Sav Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Hey players and devs. I tried to make this post before but i think it didn't go through (page crashed randomly) if it does come through well i will just delete this one, anyway on to the post! I am just curious because i have been searching the forums here, on steam and redit and i can't get a clear answer.. why are they continually developing the first game when they are planning to release the second game in half a year? The game doesn't contain a story line and if the second game contains everything the first has plus a lot more content, mechanics, multiplayer and improved graphics, why would anyone play the first one at all? I can understand if people have computers that might not be able to handle the 2nd game but a part from that, the first game would be obsolete to the 2nd wouldnt it? unless their is things you can do in the first that you can't do in the second which seems a little silly. I would use universe sandbox as an example, when the 2nd was released the first was completely redundant, there was no reason to play the first at all, so for a game like this where their is no story to go back to experience, i can't see the logic of the continuous development of the first while the newer one of the series is released. Can a dev or anyone here with more knowledge about it please explain it to me? i tend to leave a previous installment of a game and focus on a sequel in any series i play, so i am curious why i should keep the first installed when i will be giving the second game all my attention? Thanks in advanced, Sal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Sav said: Hey players and devs. I'm in the first camp, so anything I say should be taken as not official. Quote I tried to make this post before but i think it didn't go through (page crashed randomly) if it does come through well i will just delete this one, anyway on to the post! Forums eat posts, especially ones that take a long time to write. If I write a post as long as yours I frequently copy it into my clipboard before submitting, in case it gets a timeout. Quote why are they continually developing the first game when they are planning to release the second game in half a year? To be nice to the people who bought the game. Also, so people buying games in the future have some hint that maybe that game will also be similarly supported. Quote The game doesn't contain a story line and if the second game contains everything the first has plus a lot more content, mechanics, multiplayer and improved graphics, why would anyone play the first one at all? Because you own it, and can't justify spending money on the new one. Quote i am curious why i should keep the first installed when i will be giving the second game all my attention? You probably shouldn't, other than the fact that even a fully modded game of KSP will take up such a small footprint as to be unnoticeable. Squad is not going to update KSP1 to try to draw in KSP2 players. They'll be updating KSP1 for KSP1 players. Same thing with: Dealerships working on older model cars. Cell phone companies updating older model phones Microsoft supporting older versions of Windows, and still producing XBox 360 games. The whole point is to support the older versions of your stuff, so when someone is deciding if they want to drop $60 on your game, they can be sure it won't be tossed in the garbage heap when version N+1 comes out in a couple years. Edited October 7, 2019 by 5thHorseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcwaffles2003 Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 2 hours ago, Sav said: I am just curious because i have been searching the forums here, on steam and redit and i can't get a clear answer.. why are they continually developing the first game when they are planning to release the second game in half a year? A different company owns KSP 2, so why would trhey stop developing a game theyre trying to profit on with no successor under their name? Quote The game doesn't contain a story line and if the second game contains everything the first has plus a lot more content, mechanics, multiplayer and improved graphics, why would anyone play the first one at all? It wont have everything thats in KSP 1. I dont think levers, rotors, etc will be included in the base game as well as other DLC features Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I would expect work on KSP1 to wind down as KSP2 spools up and players migrate to it. Stuff runs on money and I don't think there's enough money in supporting KSP1 indefinitely. There will be a pretty significant period during which there will be very good reasons to stick with KSP1 however. KSP2 will almost certainly be somewhat rough around the edges when it comes out. As @mcwaffles2003 pointed out, it won't have the content from the DLCs, in particular the Breaking Ground robotics. Probably most importantly, none of the mods will work. A lot of people have a ton of time invested in mod sandboxes or careers, and they will want to stick with those. My expectation is that after KSP2 is out, if it is successful, KSP1 will gradually fade into the kind of dignified retirement great games with a dedicated fanbase enjoy. Modders will continue to support and mod it, but SQUAD will move on to other things. They have to live too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pecan Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I won't be buying KSP 2 until: It's a lot cheaper than USD $60 Mods have caught up Bugs have been worked out* In the meantime I'll still be playing KSP 1. (* Because it's inevitable and unavoidable that there will be some and that's not a problem. If they aren't worked out, however, it will be sign that the developers aren't just price-gouging). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RocketSimplicity Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I agree with @5thHorseman and @Brikoleur’s points, on how they want to keep the KSP 1 fan base going. I also want to add that, from what I can see, SQUAD are now trying to develop KSP in a different path from KSP 2, which I think started with 1.4 (Around the time T2 acquired KSP and probably when star.theory began developing KSP 2). They’ve stopped adding new big features and things that change the way the standard player plays (except for Breaking Ground, that’s something different). KSP 2 is continuing the new features / changing the way the player plays (e.g, colonies, interstellar, etc) while KSP is being improved into it’s final ultimate state (e.g part revamps, DLCs and QOL features) and supporting their fanbase (Involving the community more recently, e.g. Loading Screen Contest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linuxgurugamer Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 5 hours ago, 5thHorseman said: ou probably shouldn't, other than the fact that even a fully modded game of KSP will take up such a small footprint as to be unnoticeable. I don't call 30-40 gig “unnoticeable”, especially when I have 10-15 installs of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said: I don't call 30-40 gig “unnoticeable”, especially when I have 10-15 installs of the game. You may be an outlier there. But one install at a couple dozen gig? That's not really a big deal for most gamers. Heck I didn't uninstall Elite until it downloaded a totally useless (to me) 1/3 terabyte update automatically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sav