Yakuzi
-
Posts
615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Yakuzi
-
-
18 minutes ago, Commodoregamer118 said:
Today i got a TweakScale Fatal Error mesagge box
That's the best Fatal Error message I've ever read!
-
On 9/12/2019 at 5:26 PM, Brikoleur said:
My experience of it is kind of the opposite and I mostly play career.
TBF I have adjusted the difficulty settings to avoid the grind -- specifically, I turn up Funds rewards and turn down Science rewards, as most of the grind comes from lack of Funds when you really need to upgrade a building and I don't enjoy that.
Career does have its issues (in particular, most contracts are just pointless; fortunately there are so many that it's possible to pick only the ones you're interested in) and it is clearly just barely one step up from placeholder, but it is one step up from that and for me at least gets the job done -- I still set my own large-scale objectives, but it sets small-scale ones that can be worthwhile, and most importantly it sets constraints that make otherwise trivial design challenges interesting again -- stimulating creativity.
We all play KSP in our own way, and that's completely fine. In this case it seems we're different sides of the same coin. While I've failed to learn how to enjoy career mode, you apparently have and, granted, that takes creativity. But what it really boils down to, is that 'career' mode in KSP1 is indeed barely one step up from a placeholder.
Since Star*Theory have the chance to build KSP2 from the ground up, wouldn't you prefer progression mode that is fun because the challenges you have to overcome are actually immersive, rewarding and make sense? Which would include integrated space and planetary exploration, scientific discovery, investments in infrastructure development and maintenance (including LS), logistics to supply/maintain the infrastructure, and automated missions to avoid the supply grind. To me, this beats gimping a glorified career placeholder so it's not super grindy any day.
I fully realise this would take quite a bit of thought and time to implement, but Star*Theory have been working on KSP for a while (plus they had an experienced dev team from the get-go and are asking a decent amount of money for their product). Do I expect this to be implemented? No. But I'm not ruling it out either, particularly since the devs haven't even given us any detailed info yet.
In the meantime, I'm keeping my fingers crossed!
-
36 minutes ago, Xd the great said:
This.
Should be made into an option. It will be too hard for newbies to learn coding, even if I love the idea.
I fully agree! Even without it being optional, n00bs can just strap on a Kerbal on their craft so they wont have to deal with any com delays.
Terminology aside, a certain degree of automation/autonomy would be very welcome in KSP2, particularly since we'll be dealing with space/planetary infrastructure, supply and logistics (since we get LS), and interstellar travel (for which the devs already mentioned they have included some sort of autonomy). Fingers crossed.
-
On 9/11/2019 at 2:23 PM, Lu K. said:
oh where was that? i'd like to see, i must have missed a lot of info released during this latest convention thingo.
According to creative director Nate Simpson, there is going to be some form of life support:
Interviewer: Will there be such a thing as life support systems so you have to ensure oxygen supply, water supply and food supply for the Kerbals?
Nate: I can say so much that the need to keep Kerbals alive is a feature we're going to introduce now. But I can not say more about that at this point, but I can say so much. In case you tried mods on life support systems; it will not be so detailed, but as I said I can not say too much because there are a few secrets.source (in Kerman). Complete transcript on the forums here, courtesy of @nikokespprfan
On 9/12/2019 at 12:15 PM, Brikoleur said:The difference is that you can just not build orbital bases, or only build them for very specific and very limited uses, and use bases on low-gravity moons for construction instead, whereas you can't just ignore LS. I.e. if they screw up LS, there's no way around the grind, whereas if they screw up supply for orbital bases, that's just one and largely ignorable gameplay feature that's kind of broken.
(Of course it's possible they'll also screw up supply for surface bases but I doubt that; ISRU is a thing and it would be very weird if they don't build surface base gameplay around that.)
I understand your concerns about LS being implemented properly to avoid grind. On the other hand, LS is such an integrated part of space exploration, KSP2 would feel incomplete to me if it'd ship without it (as did KSP1). The current career mode is the perfect example of a dumbed down system that is leading to a grindfest, inhibits immersion and stifles creativity. I know that Star*Theory are overhauling the career/science system into something called "progression", and am cautiously hopeful that LS was part of the design process of this overhaul. If they can turn career into something fun and sensible, I'm sure they can do the same with LS. Also since multiplayer will be thing, implementing actual automated supply missions would not be an impossibility.
