Jump to content

Beta Testing Volunteer


XLjedi

Recommended Posts

Just now, Master39 said:

Or, maybe, 8 years of accumulated old spaghetti that needs a complete rewrite, or a sequel.

Who am I kidding?  We all paid to be perpetual beta test volunteers.

Ah well; let the next round begin I s'pose...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, XLjedi said:

Who am I kidding?  We all paid to be perpetual beta test volunteers.

Ah well; let the next round begin I s'pose...

You did not pay for 1.9.0 so stop acting so entitled. Take it or leave it. I am leaving it. 1.8.1 will do just fine until a better version comes along. If not then so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, XLjedi said:

We all paid to be perpetual beta test volunteers.

It's always like that with EA indies, especially when Devs gives big discounts to early adopters, rewriting big portions of the game, fixing bugs and reorganizing the code is not marketable like new parts and features.

That's why a sequel is desiderable, the indie studio demonstrate that there is market for a specific niche and then the big players come into play with some serious funding to start from scratch with a clean slate and a more experienced team.

Honestly I hoped this for years, even not KSP, just someone copying the idea with better funding and a clearer scope for the game, the fact that we're getting an actual sequel is somethin I've never even dared to wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, dave1904 said:

You did not pay for 1.9.0 so stop acting so entitled.

Don't need to turn the discussion in that direction...

8 minutes ago, dave1904 said:

Take it or leave it. I am leaving it. 1.8.1 will do just fine until a better version comes along. If not then so be it. 

OK, noted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Master39 said:

Honestly I hoped this for years, even not KSP, just someone copying the idea with better funding and a clearer scope for the game, the fact that we're getting an actual sequel is somethin I've never even dared to wish.

I'm cautiously optimistic regarding 2.0.  Some news good, some disappointing.  Seems to be weighted more toward good at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, XLjedi said:

I'm cautiously optimistic regarding 2.0.  Some news good, some disappointing.  Seems to be weighted more toward good at the moment.

It's not a 2.0, it's a new game, from a different studio, with a different budget, a different economic model and a different set of goals.

It's not an indie EA, it's a AA fully fledged game, that's what we should expect and ask for that price, from that company with that publisher.

 

Forgetting everything we think we learned from KSP1 development it's a required starting point to talk about KSP2.

 

 

Edited by Guest
Inde > indie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Master39 said:

It's not a 2.0, it's a new game, from a different studio, with a different budget, a different economic model and a different set of goals.

It's not an inde EA, it's a AA fully fledged game, that's what we should expect and ask for that price, from that company with that publisher.

Forgetting everything we think we learned from KSP1 development it's a required starting point to talk about KSP2.

Well, we can hope for that...  

To me, if it were fully fledged, it would start with the parts from KSP, BG, and MH as its starting point.  

However, the logistics of base building and multiplayer has me intrigued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, XLjedi said:

Well, we can hope for that...  

To me, if it were fully fledged, it would start with the parts from KSP, BG, and MH as its starting point.  

However, the logistics of base building and multiplayer has me intrigued.

The fact that it's a fully-fledged new game is exactly why it *doesn't* have the parts from BG and MH - those came out *after* development on KSP2 started. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, DStaal said:

The fact that it's a fully-fledged new game is exactly why it *doesn't* have the parts from BG and MH - those came out *after* development on KSP2 started. 

What?

Even if I accepted the idea that timing of the DLC should influence what makes it into a yet-to-be-released game...  Take-Two bought KSP before any of the DLC was released.  Even if Take-Two hadn't bought the franchise nearly 3 years ago; I'd still say if they are targeting late this year, maybe even early 2021?  They have had plenty of time to accommodate robotic parts. 

https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/take-two-interactive-software-inc-acquires-kerbal-space-program-2017-05-31

You don't think the KSP 2.0 the new devs had full knowledge and access to the MH and BG expansions?  According to Squad at the time, they were excited to work on their new DLC and updates with the added support.  Although, if I were Take-Two, I think I would've balked pretty hard on that MH Mission Editor...  That was a DOA flop.  "You're gonna add what to my franchise?  Did someone playtest this?"  

Perhaps an argument can be made that certain items have been obsoleted by new features or gameplay focus; we'll see.  FTL travel may be so engaging as to render things like rotorcraft pointless.  Robotic parts with articulating joints/pivots/pistons seems like it will continue to be relevant or noticeably missing at launch.  I could be wrong though, they may have new parts that do all the things we want without having to manually build so much; we'll see.  Now, if they have some economic incentives for releasing the parts in DLC format then fine... sure, let folks buy what they want.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, XLjedi said:

What?

