Jump to content

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


Arco123
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

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.

No, I'm agreeing with you that it may simply be a 2d texture image mapped to the 3d terrain.  Either way, the "effect" looks good.  If you want to call a mapped 2d texture onto 3d terrain "terrain deformation" or not is merely academic.  To me, if it persists, then it is a "deformation" of the displayed terrain, to others, if it changes the 3d shape then it is a "deformation".  I suppose the latter might be more righter or something, but you get what I'm getting at.  I'm not really concerned with going back and forth on the terminology, just commenting on persistent "changes" to the terrain surface

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Vl3d said:

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.

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.

Honestly the only thing I took away from your post is that the game could be even smaller than Microsoft Flight simulator, given the cheaper price. 
Don’t think you made the argument you thought you were. 

Edited by MechBFP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Vl3d said:

We want more marketing and better communication!

^^^Don't you get enough marketing and people blowing smoke from real world news?

I'm happy for the relative silence, as I take that as a sign that they have their heads in the game (pun), and are working diligently to create a refined project.

14 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?

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.

^^^All I hear from this is "Are we there yet... are we there yet...are we there yet...are we there yet"...

1) You haven't paid for anything yet

2) It's THEIR intellectual property not yours

3) Even when you buy the game, it's still THEIR intellectual property and not yours

**I do believe in consumer rights, and I certainly do believe and EXPECT quality products in all aspects of my life. However, do you expect weekly/monthly updates from BMW, Audi, Porsche, etc. sports care manufacturers? If you really want to get a dose of reality go check out the Subaru forums right now... NASOIC... everyone in the world thought they were going to release a brand new 2023 STi pushing upwards of 350hp 350ftlb. They just released a four sentence statement to the entire world saying (for the most part)... "Sorry we've been leading all of you on, we're not going to be building a 2023 STi, you're all up the creek without a paddle"

[snip]

 

Edited by Gargamel
Portions Redacted by Moderator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WelshSteW said:

 

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.

 

My concern with terrain deformation or voxel based planets is that... with all of the other physics calculations happening (monster load), this adds another layer of complexity. With all of that complexity comes additional resources needed to run the game. Now... I'm on a Z690 Unify-X, with a 12900KS pushed to 5.5ghz, and 5.3 all core... but I don't want to have to use LN2 to have a good gaming experience. (God I hope Raptor Lake is more efficient)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, saxappeal89129 said:

My concern with terrain deformation or voxel based planets is that... with all of the other physics calculations happening (monster load), this adds another layer of complexity. With all of that complexity comes additional resources needed to run the game. Now... I'm on a Z690 Unify-X, with a 12900KS pushed to 5.5ghz, and 5.3 all core... but I don't want to have to use LN2 to have a good gaming experience. (God I hope Raptor Lake is more efficient)

That is why I prefaced my statement by it being tuned to system performance.  It doesn't have to be voxels.  It can just be a 2D texture mapped to the terrain.  And it can have a timeout, or be in a FIFO where the oldest one goes away when a new one appears.  And only the ones local to the current scene apply anyway.  There are a lot of ways to do this and if it is done right I'm ok with it.  But if they are going to do it wrong I'd rather they not do it at all.  Bottom line:  I have no clue if or how they will or will not do it and it isn't that big of a deal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, darthgently said:

That is why I prefaced my statement by it being tuned to system performance.  It doesn't have to be voxels.  It can just be a 2D texture mapped to the terrain.  And it can have a timeout, or be in a FIFO where the oldest one goes away when a new one appears.  And only the ones local to the current scene apply anyway.  There are a lot of ways to do this and if it is done right I'm ok with it.  But if they are going to do it wrong I'd rather they not do it at all.  Bottom line:  I have no clue if or how they will or will not do it and it isn't that big of a deal

*Thumbs up* Couldn't agree with you more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, saxappeal89129 said:

*Thumbs up* Couldn't agree with you more!

I will say that it sure looked like some kind of persistent mark on the ground where the craft impacted in that first vid at 5:29 or so.  So I think they are at least experimenting.  Finger crossed it is sanely done or nixed, no in between

rFTcNsG.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Vl3d said:

You have no idea how big this game will be

Oh jeez don't say that the last time someone said that to me it was about Cyberpunk.