In the end, we can discuss this and get worked up about it until we turn
bluegreen, but the best thing to do is wait what the devs will come up with and take it from there. I, for one, am very excited to find out what they've come up with! -
4 hours ago, KSK said:
How about waiting... [snip]... before jumping to opinions...
You don't come here often do you?
-
On 9/1/2019 at 2:59 AM, 5thHorseman said:
Yeah 1 out of 20 people who are SO INTO THE GAME THAT THEY WENT TO A PRESENTATION ABOUT ITS SEQUEL have not left what is basically the tutorial area
To be fair, I don't venture beyond minmus either. Not because I can't, but because there's no real challenge/incentive/discovery for me to go to any other planets (I've been waiting in Kerbin SOI forever for a planet update. Got my hopes up for breaking ground, but alas, same ol boring planets but now with slightly more grindy science clicking). I fully realize I'm a minority here, but please don't assume we're all too incompetent/undevoted to visit other planets.
Which leads me to OP's question:
If planets are as boring as KSP1, I won't buy.
If career and science are as unimmersive/shallow/grindy as KSP1, Ill think twice before I buy
If excrements is too dumbed down, I won't buy
-
59 minutes ago, nestor said:
We do look at the public tracker and the upvotes. We look at both bugs and feedback from there. Add your feedback about the fin to the bug tracker please.
Great stuff, will do!
EDIT: feedback added to the bugtracker
-
18 hours ago, St4rdust said:
You asked: "how about a few larger SRB's...?" And we listened to you.
Very cool!
While you're at it, could you please have a look in adjusting the Basic Fin ? The rebar really shouldn't be on spacecraft at all, guess that's why no other part has it. It could also do without the yellow stripe (unless there's plans to add monoprop).
And as always, don't forget about them bugs in the bugtracker you asked us to update and upvote... There's quite a bit of low hanging fruit there!
-
18 hours ago, JERONIMO said:
how many salty 9 year old kids will come to ksp2 and give a one star review because it "twoo hrad"? ... a lot...
how many panicky forum users are freaking out about ksp2 by making unfounded assumptions and misleading generalisations? ... at least one ...
EDIT: I'm somewhat surprised by all the doom and gloom prophecies that are popping up on the forums since KSP2 was announced... Time to spend a bit more time away from the screens my fellow humans
-
2 hours ago, GoldForest said:
There will be a big multiplayer update in the future.
Is it just me, or does that sound like multiplayer won't be in the game at launch?
From the context of the article, I got the feeling that Nate Simpson meant he'll be giving up an update on how multiplayer will look like in the future:
"Q: What are the chances of cross-platform multiplater?"
"A: There will be a big multiplayer update in the future."
-
Since multiplayer will be a thing in KSP2, there's gonna be a framework for flying multiple craft together independently. I was wondering if this framework can be
abused to automate missions in singleplayer KSP2. Please hear me out:I would love to set up automatic resupply, maintenance or crew rotation missions, either by programming them from scratch or flying and logging the actual mission first, which will then be used as a template for the automated mission. Plan a date and time and a number of periodic iterations for that mission afterward, and watch your space program actually come to life! Only leveled up kerbal pilots would be able to execute those mission (depending on mission difficulty mayhaps).
This way, the KSC would actually come to life a bit (you would see automated mission take off and land periodically), involve a bit more thought when it comes to financing and planning (which is a good thing imo), transporting lots of materials to different SOI's will become a lot less grindy, leveling up kerbals will actually become important, it would make life support a whole lot less micromanagerial if it were introduced (or as a mod for that matter), and perhaps most importantly, it would give the player the sense that (s)he is actually managing a space program, not just a space mission.
It would also open up a range of new dynamic missions in case something would go wrong with the automated mission, e.g. out of fuel, repairs, crash landings, accidentally ejected kerbal, etc (optional in game settings, would require quite a bit more coding though).If we don't get this in stock, I hope we'll be able to make it happen with kRPC or kOS.
Thoughts?
