KSP 2 will ruin the original

[The Aziz]

13 hours ago, Arugela said:

Software doesn't work that way. Physical object may have that problem like a ship hull or other items that would need to be scrapped, but a program can always be fixed.

 

If we're talking about physical objects, alright

You have an old car. It's working but with some hiccups, can't deny it, it's old. You crash. If it's a fender dent or oil leak, you can fix it at no cost. But there is also possibility of total damage, when it's just not worth it to basically rebuild the whole thing because even the chassis is broken. It's cheaper to get a new one.

Let's talk shortly about software now, shall we? Imagine if Microsoft decided to not write new systems from scratch, like they did few times over the years, but stick to Windows 98 core to this day. That would hurt and probably ruin the experience, right?

[Incarnation of Chaos]

1 hour ago, The Aziz said:

If we're talking about physical objects, alright

You have an old car. It's working but with some hiccups, can't deny it, it's old. You crash. If it's a fender dent or oil leak, you can fix it at no cost. But there is also possibility of total damage, when it's just not worth it to basically rebuild the whole thing because even the chassis is broken. It's cheaper to get a new one.

Let's talk shortly about software now, shall we? Imagine if Microsoft decided to not write new systems from scratch, like they did few times over the years, but stick to Windows 98 core to this day. That would hurt and probably ruin the experience, right?

Also Software can be "Totaled" at a point also; it can get so bad that it's actually cheaper/easier to rebuild a piece of software from scratch than working with an existing base. This can be especially true for large pieces of software (i.e games) where so many dependancies are tied into the systems you want to change that you're at a minimum going to break compatiblity with existing software. 

[runner78]

15 hours ago, Arugela said:

Software doesn't work that way. Physical object may have that problem like a ship hull or other items that would need to be scrapped, but a program can always be fixed.

I am a programmer, and i say, software work that way.

[Guest]

Version 1.0.0:

Version 1.5:

Version 1.9:

Version 2.0:

... and so on and so on.

 

[Lisias]

The only thing I think KSP 2 will ruin is my social life.

[runner78]

Social life? What is that? 

[Curveball Anders]

Just now, runner78 said:

Social life? What is that? 

Interacting on the forum I think.

 

[dave1904]

Let's say they continued to update ksp for years to come. At some point it won't be the original game either. Even now it is very different to ksp 1.00. In a sense it's better to let the original be as it is and have a new one. Not that it matters since you can probably find the files of every version that exist online. 

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

The only thing I think KSP 2 will ruin is my social life.

As long as you have 2 healthy hands it doesn't matter. 

[Bej Kerman]

On 8/24/2019 at 1:53 AM, Thelizard said:

By making a sequel we effectively admit that the first had core flaws that couldn't be fixed with an update. 

So, you want to keep KSP 1 and sweep all of its problems under the rug? KSP 1 does have flaws and I think everyone should admit that. Performance isn't great, the planets are stuck in alpha (with the exception of some added science scatter and new textures), rockets are like spaghetti, etc. Many problems can't be fixed since the game is so old and its origins involved inexperienced developers. Since KSP 2 is being developed from the ground up with a team of experienced developers, KSP 2 can be made to be better at handling problems and many bugs should be caught while the base is still being constructed, hopefully leading to a game more solid than the original could hope to be. Even if interstellar travel gets cut, KSP 2 should be a much more enjoyable experience as it embraces new technology and is developed more robustly.

On 10/8/2019 at 8:58 AM, Brikoleur said:

Version 1.0.0:

Version 1.5:

Version 2.0:

... and so on and so on.

 

What's the car meant to represent and what does hiding the upper headlights represent for KSP 2?

[Guest]

15 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

What's the car meant to represent and what does hiding the upper headlights represent for KSP 2?

It illustrates a design process. You start out with an initial design that's clean and sleek. As you go on, new requirements emerge, things change, and you start tweaking it, adding a spoiler here, a wing there, until eventually it's sprouted a mess of stuff that largely buries the initial design. Then you take into account everything you've learned in the process, start from a clean slate, and incorporate all of it in a new, clean design. Then the process repeats.

