Master39

Signal delay is mostly about input lag. I don't think that most people would be against good gameplay designed around bandwidth limits and transfer speeds if it doesn't touch real-time piloting probes.

Maybe setting your expectation to: Sea Of Thieves meets Flight Simulator 2020, Space MMO Edition, has something to do with that, don't you think?

I'd like to get IRSU too, but not the dumbed-down version of KSP1. Even if they plan to replace it later down the line, same for science and everything else. I want them to take their time to properly design and implement every system and avoid place-holders as much as possible. There's nothing more permanent than a temporary fix.

This has a double meaning, because in all the interviews they said that they had different builds of the game to test or work on different parts of it. They probably have consolidated builds right now, but if the screenshots are months old it's definitely possible that they come from incomplete or partial builds. It's also possible that some graphic effects or subsystems aren't hitting their performance target and need some work or an optimization pass and are temporarily disabled, that would also explain why we saw better graphics in other footage.

Not to beat this horse too much, but no. 'Community Feedback' is taken as a generalization and a nice marketing term to make early access releases sound nicer, we're mostly here as testers who'll pay them to do it. Wide feedback sentiment will be taken, and obviously broken balance choices will be taken, but we're not gonna see 400 devnotes back and forth constantly retweaking the same community complaint, and we're not gonna have devs spending 6 outta 8 working hours reading forum threads. For the most part, the people actually building the game will barely know we exist, they'll just have general sentiment filtered through the Community Managers or whatever middlemen handle it for them. Feedback doesn't mean having the dev manually read every post and add everything that's proposed. It means collecting data on how the players actually play the game and use it to make decisions, direct forum or chat posts are only a small fraction of that data. The problem with no NMS wasn't the lack of features, was that the devs repeatedly lied about them. They were giving interview about the multiplayer system all the way up to launch, and it took players actually experimenting in the actual game and calling them out for them to admit that the game wasn't multiplayer. That's an actual scam, a thing that's just a bit worse than a game launching in EA. I'm not a fan of EA either, but I have said and repeated over the past few years that the main product here is the rewriting of KSP1 from a more technically competent studio, and it appears that that's what's launching next month. I don't care much about science or career, at least not the version we have in KSP1. I was already playing sandbox anyway, I'd like to see science and progression pushed back at the end of the roadmap rather than having them rushing to implement them and give us the same crap progression that KSP1 has.

This is a particular example in which I hope they went for a new approach instead of trying to replicate the exact behaviour of KSP1. I'd like more parts having a "damaged" state that prevents them from being reused without spending resources to fix them (for recovered crafts) or that gives back a reduced amount of resources when scrapped. (And obviously stop working at all for the remainder of the mission)

The joke you quoted was more about KSP1 being able to look like KSP2 with the right "body kit" and seen from a distance. But I agree with you, not reinventing the wheel is an important rule in programming. The problem with KSP1 is that the wheels don't work in the game and the people that designed them, for all their passion, had only a vague idea of how a wheel is supposed to work. To go back to your mention of The Elder Scrolls and BSG, I'm constantly baffled by how seriously the gaming community started taking the jokes about the bugs and reusing the old engine.

One can't just not like a game? We tried it, it was sub par compared to the other similar games we play, we went back to those instead. The game doesn't need to be catastrophically flawed to be discarded, just worse of what's already on the market now, even marginally. The same is going to happen with KSP2, if the game bugs out just as often as KSP1 (a thing I don't believe possible, but we'll see) and doesn't provide new gameplay to justify the switch I'm going to be back to KSP1, waiting for fixes and updates. ?

That was just a single example, the whole experience was clunky like that. They're great at making assets and fancy worlds at Coffee Stain, that's for sure, but their gameplay design peaked with Goat Simulator. Why bother fixing Satisfactory when I have plenty of options in this over-saturated genre?

It has nothing to do with the game being 3D, in fact, I didn't even name DSP but modded Minecraft as an alternative (which is 3D). It's in small details in the building and in the balance itself. A simple example: In Factorio to feed 10 furnaces I need a single belt and 10 arms. In Satisfactory I need 10 splitters and 20 micro-belts that require looking at the splitter at funny angles to build properly. I dropped the game (along with a friend) when we finished building 30 machines of some sort that way and realized we needed another 30 to finish the thing we were building.

I agree that nothing is confirmed. And I'm 99% sure that this is me overthinking stuff. But. I wouldn't put a running gag for veterans of the first game into a tutorial for new players, new players that are surely not going to know it's a gag. If it is a gag (and most likely it is) some people will come here asking how to add snacks when the game launches.