-
7 hours ago, Cavscout74 said:
No, the orange suits were always IVA only, not EVA. The new breaking ground sci-fi suits ARE orange on EVA for the vets
6 hours ago, Lo Var Lachland said:it makes sense, if you look at any EVA suit made by NASA, they are all white. White was mainly chosen to disperse heat from the Sun to try and mitigate overheating, and it is also easy to see while in Space, meaning that the other astronauts can see the person on EVA more easily.
Thanks for clearing that up! I was under the impression that the vanilla EVA space suits were orange as well... false memory is a pain.
-
4 hours ago, Natokerbal said:
uh only the making history suit changes. the stock EVA suit is the same for everyone.
So Jeb, Bill, Bob and Val all have an orange suit on when they go out on EVA (without making history or breaking ground)?
-
Can anyone get the 4 veteran kerbals to wear their orange suits on EVA? I'm trying in a vanilla (stock, no DLC) 1.7.3, but can't get it to work. They do have their orange suits on in IVA, but they turn white as soon as they exit the craft. Wandering if it's on my end or a bug... Let me know in case I need to file one.
-
5 minutes ago, Krulliam said:
Given the sheer scope of KSP2 and all the systems they're going to be adding, would the Unity engine hold the game back in some way? It's a great engine don't get me wrong but I feel like compared to other contemporary engines available Unity just seems like an odd choice and that it lacks the "Under The Hood" capabilities of others. Of course my knowledge on the actual deeper workings of these engines are as non-existent at best so I'm probably making a huge generalization. I just don't want to go another sleepless week worrying about KSP2 not living up my level of internalized Hyper-Hype because of engine issues.
I share your concerns. In the end, I would imagine that that the producer would prefer a short return of investment of the intellectual property they bought, so building upon the same framework as the original with a little bit more features and better aesthetics is the quickest time to market. Will that ultimately lead to substantially better gameplay than building a dedicated game engine from the ground up? I'm skeptical, but love to be proven wrong.
In the meantime, I'm looking forward to the plenitude of unfounded assumptions about this matter and everything else concerning KSP2.Love the title btw!
-
18 minutes ago, GoldForest said:
obviously
27 minutes ago, Yakuzi said:*Obviously
-
7 hours ago, GoldForest said:
It will be instant based on what we know. Building Assembly Editor is the way we make the colony. So it will most likely be like the VAB, but live.
What do we know though? I haven't seen any VAB or SPH videos or pics. If you'd purely base it on what we know from KSP2, then rockets will be built over time on the launchpad* (check out 01:13 of the launch trailer):
*Obviously not saying it will, just be careful with the assumptions. I'm sure we'll get more info over the next couple of weeks
-
1 hour ago, MechBFP said:
The problem with a bigger scale is that it is annoying for most new players. It takes an additional 3 to 5 minutes to get to orbit every time and for the most part you aren’t doing anything but watching the ship slowly get up to speed.
1 hour ago, Eskandare said:They (Star Theory) have so far stated that they kept the Kerbol system the same. Regarding KSC, I believe it is similar but with improvement to make it more to the likes of Kennedy Space Center.
Apologies, I didn't explain that very clearly. I meant that the classic Kerbol system will still be the default start. But hopefully Star Theory will give veteran players the option to start in a different solar system, on a larger home planet (3x-6.4x Kerbin).
-
32 minutes ago, tater said:
Honestly a reboot of KSP should have gone to a more realistic scale.
Despite all my skepticism deep down I'm hoping that the devs know this, and have designed an alternative starting planet/system for players who wear their big boy space suit pants.
-
It seems that folks at Star*Theory have finally implemented n-body physics in KSP2. They didn't take into account that the Kerbolar system is quite unstable, however, so when they took their fancy new interstellar spaceship for a 100,000 ly spin around the galactic neighborhood, they returned home just in time to see Duna being ejected from the system at a high inclination over Kerbol after a 455-hole gravity assist from Jool.
Pretty straightforward if you ask me.
-
12 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:
- planetary body shine - immersive and beautiful
- part explodiness inequality - lots of reactive fuel in tank, big boom. Little fuel, small boom. Parts without reactive components, no boom.
From the IGN interview video, it seems like planetary body shine is included (youtube link). Specific part type
explosionsexplodiness is mentioned at the same time in the video, ain't that handy?12 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:- no magic stuff, only physics - please, never give up on this crown rule of KSP
No more Kraken?