Posted October 8, 2019 Author Share Posted October 8, 2019 Wow thanks for all the ideas and responses! Would it be fair to say that ultimately KSP 2 will contain everything the first game had and everything that could be attained or achieved in the first will be in the second? (Base game not mods) I ask this because when the second game does come out, i dont see myself playing the first anymore, ive got my time / moneys worth out of it and i acheived the majority of my goals in game, i'd like to learn the sequel and adapt to that. The first game is fantastic don't get me wrong, but a sequel that gives more and looks nicer will trump the classic for me, provided like i said before you can do and attain everything from the first game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 47 minutes ago, Sav said: Wow thanks for all the ideas and responses! Would it be fair to say that ultimately KSP 2 will contain everything the first game had and everything that could be attained or achieved in the first will be in the second? (Base game not mods) From what was reported the only things in KSP1 that won't be in KSP2 are from the DLC, and then any gameplay changes. There won't be an option to start a "Science Mode" game, for example, though from what I read you can likely get something similar. There will also likely be a vast number of parts that don't exist in KSP2 that are in KSP1, but each will have analogs. Or be useless like the Micronode 47 minutes ago, Sav said: I ask this because when the second game does come out, i dont see myself playing the first anymore, ive got my time / moneys worth out of it and i acheived the majority of my goals in game, i'd like to learn the sequel and adapt to that. I'm in the same boat. I can't see playing KSP1 much once KSP2 drops. I'll likely also drop mod support for KSP1, though my mods haven't needed any support in years. 47 minutes ago, Sav said: The first game is fantastic don't get me wrong, but a sequel that gives more and looks nicer will trump the classic for me, provided like i said before you can do and attain everything from the first game. Totally agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave1904 Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 I have to agree with this post to be honest. If ksp is what we all hope it is in terms of modability and stability I really don't see a point in playing the original. Maybe a few people cannot pick it up at launch but the vast majority of players will not return to the original if ksp2 is good. All the posts seem to be assuming ksp2 is a good game. We don't know yet. I think squad will update and release dlc only if there is a player base that makes it worthwhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakenred65 Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 I occasionally boot up oblivion or Skyrim or fallout new vegas or fallout 4. that said, I doubt I will mess with ksp when 2 gets up to speed. After all I haven’t played sims 3 since 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klapaucius Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 I 1 hour ago, [email protected] said: that said, I doubt I will mess with ksp when 2 gets up to speed. After all I haven’t played sims 3 since 4. I'm probably the opposite. As someone who came to KSP late, I am keen to get in on KSP2 early and follow it along as it develops. There is some fun in that. As for leaving KSP1--I cannot for sure say until I have seen KSP2. It could be that they are different enough that some players will go back and forth, the way they do with Civilization IV, which I have not played, but still seems to hold appeal for players of V and VI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxxQ Posted October 8, 2019 Share Posted October 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Klapaucius said: It could be that they are different enough that some players will go back and forth, the way they do with Civilization IV, which I have not played, but still seems to hold appeal for players of V and VI. On a similar note, I much prefer to go back and play the original Deus Ex over Human Revolution. This despite the fact that HR has better graphics, a more interactive hacking mechanic, and so on. The original is simply, for me, more fun and immersive, and I've played it at least once per year since the day it was first released (even though I know all the various secret routes through areas, recall most usernames and passwords for ATMs, computers and so forth, and have both saved Paul and let him die). I've only played HR once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rejected Spawn Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 Hey guys and gals and bots and Borgs and lawyers and whatever other flavors of sentients might hang out here... isn't this thread missing a very major difference in what sets KSP1 and KSP2 apart? KSP represents largely "what has been proven" while KSP2 generally represents "what we think should be possible". [1] The more you look at this difference the bigger it becomes; we have made a huge number of real life rockets that run on a fuel and an oxidizer - we've yet to lose our minds enough to aim beyond the sky by means of nuclear explosions but we've done the math and it should work. Making a little bit of an assumption here I'd call KSP2 "the math SHOULD be right" and KSP1 "the math WAS right" which is a huge difference in approach. I've been strongly in favor of KSP1 adding more stuff that Kerbals (who generally don't die of age, their only gene pool chlorine is accidents) could use that humans with our fragile build and limited life span wouldn't be able to try if following all of our morally generated laws, however I stopped favoring this approach quite as strongly once KSP2 was announced as it finally lets us step beyond the relative safety of what has a counterpart in our own history and aims toward a reasonably likely future where we had little choice but to actually put our craziest ideas to the test. Playing KSP1 is not at all unlikely to end up being a kind of "classic and conservative" approach to space travel once we finally get our hands on the KSP2 universe that lets us throw caution out the window and immerse ourselves in the madness of science at its most experimental. [2] [1] When dealing with experimental stuff where the math seems solid we will inevitably end up with some stuff that gets disproven, please don't derail the entire thread because of yet another Metallic Hydrogen rant. [2] See [1] (and please SERIOUSLY DON'T get into the metallic hydrogen, WE GET IT already!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shdwlrd Posted October 9, 2019 Share Posted October 9, 2019 10 hours ago, Rejected Spawn said: KSP represents largely "what has been proven" while KSP2 generally represents "what we think should be possible". That's a good way to look at the difference between KSP 1 and 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kspnerd122 Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 the old devs are still going to work on ksp 1 however star theory should be careful not to kill the original game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOfAblator Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 1 minute ago, kspnerd122 said: the old devs are still going to work on ksp 1 however star theory should be careful not to kill the original game. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts