Kerbal Space Program 2 to be released in 2022 [Discussion Thread]

[DwightLee]

Well the worst thing they could do now is give us an estimate on release. Never ever tell gamers anything at all, until it is absolutely cast in stone. As they often will pretend conjecture is some kind of sacred promise. 

[Hip]

12 hours ago, DwightLee said:

Well the worst thing they could do now is give us an estimate on release. Never ever tell gamers anything at all, until it is absolutely cast in stone. As they often will pretend conjecture is some kind of sacred promise. 

Totally agree. See Sons of the Forest few days/weeks ago. 

[saxappeal89129]

On 4/27/2022 at 5:27 AM, DwightLee said:

Well the worst thing they could do now is give us an estimate on release. Never ever tell gamers anything at all, until it is absolutely cast in stone. As they often will pretend conjecture is some kind of sacred promise. 

^^^ +1

On 4/26/2022 at 3:19 PM, shdwlrd said:

They already said it will be about $60 usd. 

^^See look at that, one of my BIG questions already answered. So...

1) It will come out in 2022 sometime (or soon after)

2) It will be about $60.00 USD

3) It's Kerbal so it will be AWESOME

Nothing else that you need to know...

Except... will there be weather? Please give the planets weather and climate... I mean that's a huge part of launching RL rockets is weather/timing. If I don't see a huge dust storm on Duna I'll be slightly disappointed.

Edited April 28, 2022 by saxappeal89129

[TLTay]

On 4/27/2022 at 6:27 AM, DwightLee said:

Well the worst thing they could do now is give us an estimate on release. Never ever tell gamers anything at all, until it is absolutely cast in stone. As they often will pretend conjecture is some kind of sacred promise. 

I get the sentiment, but some really like updates. It's the most engaging thing about indie games. I remember following the original Kerbal blog before it was available to download at all, before you could pay for it, and way before it was on steam or officially released. I miss that engagement... 

Oh well, at least waiting for KSP2 has provided something to look forward to these last 2 years.

[Vl3d]

We want more marketing and better communication!

[stephensmat]

On 4/27/2022 at 9:27 PM, DwightLee said:

Well the worst thing they could do now is give us an estimate on release. Never ever tell gamers anything at all, until it is absolutely cast in stone. As they often will pretend conjecture is some kind of sacred promise. 

100%  I'm speaking as a guy who pre-ordered No Man's Sky. here

In a way, I think that's the problem. It's been a long time since they said 'Release 2022', and we've had multiple videos and Dev Diaries since then, which haven't mentioned release at all. It's making us nervous that they aren't repeating themselves about Release Date. In the real world, no news is good news. For the expectant, it's good or terrible.

[The Aziz]

Then people need help, not release date, if they're getting anxious or nervous when they're not constantly reassured about a release window, admittedly very wide, that hasn't changed in over a year.

There's always alternative scenario:

Release date: *is published*

Comments: "there's no way they can release it in time in finished state!"; "There will be more delays, I know it because they've done it before and there is one very extreme case on the market!"; "The evil publisher just wants our money as soon as possible, they should've let Intercept finish the game at their own pace!" Etc.

[Vl3d]

Or what if game development companies were actually professional and communicated constantly and clearly while also respecting their promises and deadlines?

I think it's insulting to players to say it's their fault. We want to find out more about a product, have a clear idea when it will be delivered and what it will contain.

Companies should not hide or lie. Lack of communication is as bad as irresponsible communication.

[Superfluous J]

55 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Or what if game development companies were actually professional and communicated constantly and clearly while also respecting their promises and deadlines?

They did. It was a terrible experience all around.

55 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I think it's insulting to players to say it's their fault.

When sales of a product rely on positive user reviews and your users will review your product lower based on something you said you were thinking about but then decided against, lambasting you for breaking your promises, then yes your not getting the information you want is their fault.

It's surely not the fault of the people who did what you want, only to be financially punished for it?

57 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

We want to find out more about a product, have a clear idea when it will be delivered and what it will contain.

They clearly don't know when it will be delivered and they've shown a decent amount of what it will contain. As they've not updated the most recent "in 2022" timeline, I expect they're still hopeful of meeting that. But whether it's in July or December I doubt they're remotely sure.

 

[Vl3d]

21 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

They clearly don't know when it will be delivered and they've shown a decent amount of what it will contain.

I am not accusing Intercept of anything. I am 100% on KSP2 teams side. My answer was strictly related to Mr. Aziz's speculations, in the most general sense.

Besides this, no.. they have not shown a decent amount. Not even close. You have no idea how big this game will be.

[MechBFP]

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

You have no idea how big this game will be.

Neither do you, so maybe keep that in mind. 

Edited April 29, 2022 by MechBFP

[Vl3d]

12 minutes ago, MechBFP said:

Neither do you, so maybe keep that in mind. 

Yes I do: $60 big. AAA level.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Vl3d

[MechBFP]

2 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Yes I do: $60 big. AAA level.

Feel free to clarify what you think that means, in detail.

[WelshSteW]

 

Let's all play nice, eh?

 

I think it's fair to say we could have an idea of how big KSP2 will be. We can reasonably expect it to be bigger than KSP1 for a start. We've seen that at the very least, there'll be one extra system to visit, so that would make it around twice as big as KSP1, in terms of available playing area. We've also seen some truley massive ships, so we can guess that part-wise it'll be bigger as well. Those two together mean that it'll have a lot more options in terms of playability than KSP1.

It would be fair to think that we haven't seen everything that'll be in the game, there's likely to be more than one extra system, there will be more variation in the types of planets / mooons / systems... So yeah, I think it'd be fair to say KSP2 will be several multiples of the size of KSP1.

