Jump to content

Way to go! Kerbal Space Program 2 is in 7th place on Steam's most wanted game!


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Kernel Kraken said:

I have not a shred of doubt in my mind that KSP 2 will be a masterpiece to outperform all other space Sims that I will no doubt spend hours and hours on. Knowing all this, I still say the day my honor is gone and I am not to be trusted is the day that I give a company money for a product yet to be delivered or reviewed. If I ever do, I want one of you to shoot me.

And if KSP 2 is lacking, well, as long as it's as moddable as KSP and modding info is documented, within a month to three KSP's community of modders will have dealt with most of the worse flaws that can be modded.

KSP is the way it is because of being moddable and the community over the years of modders and mods.  Not repeating that with KSP 2 would be the worst possible decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jacke said:

And if KSP 2 is lacking, well, as long as it's as moddable as KSP and modding info is documented, within a month to three KSP's community of modders will have dealt with most of the worse flaws that can be modded.

KSP is the way it is because of being moddable and the community over the years of modders and mods.  Not repeating that with KSP 2 would be the worst possible decision.

Crowdsourcing game development is no way to go through life, son.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Wubslin said:

Crowdsourcing game development is no way to go through life, son.

But it can sure help to get closer to perfection and feature variety and sufficiency, Sunshine. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jacke said:

But it can sure help to get closer to perfection and feature variety and sufficiency, Sunshine. :)

I'm just sayin, I'd rather those wonderful community modders take a given game from 100% to 120%, rather than from 80% to 100%. And we live in an interesting time. Used to be, you went gold, slapped that thing on a cartridge or an optical disk, bing bang boom what you shipped was what you shipped and you had to make your game pretty bulletproof out the door or else initial sales would tank.

With the magic of the internet, there are now such conveniences as day one patches and, if the developers care, eventual large updates that can add huge features to the game. It's an incredibly blurry line now, with some games even living their whole lifespans in permanent "playable alpha". Sure having a developer launch an incomplete game and later patch it into functionality is better than complete abandonment (see Internet Historian's The Engoodening of No Man's Sky), but it's never a fun situation even with the best developer love and care.

I'd rather KSP 2 come out on really solid footing in 2025 than have it come out Q1 2022 as a veritable Cyberpunk 2077 situation. Modders shouldn't pick up slack, they should be adding depth and novel things like N-body simulation or crazy visual mods.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Wubslin said:

I'm just sayin, I'd rather those wonderful community modders take a given game from 100% to 120%, rather than from 80% to 100%. And we live in an interesting time. Used to be, you went gold, slapped that thing on a cartridge or an optical disk, bing bang boom what you shipped was what you shipped and you had to make your game pretty bulletproof out the door or else initial sales would tank.

With the magic of the internet, there are now such conveniences as day one patches and, if the developers care, eventual large updates that can add huge features to the game. It's an incredibly blurry line now, with some games even living their whole lifespans in permanent "playable alpha". Sure having a developer launch an incomplete game and later patch it into functionality is better than complete abandonment (see Internet Historian's The Engoodening of No Man's Sky), but it's never a fun situation even with the best developer love and care.

I'd rather KSP 2 come out on really solid footing in 2025 than have it come out Q1 2022 as a veritable Cyberpunk 2077 situation. Modders shouldn't pick up slack, they should be adding depth and novel things like N-body simulation or crazy visual mods.

The simplest asset flip perpetual alpha indie game you can find on Steam is an order of magnitude more complex than what was considered a AAA title back in the "gold disk" era, and even with all that perfection bugs were far from being a rare occurrence (I'm still mad with the first PS1 Spyro for a red gem that fell of a cliff and prevented me to reach 100%).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can forgive KSP 2 many faults.

But if it repeats the shear stupidity of the parts distribution of the KSP stock Tech Tree, with

  • Un-kerballed pods not available from the start
  • RCS not before *Tier 5*
  • NO 90° RCS quads (see the ones on the Apollo Lunar Lander)
  • Proper inline RCS tanks not before *Tier 6*
  • Many parts needed together spread over several Tech nodes
  • Overpowered reaction wheels

....