From the top of my head, I'd like to add a couple of suggestions myself as a 2000<=KSPlaytime<=4000 h player:
Cosmetic enhancements:
- footsteps, vehicle trails, kicked up dust. nuff said
- condensation trails, mach effects. Would be nice to have for immersion
- chatter. Kerbals communicate(?) in the trailers and have com arrays... we should be able to hear them.
Gameplay enhancements:
- proper career with time based mechanics. Including meaningful planetary and orbital infrastructure. Don't use anything from the current 'career' mode... seriously.
- make planets interesting and interactive. They are extremely boring in KSP1, which the grinding of science points does not alleviate whatsoever, no matter how much ground is broken.
- science is about discovering how the planets/stars/universe works. Science is not for unlocking tech*, tech should be unlocked over time with whatever currency system career mode provides. Also, scientific infrastructure.
- separate jet engines and nozzles. The off-set CoM of KSP1 jet engines is unrealistic and messes up designs. Include a jet engine and dedicated nozzle(s) that the player can orient however (s)he sees fit.
Technical Enhancements:
- shape-based, vessel-centered, aerodynamics. You know, FAR. The shape of the vessel as a whole, not individual parts, should control lift and drag. Stuff that is obscured from the airflow by other parts of the craft should not be causing any drag.
- native part-welding. People build big, complex craft, and with colonies and multiplayer there will be a lot of craft within physics range. For the vast majority of the time, most parts don't need their physics updated every frame, so allow the player to weld whatever they want together and keep FPS high. Even if you guys successfully implemented multithreading for individual craft, make welding a thing!
- procedural parts. Procedural wings are as much Lego style as the stock big 455 wings we currently have in KSP, and allow for more creativity while reducing part count. We might not need proc fuel tanks, if we have welding.
For the love of his holy Kraken Enhancements:
- call geomes, well, geomes. Biomes are only for lively places... or minecraft
* Though scientific discoveries may open up new tech branches, and tech may lead to new scientific instruments.
-
-
I'm not one to hype on moving vehicles, but I'll buy a ticket for this ride though!
How our destination will look like, no-one knows. But we're set to arrive in spring 2020!!! (source, last sentence of the article)
-
3 hours ago, Teek said:
Apologies if someone has already posted this, but PCGamer has published an interview with KSP2's Creative Director, Nate Simpson. https://www.pcgamer.com/kerbal-space-program-2-interview/
There's gold to be found in that there article. Not least:
" Kerbal Space Program 2 is due out on Steam in spring 2020. "
"Touting an improved terrain system, Star Theory wants players to feel like every location is special in some way. "We really want each location to feel like a unique discovery that you'd feel like screenshotting and sharing with people, and—if it's an interesting spot—maybe other people would also attempt to find that place in their local games," says Simpson. "I'm pretty excited about the results we've been getting out of that system. And there are lots of emergent kind of happy accidents that come out of that. "
"Also teased is mod support, with Simpson saying Star Theory has "exposed significantly more core functionality to modders." While no details were given, Simpson recognises the importance of mods to the original game's popularity. "We're very, very excited about what will be possible going forward. Because we feel like the modders are kind of the beating heart of the Kerbal community." "
It also seems this developer made an actual design document (stunning, I know):
"We made a document very early in the project"Also Kraken confirmed!
I'm cautiously optimistic about KSP2. Based on the PC Gamer interview and the Developer Story on youtube, it seems that the devs at Star Theory are avid KSP fans. They're not only talking to Squad about staying true to the KSP spirit, but also to astrophysicists on solar system dynamics and evolution. Most of all they seem very excited about sharing all the new things with the forum and allowing modders to tap more deeply into the core code of the game.
Kerbal Space Program 1.8: “Moar Boosters!!!” Grand Discussion Thread
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
Huh, which ones? Apart from the science msg spam fix, I can't find 1.8.0 fixes for any of the top 50 upvoted bugs on the tracker (or closed bugs).
@nestor Does this mean there's gonna be a bug fix coming soon (as in 1.8.1 or 1.8.2)? Or is it just something that's in the pipeline? Again, there's some really low hanging fruit with a lot of upvotes on the bug tracker. Not unlike the bug listed below:
Upvoted and SMH...