Jump to content

KSP2 Hype Train Thread


GregroxMun
 Share

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

If the 'game' focuses on multiplayer as a core feature... that takes away from the learning.  It changes the game.  A multi-player-centric experience isn't about teaching yourself something - it becomes a race to accomplish certain milestones - replete with just downloading someone else's purpose-built rocket and running the mission.

You might be in luck though. My suspicion is one of the most if not predominant way people would will use multiplayer is for coop play rather than competitive, building bases and stations and flying missions together. If thats the case you might find it helpful to be working along side others who are figuring out the same problems that you are. I also suspect it will be possible for players to go at their own pace and time warp and synch as they like so long as continuity can be preserved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

That's true.

I 'gig' on multiplayer because its the least attractive feature for me.  I never once wished during KSP that I could have entered a world with other players.  I understand, accept and appreciate that for others their 'for me' means multiplayer is a desired feature.

From an objective standpoint - there's just some things that 'work better' as multiplayer.  Non-story driven FPS games come to mind (Battlefield, etc).  Those are basically just giant games of "Tag" when it comes down to it, and playing against other human minds makes the game more fun.  Story driven FPS games (Tomb Raider, Red Dead Redemption 2, etc) are better without other players in the mix to goon things up.

The KSP experience is unique.  It's kind of like an educational toy in many ways.  Advanced Legos/Tinkertoy for grown up minds.  The 'story' (to the extent there was one) wasn't so much about the Kerbals - but rather it offered a challenging gameplay experience that opened up the world of astrophysics to players in a highly engaging way.  It made the daunting... fun.  So the Kerbals were the backdrop to the real story - my learning about and appreciating how difficult space really is - and still being able to do cool things.

There's the rub.  With KSP I got to learn at my own pace.  Try something, watch it fail, try to figure out what went wrong... try something else (gross or minor changes) and then keep learning until I 'got it right'.  Massive sense of accomplishment!  Along the way my understanding of rockets and planes and gravity and all of what was in KSP grew.

If the 'game' focuses on multiplayer as a core feature... that takes away from the learning.  It changes the game.  A multi-player-centric experience isn't about teaching yourself something - it becomes a race to accomplish certain milestones - replete with just downloading someone else's purpose-built rocket and running the mission.

I get that there are different players in KSP - most of the people I usually engage with on the Science sub are likely 'pro' in the sense that they can and have visited the various outer planets multiple times and just 'get' the stuff I struggle with.  They likely won't be challenged by KSP2 any more than they are KSP... and so for those folks, racing to visit all the new content will be fun - and having others out there won't take away from their own enjoyment (presuming no one can build a 'star fighter' and blast other players hard-built ships from a hard-fought orbit).

But for me - a player that struggles to get this stuff through his thick neanderthal skull... having other players in 'my' space will just be a distraction.

I get your point but:

1) A small co-op working exactly the same as single player is multiplayer too. I would pay to replace the dumb NPC companions in RPGs with a friend or two and play together.

2) multiplayer not being your favourite feature is not an argument for believing that, among all things it's multiplayer the cause of delays.

 

 

 

I'm not saying that you have to like multiplayer, in just noticing how the general dislike for multiplayer makes the community point toward it as the cause for the delays.

 

Just now, Pthigrivi said:

My suspicion is one of the most if not predominant way people would will use multiplayer is for coop play rather than competitive, building bases and stations and flying missions together.

This. Last time I checked the game was tagged as co-op on Steam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I disagree with this.  KSP has been around long enough that it would be easy for people to see that this is not merely a 'multiplayer space game'.  The fact that you even write this makes me worry that Take Two might push Intercept to go this route.

KSP is everything but a 'multiplayer space game' - and if KSP2 gets reduced to this... I won't like it and the team will have failed its core audience.  (and its own stated goals)

I find it funny that Multiplayer is only said in one word in the short description and in one paragraph at the very bottom of the full description, but pss88 puts forward the scenario of someone only seeing "space" and "multiplayer" only because it's convenient for their side of the argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I find it funny that Multiplayer is only said in one word in the short description and in one paragraph at the very bottom of the full description...

???
Buy Kerbal Space Program (KSP) 2 PC | Official Site | Private Division Store

How is multiplayer any less conspicuous than any of the other features mentioned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's buried beneath everything else?

So because it comes toward the end of the list of features, that means it isn't important to the developers? Are we then to infer that modding suppport is even less important, since it comes even later than multiplayer in the headings? 

Bej, next-gen technology, improved onboarding, interstellar travel, colonies, multiplayer, modding - these are no mere minor mentions hidden away in a document somewhere.  These are headline features on the front page of the game's website. 

