Meecrob

I'd imagine there is also an inertial guidance unit in there somewhere at least for backup within LEO, and possibly for development of the guidance system for Starship beyond LEO.

Okay, you got me on that one, but the price is a bit steep for where the demo is at.

I guess I'm getting at the fact that the dollar value is inconsistent with the experience. I get that more people than me have excess disposable income to spend on things like this, and don't mind. [snip] The audience has spoken and its a general consensus that this is cool for a demo, but its not a full game. Correct me if I am wrong.

Looking at the launch site? I mean, I'm happy for you, enjoy the performance, but many people are not able to. Its not a realistic purchase point. Just like a Ferrari or Lamborghini is not realistic to most people. I bet they both have the same bugs as KSP2 also.

Yes, they are updating...just like any project that released, an incomplete product should be updated. I still don't get why making a crap product into a less crap product deserves praise. There is no timeline, and no rhyme or reason to the bugs they fix. That is their prerogative, and it is my prerogative to think that despite how hard it is to patch, and despite how hard it is with pressure from PD/T2, the game still kinda sucks.

Its 2023. These FPS are abysmal. I get that KSP takes math to run and that isn't the optimal regime for a processor, but like c'mon. I can play other games at 100 FPS with the same computer. Maybe I'm wrong, but a game that starts on a low FPS because you have to launch, isn't ready for the big leagues yet.

This is what I was trying to get at. Its great they are fixing things, don't get me wrong, but its a long road to 1.0

I'm not getting upset. I get that its EA. I don't want to re-hash the arguments about it. I simply do not get why people are praising them for cleaning the crap out of their pants...I thought that they should do this, no? They are cleaning up their mess and I hope its an awesome game at the end. Now, its not. I very much appreciate that the devs are fixing it. I don't think that selling a broken game, then fixing it deserves praise. Edit: Practice medicine? Sorry, I don't get how you came to that conclusion. I never mentioned that they should do that. I just want a game that works. I get it will take time to get KSP2 to that point, I'm merely saying that they sold us on a game, and its half that right now...making it 5/8ths a game is good, but its not a full game yet. P.S. devs: take your time, I'm not complaining about the timeliness of anything...just make a good game, like we all know you can. We will be here.

Seriously? Obviously no games have zero bugs. When they make you pay money for a game that doesn't work properly, its assumed fixes will be made. I don't think its above and beyond the scope of a game developer to un-screw the game they charge money for.

Bugfixes are not that impressive considering they are not supposed to be in the game to begin with. Its kinda like if I pooped my pants, and then cleaned it afterwards. You'd probably think "yeah, you might want to do that"

IIRC, it was basically a management sim where you unlocked new parts, then hit a button for an RNG to tell you if you landed or blew up. Its been a while, but I remember being underwhelmed.

My bad, I was hesitant to reply, since I know you are very knowledgeable, I thought you misread it is all. Edit: or I had misread.

I think @tomf is trying to say that Starship is not re-entering nose first, but rather with a healthy angle of attack so the body will be doing much of the work of keeping the plasma flow away from the rest of the structure.

Haha...orbit. Edit, Didn't they use a SPAC to IPO?

I hate to play this card, but 19 years is a short amount of time. There are many, many companies that have seemed solid for decades and then collapsed overnight. I'm not suggesting Take Two is heading this direction, but its short sighted to think companies have any goal of lasting a long time. Some do, of course, at present, but its almost like you speak of your steam library like life insurance.

While I am surprised someone actually wants to use the launcher, surely you can imagine someone wondering what is up when they paid for a game, try to start it, and it doesn't work. "Not good" seems appropriate. I mean it is literally not "good" that someone cannot play the game they paid for. Perhaps you interpreted their comment as "my game doesn't work, therefore KSP2 got shutdown" ?

Well it does look more like male anatomy than female.

Before I say anything, this is a difficult topic to be accurate on, given what information we have, so thanks for trying to explain your point of view to me. Where I am coming from is that of course Nate wants to check out all the cool stuff we made. If I were him, I would be too! I'm talking about how it was worded. Without stating what Nate is doing (and I'm not suggesting any sort of NateTracker or anything), simply saying he is checking out player creations, without saying he is doing anything else is selling him short. Presumably he is working hard coaching the team to release the first patch, but with only the comment from the CM, all we know is that he is browsing pics of rockets and "liking" the cool ones. I know this is not all he is doing, but we are not told he is doing anything other than this. For sure, Joe. I was a bit hasty in the wording of my reply. I hope my reply above shows where my train of thought is going.

@Izny I think we are in total agreement. I didn't understand that you were making an observation. Instead I thought you were more trying to say that the forums should be sorta abandoned. I think this is an issue that has to do with Take Two has data that "X" worked in the past (i.e. using discord), but failed to realize that KSP is not like their other games, and thus their previous data does not apply universally.

I'm not trying to say anything about what Nate does with his time. I am saying that the wording leaves it up to the imagination. If I was a boss overseeing a launch, whether it goes well or not, I don't want my media team telling the community that I am only looking at the positive replies. You don't sell games by catering to the people who already bought the game.

Thanks for the link!

Please don't say things like this. It doesn't matter what the reality is, it sounds like he's not working on the game. We all get that he has a life and obviously cannot work on the game 24/7, but a better way to say it would be "Nate is so invested in this project that when he is not directing the course of the game, he is interested in seeing what players create." You basically just said that Nate is trying to inflate engagement by liking posts when he could be working on the game. I doubt what I said is the absolute truth, but what you said can lead people to think that. Think of it this way: I have a car, it works pretty well. You are trying to sell me a new car. The brochure says its better, but I buy it and its not. So I say that I am disappointed. You tell me the designer is currently ignoring me and only talking to people who like the new car. I'm going to ask for a refund, since I'm clearly not cared about as a consumer.

I don't think the friction setting controls the tendency to slow down as much as its tendency to initiate a turn. So with zero friction, the nosewheel loses its ability to ruin your takeoff run by turning you off the runway. I suspect the wheel in its current state is modelled as a vertical peg with the wheel attached dead centre. There is no natural tendency for the wheel to return to a "straight ahead" condition if modelled this way. Edit for the plane nerds: Yes, usually aircraft achieve caster by different means than a typical shopping cart wheel, usually the big metal uses dampers, etc to achieve the same effect.

I get what you are saying, but its simply a poor business decision to decide that communicating to part of their base is "too old school." I mean, this is like "sorry, we don't want to talk to you unless you use Intel processors...we don't have time for AMD users. Also, please buy our game, AMD users!"

In real life, nose gear does not have brakes. They are also designed to have a caster which naturally returns to "straight ahead." I doubt this is programmed into the nosewheels in KSP2