Even if I accepted the idea that timing of the DLC should influence what makes it into a yet-to-be-released game...  Take-Two bought KSP before any of the DLC was released.  Even if Take-Two hadn't bought the franchise nearly 3 years ago; I'd still say if they are targeting late this year, maybe even early 2021?  They have had plenty of time to accommodate robotic parts. 

https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/take-two-interactive-software-inc-acquires-kerbal-space-program-2017-05-31

You don't think the KSP 2.0 the new devs had full knowledge and access to the MH and BG expansions?  According to Squad at the time, they were excited to work on their new DLC and updates with the added support.  Although, if I were Take-Two, I think I would've balked pretty hard on that MH Mission Editor...  That was a DOA flop.  "You're gonna add what to my franchise?  Did someone playtest this?"  

Perhaps an argument can be made that certain items have been obsoleted by new features or gameplay focus; we'll see.  FTL travel may be so engaging as to render things like rotorcraft pointless.  Robotic parts with articulating joints/pivots/pistons seems like it will continue to be relevant or noticeably missing at launch.  I could be wrong though, they may have new parts that do all the things we want without having to manually build so much; we'll see.  Now, if they have some economic incentives for releasing the parts in DLC format then fine... sure, let folks buy what they want.

 

Honestly, I hope they just put all their focus into game efficiency and supporting the new assets it's already bringing in.

  • The career/science overhaul
  • Mechanics around colonies and the incentivization to even make players find them useful
  • Logistical problems of resource management between the KSC, orbital launch platforms, and colonies

I'm hoping to see robotic parts too, but I wouldn't be disappointed if I had to wait an update or 2 to get them. Also to the "FTL travel may be so engaging as to render things like rotorcraft pointless" comment, I dont think we'll be seeing FTL travel methods in particular, but instead some craft traveling at significant fractions of the speed of light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Honestly, I hope they just put all their focus into game efficiency and supporting the new assets it's already bringing in.

  • The career/science overhaul
  • Mechanics around colonies and the incentivization to even make players find them useful
  • Logistical problems of resource management between the KSC, orbital launch platforms, and colonies

I'm hoping to see robotic parts too, but I wouldn't be disappointed if I had to wait an update or 2 to get them. Also to the "FTL travel may be so engaging as to render things like rotorcraft pointless" comment, I dont think we'll be seeing FTL travel methods in particular, but instead some craft traveling at significant fractions of the speed of light.

I don't remember them mentioning FTL at all actually....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Incarnation of Chaos said:

I don't remember them mentioning FTL at all actually....

Not directly, but they have mentioned they would like to work with theoretically feasible technologies (inb4metallichydrogendebate) and without "negative energy" there is no realistic way to surpass the speed of light. So to me that says no FTL travel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

I don't remember them mentioning FTL at all actually....

I took it directly from the Take-Two KSP 2 Press Release:  

Kerbal Space Program 2 offers a multitude of ways for players to further their space adventures with a robust offering of new planets to explore, new technologies to traverse the stars, and the ability to establish colonies, all rooted in real-world science. Players will be able to build without the constraints of planetary gravitation for the first time, which allows for larger constructions and more complex creations than ever before – including interstellar vessels. In addition, players will be able to share these experiences collectively in multiplayer for the first time in franchise history.

I took "new technologies to traverse the stars" to mean some form of FTL travel.  It says "rooted in real-world science".  To me, that says Alcubierre's FTL warp drive is on the table.  I suspect in the game, the Kebals will discover the negative energy source needed to power it.  ...and if I were to venture a guess, Mystery Goo will somehow be the key.  LOL

I s'pose the stars in the Kerbal-verse don't have to be several light years apart, but I don't particularly like the idea of having to clear all contracts before going into a 4 or 5 year accel-time phase in the game play either.

Edited by XLjedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, XLjedi said:

I took it directly from the Take-Two KSP 2 Press Release:  

Kerbal Space Program 2 offers a multitude of ways for players to further their space adventures with a robust offering of new planets to explore, new technologies to traverse the stars, and the ability to establish colonies, all rooted in real-world science. Players will be able to build without the constraints of planetary gravitation for the first time, which allows for larger constructions and more complex creations than ever before – including interstellar vessels. In addition, players will be able to share these experiences collectively in multiplayer for the first time in franchise history.

I took "new technologies to traverse the stars" to mean some form of FTL travel.  It says "rooted in real-world science".  To me, that says Alcubierre's FTL warp drive is on the table.  I suspect in the game, the Kebals will discover the negative energy source needed to power it.  ...and if I were to venture a guess, Mystery Goo will somehow be the key.  LOL

I s'pose the stars in the Kerbal-verse don't have to be several light years apart, but I don't particularly like the idea of having to clear all contracts before going into a 4 or 5 year accel-time phase in the game play either.

