razark

And yet there are those who think it is worth the money, no matter what you think they should think. The numbers may be heavily on the side of people that don't think it's worth the money, but there are still people that do. They may not be people who are buying it now, so the sales don't reflect it, but they still think it's worth the money. You're making an objective statement about a subjective opinion.

How does one determine who is arbiter of what product is worth the money or not? You do not think it is worth the money. Other people do. Simply declaring it isn't is as valid as declaring "X is absolutely the best flavor ice cream, and anyone that disagrees is wrong."

I'm not saying we don't...

Shapes: Whatever is easiest and cheapest to build. Spheres, cylinders, or disks, most likely. Processing: Will involve whatever is needed to most easily and cheaply process whatever it is that is being processed. (How else are you going to separate raw materials for processing?) Uh. Well, the cheapest or easiest way, whatever that might be. The First Industrial Center: "Will be made from parts brought from earth, and would start from there." Unless an easier and cheaper method exists. If some other alternative exists, existing infrastructure will be used (because it is the easiest and cheapest method.) Best place to set up shop: Wherever it is easier and cheaper to set up your operation to achieve the goal you are trying to accomplish. Worst place to set up shop: Wherever it is hardest or most expensive to establish operations. In most cases, this would be the most distant location that it is physically possible to reach and return from, because it would just be utterly stupid to do that. I mean, if you're processing ore from the asteroid belt, it would be pretty damn stupid to set up a smelter on Pluto, or Alpha Centauri, or a different galaxy, or Middle Earth , or Narnia, or Arrakis.

Seems like a totally accurate source. "The developer of Kerbal Space Program, Felipe Falanghe, has announced and has begun work on its successor, Kerbal Space Program 2..."

I'd like to point out that the list provided was not a list of the top ten things that are being worked on. It's not stated as a list of the top priorities, or the order of things being done. It's not mentioned as a list of what's in the next patch. There were no promises made, schedules given, nor projections estimated. As quoted, it's a list of some of the things they happen to be working on, no more or less. Just for when the "they promised they were going to fix <X>" posts come in later.

Your math isn't quite right. $50/79.25 hours would be about 0.63 dollars per hour. You've calculated 1.58 hours per dollar.

Yeah, I'm not sure why I remembered where I had seen it.

Tina Turner, the dynamic rock and soul singer who rose from humble beginnings and overcame a notoriously abusive marriage to become one of the most popular female artists of all time, has died, according to a post on her verified Facebook page. She was 83. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/24/entertainment/tina-turner-death/index.html

From the first AMA:

Ok, so I'm not the only one that remembers how much the KSP1 bugtracker was reviled by this community.

Why am I answering questions on an internet forum? Because I saw someone who seemed confused and wanted to help them understand something. or Why am I building capybaras instead of space stations, etc? I'm not. I'm kind of burnt out on KSP1, and don't find KSP2 worth playing in it's current state, so I'm playing other games, watching shows I like, reading books, hanging out with family and friends, and other stuff like that.

Then I'm not sure why you asked why people were doing it.

Because:

Well, good. So long as there's no overreacting. I'm sure my loved ones would be happy to have their comatose or deceased condition compared to a video game not working the way I wanted it to. Because it's fun. Are you trying to say you are actually getting enjoyment out of coming here and endlessly complaining about the game? If so, well, I just don't understand that mindset at all.

That's probably the best option for anyone that isn't happy with the game. Take some time away, go do something else, enjoy other games, hobbies, books, whatever. Stop worrying about KSP2. Come back in a few months or a year and see what's happened. There will be no change, and you've lost nothing but worrying over it. Or the game has become an amazing thing and you get the joy and wonder of starting fresh. Or it's somewhere in between. But if you dislike the game, why spend all the time and effort to make yourself miserable over something you're not going to be able to change?

Do you have batteries? The probe cores only hold a small charge (IIRC), and it can quickly deplete once you're on the dark side.

Based on the information you've posted, I'd say that something is wrong somewhere. Is your vessel in sunlight? Are you using more power than you are generating?

When all else fails: I'm only half joking here. I've not spent my time anticipating anything. Whatever they give us is above the nothing that I'd be content to walk away with now. If the whole thing gets cancelled tomorrow, I lose nothing. My life will be no different than it was before. Aside from the $50 and the time I've spent on a game that I've already gotten some entertainment from, I've lost nothing that isn't already spent. It's a video game that I might get to play a decent version of some day. Or I might not. Whoop-dee-doo, life goes on.

I expect nothing. That way, anything that arrives is better than what I expected. What I actually expect is a knock-off of the KSP system.

Well...

No, but they are directly above my first comment that you quoted.

Cool. You want a cookie? See how useless that was? Like the two comments I was replying to in the thread that got merged in here.