs will handle it exactly. And before the controversy happens (because there have been a few threads about how bright the skybox should be around planets), this thread is not to discuss that, it is just for rendering ships and planets from far away.
  9. Why would this generate negative press? A release date is a release date, and I don’t think that it implies maliciousness or any other negative quality to do the reveal from the financial report first. Game news websites will probably just be happy to recycle old footage and proclaim that the game is releasing, and I know that I’d be perfectly happy to wait a few days for the release date announcement trailer to go out after the release date is confirmed. But I definitely think that the chance of a concrete release date tomorrow is slim.
  10. The poster wasn’t advocating for single launch, they were wondering about being able to launch station parts for orbital assembly- those parts are large enough to necessitate massive rockets for each one of them, which results in the request for larger lifter parts to be able to build those stations.
  11. Attention can be monetized in many ways - and even if you are not the one making money by selling ads, there are incentives from the ones who are.
  12. I think that these are two different arguments that you two are making. On the one hand, yes griefing exists, and on the other, there are tools to stop it if necessary. Your experience with WoW or WoT sounds unfortunate and unpleasant, but different games are designed differently and KSP can be nicely grief-free with easy design decisions. Here are the differences that KSP has or can have that reduce or stop griefing compared to other games: - KSP is a very time-intensive game, because it takes longer to execute actions. While pushing someone into an unfavorable position can take probably up to a minute of setup, hitting a station with a missile can take up to 15 minutes, starting from a nearby celestial body. This has a double effect of discouraging grinders and giving more time for others to respond between actions. - KSP is not a competitive game, in that it does not have inherent systems that require the game or authorities to be impartial in their judgement. If someone is considered attempting to grief, they can be banned without having to justify reasons. - KSP will probably have players interacting with each other over long periods. This means that unlike in online games where a grieved will just move on and keep griefing, grinders in KSP will be stuck with the same people if they want to keep griefing, which gives time for moderators to ban and rollback. -KSP isn’t run in a match environment. When you are griefed during a match, the match ends and your gameplay experience is harmed. But when you are griefed in a persistent world, you can roll back the server or hopefully just that station to repair the damage. So yes, griefing is a problem, but at @Master39 has pointed out, KSP 2 is in a prime position to be griefing-free.
  13. Someone mentioned asteroid bases, I would really love to see absolutely massive asteroids, on the scale of kilometers or even tens of kilometers across, if the engine allows for it. What would be even better would be if they could be moved, which would provide a big end-game challenge for players to move a massive asteroid into LKO or something.
  14. Here, I would say that Steam is a pretty good estimate of changes in active users. If you assume that a certain percentage of KSP activity is due to Steam, then the Steam usage will be proportional to the total usage, give or take a few random fluctuations. I take no problem with this estimation, just with the choice of using this metric to make an argument about game development sustainability. If the business model relies on sales instead of continual play, then looking at continual play is not a good way to look at what sort of income activity is going on. Put another way, I could use the concurrent users metric as a proxy for income in a live service game, but not for a game like KSP.
×
×
  • Create New...