It's the perfect example of a game that prioritizes the graphics over the gameplay. It looks awesome, the world it's beautifully crafted, the problem is when you start to play it. The map gets in the way when you're building, and the factory gameplay feels like it's 2 generations older than games that preceded it. It's cluncky, everything feels like a chore. I've tried it, and soon went back to games that have worse graphic but a gameplay design that's several times better.

Oh, we're back to "Everything I haven't seen doesn't exist, and I'll pretend I haven't seen half of what was showed/said" stance. I see. I would. I make that choice constantly when playing. Last time I've talked about choosing VTOL VR over fancier flight sims, now I have another example, @SolarAdmiral anticipated it, I tried Satisfactory, it sucks (factory gameplay wise) and I immediately went back to Factorio and Modded Minecraft. Gameplay rules, graphic is an afterthought. Problem is, just like my Starcraft VS Starcraft II example, you can't show the difference in gameplay (and I'm using the term extensively, including in it the stability and UI improvements) from a 10 seconds clip or a screenshot.

The more I look at that plane the more curios I get about those procedural wings and how control surfaces and fuel into wings are going to work.

I don't know you, but I don't spend my time in KSP hiking up mountains to look at the sunset, I have other games for that, I spend it building and flying rockets (or planes, or helicopters, and occasionally boats). The changes in graphics are irrelevant. Comparing them from screenshots alone you could say that the only difference in StarCraft I (1995) and Starcraft II (2010) is the graphics too, then you try to play them both and you can feel the full difference 15 years of evolution of the medium do. This is what happening here. I don't need this game to be pretty, I need it to work and with more efficient systems than the first one. What are you expecting them to fill uninhabited planets with? This is not Skyrim.

Luckily for us Duna is far from the only atmosphere in the game, and they make a ton more sense everywhere else.

You know that most people don't work in offices, right? Or in place that forbid you from using your personal phone? Or your personal laptop? You're generalizing a specific situation, and that can end up offending people when it wasn't your original intent. Unless you're actually trying to argue that people that don't work for a big company that has a draconian IT department don't have a life. This is where the "different tools with different purposes" bit of the arguments comes into play. You can't have the same kind of interaction on a forum vs on a chat, so the raw amount of information is irrelevant. The kind of talking and discussions you can have on the two different platforms is completely different.

In your country, in your line of work, in the small subset of companies you worked with in the past 7 years or so (more like 3 or 4, it wasn't that popular at launch). A far cry from "people that have a life to worry with". And Discord isn't the same all around. I was overwhelmed too by the KSP2 one, and never even opened it again after the initial scroll through. On the other hand I'm in a small discord for the Fandom I write fanfic for, and it's a cozy place. Interesting people, no drama, good content, and a strict but friendly moderation team.

Not to interrupt the "KSP-2 flaws hunt train thread" with some hype and speculation, but is that spaceplane just painted black or is that ablative coating? Among the thousands of people asking where's the anti-aliasing, why the misalignment, and where's the dust storms on Duna (let's not forget the most important the green-ish skybox), did someone ask that question?

I have the feeling that it only looks the same, it will probably play very differently right out of the gate.

Nah, just good old elitism. One could argue that following and participating in a forum takes more time and effort than casually frequenting a chat. Different tools with different uses. Got a good laugh though, it was years since I've last heard the "people that are busy in real life" argument. The funniest part is that probably most of nowadays life gets organized over group chats. This, 63 pages of discussion on multiplayer that's mostly new people repeating what was already said a couple pages earlier tell me that forums are volatile enough as it is. Trying to do the same in a Discord with thousands of other members means that every single discussion will always start from the beginning over and over again, and, even in the rare case in which evolves past that, it will be forgotten in a couple of hours and restarted the next day. Chats are just too volatile to replace the kind of discussion happening here, I wouldn't feel threatened by them.

I don't know why but this reminds me of the old fad (was it in the '90s? It's before my time for sure so I don't know the details) of putting body-kits on cheap sport cars to make them look like a specific Ferrari or Lamborghini. On a side note, are we getting the same information? Did you see and read about the new VAB interface, the maneuver nodes, the tutorials and all the stuff that actually matters or you all just care about graphics? Screw graphics, I would be interested in KSP2 even if they went with a stylized graphics like Sable, Borderlands or Dishonored (and I'm acting on what I'm saying, of all the mil-flight sims out there my favorite is VTOL VR, for its superior gameplay). A whole topic about the terrain texture in beta that completely missed the important part of the new terrain system, the higher resolution in the heightmap, making terrain more interesting on a planetary scale.

The fact that we're talking about it here is testament of the visibility he has in the community. I just don't like when people that have a microphone and a stage to talk from and are careless with it.

If it's a mistake and he's really playing hykes, if it's trolling that's strike 2 for me from him. I don't like when people that have power and visibility in a community are careless with it.