Edited by Jacke
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jacke said:

But it can sure help to get closer to perfection and feature variety and sufficiency, Sunshine. :)

Which is why it's doubly bad when publishers that can afford to ship a game still go for early access purely to reduce their fiscal risk. We need crowd funding to be available to games that wouldn't happen otherwise with conventional publishing. Not be spent on providing a safety padding for large publishing houses.

KSP needed early access to happen. It's a game for a niche that hasn't properly existed until there was a game, and no publisher would take a risk on that until it's proven as a concept, and that requires someone to front the cash. Individuals, on the other hand, saw early demo and went, "I'd play the crap out of that!" And rightly so, in most cases. Sure, that sort of thing still flops more often than not, but it gives an opportunity for that variety.

KSP2, on the other hand, is being published by Private Division, which is large in its own right, but is also a division of Take Two, one of the largest publishers out there. They can afford to make this game, and by now, they know they'll make their investment back. Expecting fans to pay up front for making of the game would be ludicrous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/21/2021 at 2:42 AM, Jacke said:

I can forgive KSP 2 many faults.

But if it repeats the shear stupidity of the parts distribution of the KSP stock Tech Tree, with

  • Un-kerballed pods not available from the start
  • RCS not before *Tier 5*
  • NO 90° RCS quads (see the ones on the Apollo Lunar Lander)
  • Proper inline RCS tanks not before *Tier 6*
  • Many parts needed together spread over several Tech nodes
  • Overpowered reaction wheels

....

1. Opinion-Based

2. For what do you need RCS this ''Early''? I personally only use it later, so it's also Opinion-Based

3. Aren't there already ones?! I'f not I'm sorry

4. you wouldn't probably need in a normal game to have that much monoprop, atleast according to me

5. well yeah, that is a tech tree I would say

6. then have fun with a future KSP2 RO or a KSP2 Saturable reaction wheels mod :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Starhelperdude said:

1. Opinion-Based

Un-Kerballed pods in the Start Node: History-based.  Computerized probes were the first things launched.   Having verisimilitude with space exploration history would improve the game.

Quote

2. For what do you need RCS this ''Early''? I personally only use it later, so it's also Opinion-Based

History and reality science based.  RCS was the first 3-axis control system used on spacecraft.  Exhaust vanes and gimbaled engines were used for launch vehicles, along with RCS on upper stages.  And KSP's reaction wheels are far overpowered.  In reality they were introduced much later only used on large and long-life spacecraft.  Again, verisimilitude with space exploration history.

Quote

3. Aren't there already ones?! I'f not I'm sorry

Take a look at the RCS blocks on the Apollo Lunar Lander.  Note that the 2 horizontal nozzles are 90° apart and the quads are located at the 4 45°-angle spots.  Those are 90° RCS blocks and how they are mounted.  Means they are out of the way of the centres of the front, back, and sides.  Look for them in the stock game--not found.

Quote

4. you wouldn't probably need in a normal game to have that much monoprop, atleast according to me

For small spacecraft with 4x RCS blocks the small inline Monoprop tank is ideal.  It's used as attitude control and the RCS is the final stage as well, doing serious maneuvers.  It should be introduced at the same time as the RCS blocks in the same tech node.  The radially attached tanks are useful, but don't allow the same sort of small compact designs.

Quote

5. well yeah, that is a tech tree I would say

Minimum set of parts for features split among several tech nodes:  Worse case I think is the Breaking Ground Deployable Experiments.  The first one needs 3 Tier 5 Tech nodes to get the 3 parts needed for the minimum experiment.  It takes a damn long time on a 10% Science Return career.

Quote

6. then have fun with a future KSP2 RO or a KSP2 Saturable reaction wheels mod :)

After this many years, there are some things that should just be stock.  All these cases I've pointed out among them.  What about the KSP / KSP 2 players on console?  They can't mod the game.

Edited by Jacke
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...