11 hours ago, Vl3d said:

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

Oh and I know how much they've shown. We just have different definitions of "A decent amount" when it comes to teaser footage of an in-development video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow it's getting hot in here. One overriding theme I've taken away from the feature videos, is they really want to keep these things close to their chest. They give the impression, to me at least, that they want to give us surprise and wonder. All of the videos have been more or less about how ksp 1 mechanics have been improved, polished and expanded. Stuff we are familiar with. Or about the onboarding efforts and the complexity of what they are doing.  From that my take is we are not the target market for the videos, not really. WE don't need convincing, the rest of the gaming world does. At the end of the day, as long as the base is solid, the api are good, this community will find a way. This comunity alone is not enough critical mass to pay for a AAA title. Witch this is, if you go by the time put in, the money spent, and the expected retail price. (arguably, AAA seems to creeping in to the 80$ range these days,) I'm just guessing, I think they've been at this for at least 18 months before anything as made public. They didn't start out with AAA in mind, I don't know how it grew into that but here we are. I also believe that many in this community don't fully appreciate the colossal effort they put in to solve the precision issues (slay the kraken.) And the work that went into explaining this whole thing to newbs. I will watch every tutorial in game with popcorn, just to enjoy the work. I might even pick up a few things I've missed before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some content has been removed.

As per the usual, do not attack the person, attack the argument.  

Do not make statements solely for the intent of causing an argument. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, saxappeal89129 said:

Check out the Subaru forums right now

That made me laugh!

I just pictured how little response I would get by going on the GMC forums and demanding that the '23 Yukon Denali get the nose of the AT-4, the steel bumpers of the Sierra with front and back tow hooks and a No S Tailgate with power window (read: NOT lift-gate... TAILGATE ) because that's what I want. 

Good analogy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quality over quantity, yall. The game will be plenty big. What matters are the dynamics—diverse resource puzzles and tight mechanics. Nobody will be able to assess that until the game is released. Until then, chill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pthigrivi said:

Quality over quantity, yall. The game will be plenty big. What matters are the dynamics—diverse resource puzzles and tight mechanics. Nobody will be able to assess that until the game is released. Until then, chill. 

Already gave you the like but that's not enough. 

Playing NMS, Sims 4, Cyberpunk, etc. you learn to appreciate deep puddles much more over shallow oceans. A couple of well intertwined, interdependent, deep systems, will trump loosely tied, individually canned "mechanics" any day.

7 hours ago, darthgently said:

[specifically quoting the image]

 Multiplayer was promised for the original KSP. Still waiting on that,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

Multiplayer was promised for the original KSP. Still waiting on that,

If anything is skipped or shorted to get KSP 2 out the door with solid gameplay  and stability I hope it is multiplayer and not something else, so I can wait on it longer if need be, lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, darthgently said:

If anything is skipped or shorted to get KSP 2 out the door with solid gameplay  and stability I hope it is multiplayer

You don't understand.
KSP2 <IS> multiplayer.

The essence of everything you build and everything you do in KSP1 is you playing multiplayer - but you do it with yourself. One part of your brain is proud of another part of your brain.

Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.

Multiplayer <IS> KSP2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

You don't understand.
KSP2 <IS> multiplayer.

The essence of everything you build and everything you do in KSP1 is you playing multiplayer - but you do it with yourself. One part of your brain is proud of another part of your brain.

Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.

Multiplayer <IS> KSP2.

This happened in KSP 1 too. Anyone can post their mission and not only will others be able to see the end result of that mission, they’ll be able to see the journey that the player undertook, with all of its impressive or tense situations. Additionally, you seem to be basing this argument off of the assumption of a massively multiplayer world - something that is not guaranteed to be intended by the devs (I’m sure that some server will create a big world with lots of history to fulfill that at least). And lastly, the analogy with the parts of the brain doesn’t apply properly to a lot of people. For example, for me at least, there is a big, big difference between being personally proud of something and having external validation - and the expectation of external validation might make me want to not play multiplayer 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

You don't understand.
KSP2 <IS> multiplayer.

No, you don't understand that I understand.  Really, I do.  And if when triaging the bug list prior to release, the bugs in multiplayer are back-burnered to deal with basic gameplay, I will shed no tears.  See?  I understand.