[Vl3d]

42 minutes ago, MechBFP said:

Feel free to clarify what you think that means, in detail.

Take absolutely all the assets and pre-alpha and in-game footage that has been released until now. For example:

Right, so now please tell me if you agree with this statement.

3 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

they've shown a decent amount of what it will contain

If you do, please specifically tell me what we know about something extremely simple like: what is multiplayer going to be like? It's there going to be weather? Will we be able to build on/under water? How are supply routes going to work? What does the colony builder look like? What resources will be in game? It's there even going to be an in-game currency? It's there going to be a story? Etc.

Let me name a few games so you can compare the amount and quality of content $60 games have in them: Red Dead Redemption 2, Elden Ring, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, No Man's Sky.

Yes, Microsoft Flight Simulator is $70.

Or better yet, go through this list and strike out things that have been shown or confirmed:

Then you will realize they have shown close to nothing. Thank you for your patience.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Vl3d

[darthgently]

35 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

ake absolutely all the assets and pre-alpha and in-game footage that has been released until now. For example:

Video 1, @5:32.  Do I see terrain deformation on impact?

[Vl3d]

9 minutes ago, darthgently said:

Do I see terrain deformation on impact?

Nope.

[darthgently]

6 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Nope.

What is that after the smoke clears?  Wreckage?

[WelshSteW]

Is it the overhead shot you mean? The black lines? I think that's just a graphical effect to suggest 'charring' of the ground.

[darthgently]

1 minute ago, WelshSteW said:

Is it the overhead shot you mean? The black lines? I think that's just a graphical effect to suggest 'charring' of the ground.

Yes.  I think everything on the screen could be described as a "graphical effect" however, so not sure how descriptive that really is.  Given the way terrain is generated I doubt that it is actually part of the terrain code, but even if it is merely a terrain deformation simulated via a "craft made of charred regolith", this could be interesting.  I wonder if this was just an experiment, and if not, how long this "regolith craft" would remain in the game? 

16 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Nope.

I'm still going to guess it could be an experiment in "terrain deformation" because that is what it apparently is supposed to represent, whatever your technical interpretation.  I don't think you have enough information to say "Nope" with authority.

[The Aziz]

And yet, even Nate himself admits that there's a lot they're not showing. They choose to do that, and guess why. 

Now RDR, ER etc are all RPG style, I don't know how anyone compare them to realistic-ish spaceflight simulator. You know, apples and oranges. MSFS selling point was that they mapped whole world, but other than that it's basically an arcade flying game. Like what, even old Flight Sim 2002 (which I still own) had map of the whole world, though most of the terrain was randomly textured, and yet flying was much more complex, you couldn't just play it with WASD. I don't know where the $70 price tag came from.

[shdwlrd]

6 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Or what if game development companies were actually professional and communicated constantly and clearly while also respecting their promises and deadlines?

That's funny. I've never worked for a company where they communicated everything they were working on to their customers.

6 hours ago, Vl3d said:

I think it's insulting to players to say it's their fault. We want to find out more about a product, have a clear idea when it will be delivered and what it will contain.

Companies should not hide or lie. Lack of communication is as bad as irresponsible communication.

Have you heard the saying "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch." The few obnoxious users can ruin it for everyone. That's just the way it works. You'll only put up with so much before you say screw it, I'm done.

Games are not like tangible industrial, commercial products where you need to know the full specifications to determine if the product is acceptable or not. Games rely on peoples emotions, and that is a very fickle thing to gauge. So it's better not to tell your secrets before you're ready to do so.

[WelshSteW]

1 hour ago, darthgently said:

Yes.  I think everything on the screen could be described as a "graphical effect" however, so not sure how descriptive that really is.  Given the way terrain is generated I doubt that it is actually part of the terrain code, but even if it is merely a terrain deformation simulated via a "craft made of charred regolith", this could be interesting.  I wonder if this was just an experiment, and if not, how long this "regolith craft" would remain in the game? 

I'm still going to guess it could be an experiment in "terrain deformation" because that is what it apparently is supposed to represent, whatever your technical interpretation.  I don't think you have enough information to say "Nope" with authority.

 

Yeah, I was wondering how to word it tbh.

The terrain is the same as it always was, it's just coloured differently. It's got black marks on it, to try to show it's been burnt. But it's just a visual thing, there's no 'damage' as such.

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by WelshSteW

[darthgently]

1 minute ago, WelshSteW said:

The terrain is the same as it always was, it's just coloured differently. It's got black marks on it, to try to show it's been burnt. But it's just a visual thing, there's no 'damage' as such.

Yes, but this is not in KSP 1.  Maybe it is just a visual texture pattern or maybe it has a 3d shape like a craft, but either way, maybe we will see this "effect" from craft and maybe even Kerbals will leave footprints and rovers will leave tracks.  I have mixed feelings about this.  As long as the extent of the effect depends on available resources and doesn't alter frame rate overly much I'm ok with it

[WelshSteW]

5 minutes ago, darthgently said:

Yes, but this is not in KSP 1.  Maybe it is just a visual texture pattern or maybe it has a 3d shape like a craft, but either way, maybe we will see this "effect" from craft and maybe even Kerbals will leave footprints and rovers will leave tracks.  I have mixed feelings about this.  As long as the extent of the effect depends on available resources and doesn't alter frame rate overly much I'm ok with it

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have terrain deformation. I'm not arguing against it being in the game, I just don't think that clip shows it.

 

I think I've posted this somewhere else, but all of the colonisation stuff we've seen has had structures built around terrain, rather than terrain changed to accomodate structures. I know that's on a much larger scale than footprints or impact damage, but if the mechanics of deformation are there, I'd imagine they could be used for terraforming as well as footprints and impact damage.

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by WelshSteW