[Bej Kerman]

22 minutes ago, Brikoleur said:

It illustrates a design process. You start out with an initial design that's clean and sleek. As you go on, new requirements emerge, things change, and you start tweaking it, adding a spoiler here, a wing there, until eventually it's sprouted a mess of stuff that largely buries the initial design. Then you take into account everything you've learned in the process, start from a clean slate, and incorporate all of it in a new, clean design. Then the process repeats.

Ah, got it. Thanks for explaining.

[Renegrade]

On 8/23/2019 at 9:47 PM, RocketBlam said:

I don't agree. The original will still be there. I still play Civilization 5 from time to time. A lot of people do.

Ditto.   And Civ 4.  Lots of Civ 4, even though it needed a better "huge stack of units" management UI.  And sometimes Civ 1/2/3 (although they feel kinda same-y to me).

I'll still play KSP1.  Heck, I kept backups of all of my Squad Store downloads, just in case I want to say play 0.22 again.  Heh.

 

[kAerospace]

On 8/24/2019 at 2:53 AM, Thelizard said:

KSP 2

Making a second is a bad idea: 

Ksp Is like Minecraft, there should never be a sequel, it is an open ended creative game, 

By making a sequel we effectively admit that the first had core flaws that couldn't be fixed with an update. 

Im sorry but more Minecraft, when Microsoft acquired Mojang, they didn't make Minecraft 2, they instead took the amazing community and built upon it, they did things we never would've thought they could do. Most of the features in KSP 2 that we know of,  can be incorporated in an update. Also, some of the parts in KSP 2 seem a little too far from the present. 

 

In my opinion "poor choice", but I'll still play it (KSP 2 ) anyway

Actually, KSP2 is a great way to update the codebase. KSP runs on code which originates from 2011, with many features added to it. KSP is poorly optimized in comparison to later games with a similar gameplay (like SR2 or something) and KSP2 is a great way to fix many of the flaws that came with the old code...

[Bej Kerman]

If you're worried about KSP 2 ruining KSP 1, maybe it's the terrible optimisation and occasions mishandled development (scrapped hidden planet a la Outer Wilds, lazy repaint of the parts and parts that should be present not being there that got completely one-upped by ReStock+) of KSP 1 that's the problem and not the fact KSP 2 is going to completely dunk on it. "By making a sequel we effectively admit that the first had core flaws that couldn't be fixed with an update." is effectively saying "I don't want all the horrible issues of KSP 1 that make it unpleasant to play to be revealed through a properly optimised and expanded iteration of the game". Horrible issues should be a reason to get a sequel.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Bej Kerman

[AtomicTech]

2 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

If you're worried about KSP 2 ruining KSP 1, maybe it's the terrible optimisation and occasions mishandled development (scrapped hidden planet a la Outer Wilds, lazy repaint of the parts and parts that should be present not being there that got completely one-upped by ReStock+) of KSP 1 that's the problem and not the fact KSP 2 is going to completely dunk on it.

Yep!

KSP is like a stew, being served to you one serving at a time and changing each time. KSP 2 is the entire stew, being served to you, fully finished.

[the_electro_bros]

On 8/23/2019 at 7:53 PM, Thelizard said:

Most of the features in KSP 2 that we know of,  can be incorporated in an update. Also, some of the parts in KSP 2 seem a little too far from the present. 

 

 

While an update might be possible, many parts of it could conflict with current functions. There is an entire physics revamp going on.

Incorporating that into the current KSP is just inefficient, and will introduce many bugs. 

[WelshSteW]

I for one really really hope that KSP2 does ruin KSP1. If it does that, it means they got it right.

[jimmymcgoochie]

On one hand, KSP2 is supposed to surpass KSP in pretty much every way- bigger, faster, prettier and overall better in pretty much every way.

On the other hand, look at the thousands of mods that have been made for KSP, the years of effort that have gone into many of them and the sheer complexity of some of those (just look at RO/RP-1 to see how far KSP can be pushed from its original state) and then you have to realise that KSP2 will be starting from scratch with no mods at all (or very few). It'll take time for KSP2 to get even a fraction of the mods available for KSP, during which time it'll have to stand on its own feet; yes, some KSP mods could be transferred over to KSP2, but that's up to the mod developers and maintainers and they're under no obligation to do so, plus it could be a lot harder than you might think.