That's a massive leap; especially since the trailer we've seen contains Orion and Fusion ICF drives which meet these much better than the warp drive. Also you'll be able to warp out of focus, so that wouldn't even be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Also you'll be able to warp out of focus, so that wouldn't even be an issue.

I wasn't referring to literally watching the accel time happen.  Time is time, I would still have contracts expiring regardless of whether or not the warp occurs out of focus?  I don't like the gameplay idea of, "OK, lets finish all contracts so we can accel time.  Now 15 years has passed and we have all done nothing in the meantime waiting for this ship to arrive at closest star."  That kinda feels like a hard disconnect in the gameplay timeline for me.

The stars will have to be pretty close together, or the speeds are gonna need to be FTL.  I suppose they could fudge on distance and have the kerbal-verse exist near the center of a galaxy where maybe the stars are closer together?      

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, XLjedi said:

I wasn't referring to literally watching the accel time happen.  Time is time, I would still have contracts expiring regardless of whether or not the warp occurs out of focus?  I don't like the gameplay idea of, "OK, lets finish all contracts so we can accel time.  Now 15 years has passed and we have all done nothing in the meantime waiting for this ship to arrive at closest star."  That kinda feels like a hard disconnect in the gameplay timeline for me.

The stars will have to be pretty close together, or the speeds are gonna need to be FTL.  I suppose they could fudge on distance and have the kerbal-verse exist near the center of a galaxy where maybe the stars are closer together?      

 

......

What i'm saying is that you could do contracts and your ship would still get there, also no you won't.

Kerbal is 1/10th scale; which means the distances aren't going to be anywhere near the real live analogs. Even Orion is likely going to be overkill, but time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Incarnation of Chaos said:

......

What i'm saying is that you could do contracts and your ship would still get there, also no you won't.

Kerbal is 1/10th scale; which means the distances aren't going to be anywhere near the real live analogs. Even Orion is likely going to be overkill, but time will tell.

Alright, so they fudge on the scale of the Kerbal galaxy to make near-FTL travel function just like FTL travel in a Milky-Way sized galaxy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Basically; same thing they do now with planets. On a realistically sized planet making orbit would take much longer, and require about 4X the DV.

So they couldn't scale up the rockets?  Somehow we meager humans manage the DV to put things into orbit on a regular basis.

Basically, they have to fudge the science on one end of the scale or the other... most likely in the interest of gameplay.  A near FTL drive in 1/10 scale is a warp 9 drive in 1:1 scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, XLjedi said:

So they couldn't scale up the rockets?  Somehow we meager humans manage the DV to put things into orbit on a regular basis.

Basically, they have to fudge the science on one end of the scale or the other... most likely in the interest of gameplay.  A near FTL drive in 1/10 scale is a warp 9 drive in 1:1 scale.

I mean they're already pretty close; the mass ratios are just completely out of wack. Actual rocket fuel tanks contribute much less dry mass; being almost 98% fuel by mass. Kerbal tanks are around 82% fuel by mass; using SMURFF to correct this makes it relatively easy to make launchers with realistic DV (8000m/s between 2 stages).

So they could scale up the planets (wouldn't even have to go full scale; 3X would still be plenty); which then would make everything further out. But then they have to completely rebalance the game, parts and tech tree, and comes at the risk of isolating previous KSP1 players.

So this means scaling the universe up carries more risk than just keeping the 1/10th scale.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They already confirmed in interviews there will be no Warp drive engine in the game.

 

 

11 minutes ago, XLjedi said:

So they couldn't scale up the rockets?  Somehow we meager humans manage the DV to put things into orbit on a regular basis.

The problem is not realism, it's time to orbit. When an attempt to reach orbit its 5 minutes long you can try 12 times in an hour, if the game used a real world scale that would go down to 2-3 attempts per hour and the game wold be too hard on new players and too boring on the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Incarnation of Chaos  @Master39 well... pointing back to the press release it didn't just say "explore the next closest star" it said "Explore new galaxies".  In fact, it's literally the first thing they say in the press release.

https://ir.take2games.com/node/26301/pdf

"Explore new galaxies, build larger contraptions, and discover more celestial bodies with the sequel to the critically acclaimed space simulator"

So I dunno, maybe Take-Two doesn't actually know what a "galaxy" is or how far apart they are?  1/10 scale or otherwise if we are expected to traverse galaxies in KSP 2 there is going to need to be some sort of FTL engine.

Edited by XLjedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...