3 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

I don’t think multiplayer was ever “promised” by Squad for KSP1

Unfortunately, this much is true. 

 

 

Edited by Deddly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoiler

You both didn't get what I'm trying to say. But it's my fault and bad English.

I don't think multiplayer will be 'core' feature. I just don't want them to cut it out from release.

Edited by pss88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Deddly said:

So because it comes toward the end of the list of features, that means it isn't important to the developers?

I said it wasn't emphasized. I never said it wasn't important to the devs. Do not shove words in my mouth, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deddly said:

Oh no kidding. I must have missed that. That wasn’t so wise. That was back before 1.0? They did tend to get out over their skis back then. 

Edited by Pthigrivi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I said it wasn't emphasized. I never said it wasn't important to the devs. Do not shove words in my mouth, please.

Sorry Bej, I must have misunderstood you. 

I would argue that a headline feature on the front page of the website is very much emphasised, but if you feel it isn't, what does that mean to you? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deddly said:
48 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I said it wasn't emphasized. I never said it wasn't important to the devs. Do not shove words in my mouth, please.

Sorry Bej, I must have misunderstood you. 

It's alright :)

7 minutes ago, Deddly said:

I would argue that a headline feature on the front page of the website is very much emphasised, but if you feel it isn't, what does that mean to you? 

The things that the devs would want people to associate with KSP 2 first are all the things they'd put at the front of the website. Multiplayer is very much niche from what I gather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's alright :)

The things that the devs would want people to associate with KSP 2 first are all the things they'd put at the front of the website. Multiplayer is very much niche from what I gather.

Thanks for explaining. I don't agree, but I understand :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Master39 said:

I get your point but:

it's multiplayer the cause of delays.

I will agree with the argument - it's speculative to think multiplayer is the cause.  However, I don't think it's unreasonable speculation given the history of KSP (said it would be a feature... someday... and never achieved).

I don't object to multiplayer outright - and the 'co-op' suggestions I've seen seem totally reasonable.  However some of the 'desired' multiplayer features I read folks hoping for make the game not sound like KSP at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I won't like it and the team will have failed its core audience.  (and its own stated goals)

You, alone, are not the core audience

2 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

However, I don't think it's unreasonable speculation given the history of KSP (said it would be a feature... someday... and never achieved).

That was not a promise made by the current studio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would honestly be pretty happy if the multiplayer in ksp2 were something like rimworld's old multiplayer mod where the multiplayer interaction were just limited to just chatting and trading resources. The physics multiplayer of  a game of this complexity sounds like a huge ask as a programmer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's already an active discussion of multiplayer possibilities in other threads. Like Deddly said, please don't let it take over additional threads like this one. 

Some comments removed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a general question, why do folks care how a game’s PR/marketing campaign is going? It seems unique to gaming, but maybe Im wrong? I get why Intercept would care, and why T2 would care, but fans? Like Im never sitting around thinking “Gee the Red Sox really aren’t running enough promos this month” or “Damn how is Thor Love and Thunder going to hit its opening weekend targets on just two trailers?” All that really interest me is if the movie is good or not when it comes out? Is that weird?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Just a general question, why do folks care how a game’s PR/marketing campaign is going? It seems unique to gaming, but maybe Im wrong? I get why Intercept would care, and why T2 would care, but fans? Like Im never sitting around thinking “Gee the Red Sox really aren’t running enough promos this month” or “Damn how is Thor Love and Thunder going to hit its opening weekend targets on just two trailers?” All that really interest me is if the movie is good or not when it comes out? Is that weird?

Why do you read the news? Why do you follow Starship development?

I have another question: why do people blame the fans for wanting to know more about a game they care about?

Edited by Vl3d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Just a general question, why do folks care how a game’s PR/marketing campaign is going? It seems unique to gaming, but maybe Im wrong? I get why Intercept would care, and why T2 would care, but fans? Like Im never sitting around thinking “Gee the Red Sox really aren’t running enough promos this month” or “Damn how is Thor Love and Thunder going to hit its opening weekend targets on just two trailers?” All that really interest me is if the movie is good or not when it comes out? Is that weird?

That's true but a point to consider is that a film's development mostly stops at the theater release date. Speculative but, perhaps for games a better marketing campaign could provide a strong signal of future support/updates with more players buying the game?
I feel people also tend to internally correlate the intensity of the PR and marketing with the expected release date i.e."more PR-> closer to release, less PR-> doubt its going to happen".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Just a general question, why do folks care how a game’s PR/marketing campaign is going? It seems unique to gaming, but maybe Im wrong? I get why Intercept would care, and why T2 would care, but fans?

I want them to sell KSP-2 to as many players as possible. That way the game will be more popular, more money will go to its development - so, more updates, DLCs, sequels, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...