13 minutes ago, t_v said:

Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.

 

If what you create only becomes real when seen by the whole world then we disagree on what validates creativity

Edited by darthgently
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.

What's the difference between achieving that in multiplayer and simply making a youtube video or livestream in KSP1?

Edited by DunaManiac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny because while KSP 2 multiplayer thread is one of the largest and oldest on these forums, I haven't posted a single word there. I simply couldn't care less. I don't like playing with strangers from the internet and I don't know anyone who would spend $60 on a space sim. If it's there, fine, whatever, if it isn't, also whatever, unless one of my acquaintances surprises me with actual interest in this game and decides to buy it. Then maybe I'll consider playing with them, but at that time I will probably be on my way to another star, no time for people lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, t_v said:

difference between being personally proud of something and having external validation

 

33 minutes ago, DunaManiac said:

What's the difference between achieving that in multiplayer and simply making a youtube video or livestream in KSP1?

It's more than validation - it's also the co-op building process, the learning process when seeing what others have built and, most importantly, it's the first time technology is good enough to actually allow players to build and expand the game world. After which comes exploration - the main KSP single-player reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

The essence of everything you build and everything you do in KSP1 is you playing multiplayer - but you do it with yourself. One part of your brain is proud of another part of your brain.

Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.

Well, firstly, saying this is saying that your creation isn't real or valid without approval from others. You can be creative and build things without needing other people to see it. While some proffessional artists make art for others' approval, art is made mostly for self expression. People don't make art to show-boat their creations, they do it to express themselves. Not showcasing it doesn't make art less important. Art, and making things in general is for the enjoyment and expression of self, or in some cases for the betterment of others through real life invention. Gamesa are similar; most people don't play KSP so that they can post it on youtube or show it on the forums. They do it for fun. So saying that you can't have fun in a game unless you can show others in an MMO multiplayer is like saying that there's no point in self-enjoyment unless others can see it, which honestly defeats the point of self-enjoyment in general because self-enjoyment is for YOURSELF. Not for others. Therefore,  you don't need a multiplayer to make meaningful things in KSP. You don't need others to see your things to be good. As long as it pleases the creator, it's 100% real. Nobody should be obligated to showcase their fun to make it "real", period.

31 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

It's more than validation - it's also the co-op building process, the learning process when seeing what others have built and, most importantly, it's the first time technology is good enough to actually allow players to build and expand the game world. After which comes exploration - the main KSP single-player reward.

You seem to be under the impression that the most important thing in multiplayer is the the ability to show others our work, which will give us the opportunity to make our work "real."  Well,  there are so many other places where you can do the same thing. Your argument hinges on the MMO-style multiplayer that you've proposed, while it is possible it could be simple co-op with friends. We already have a community, we have youtube and the forums to share what we've built and we have already expanded the game world with mods. Saying that a multiplayer is so important that it would make self-enjoyment real is saying that self-enjoyment as it is right now is deluding yourself with fantasies that your creation could ever be worth something. Art isn't worthless just because no-one has seen it, or no-one collaborated with you to create it. Because it was already great and valid before you showed it, multiplayer or otherwsie. Self-expression without showing other people is completely fine, because it's about what YOU make. Nothing changes when other people see it, or when you can collaborate with others to make it. What difference will a multiplayer make to a co-op building experience when we already have it right here, on this very site?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

 

It's more than validation - it's also the co-op building process, the learning process when seeing what others have built and, most importantly, it's the first time technology is good enough to actually allow players to build and expand the game world. After which comes exploration - the main KSP single-player reward.

My very first MP experience was the best: I joined a random server and went to space to rendezvous with a station, only to find out it was a cloud of debris from what used to be a phallic shaped docking hub. That's when I realized the potential.

4 hours ago, darthgently said:

If anything is skipped or shorted to get KSP 2 out the door with solid gameplay  and stability I hope it is multiplayer and not something else, so I can wait on it longer if need be, lol

If they promised it for release and skip it, that's not gonna look good, as much as me or you might care about multiplayer. That's a lifelong stain as much as the original SQUAD promising multiplayer then selling the game and running away.

41 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

You want more marketing and better communication. You need to stop being so needy.

Gaming: The only market where informed consumers are looked and beaten down by... other consumers who wish to not be informed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...