Yellowburn10

Not Kerbin, but other planets will have a tilt.

It really is appreciated that these updates are being more transparent. I can understand being hesitant about sharing such details with the community, but having greater understanding of the current progress of things can put to ease the minds of many people. Even if you guys don't have a fix for something right now, or don't have it all ironed out yet, it's still assuring to know that it's being worked on.

I feel ya. I was attempting to do an apollo mission for one of my first missions, and my lander's delta v was only enough to do a return to low mun orbit, which complicate things if any low mun orbit is constantly shifting. That and having kerbals go EVA can sometimes disintegrate your craft.

I had something like that happen to me when I loaded a save of a craft in low mun orbit, the thing was suddenly spinning wildly when it loaded in. I had a passing thought that maybe the two bugs were connected, but it's only just a thought. I'm going to be trying a few other tests soon just to try to recreate the bug in different scenarios, such as if inclination or highly eccentric orbits make any differences.

So, I've been having this constant problem whenever I visit the Mun where my orbit is constantly changing on it's own, at least when I don't have time warp on. I've made a few tests with different kinds of vessels and have had the same issue. It's strange because I don't have the problem when I orbit kerbin, and while I haven't tested this anywhere else yet I'll be trying soon. Anyone else experiencing similar?

I feel ya. After I had managed to get a working craft to launch, get to space and go to the mun, I caught glimpses of what this game is really supposed to be. I honestly haven't felt something like this in a long time playing ksp, the only other time I think comes close was when I first played ksp1, watching the sunrise from space from my first orbit. It really just shows me that there is in fact a diamond in this ruff.

KSP fans: "Please do some kind of open beta testing!" Also KSP fans: "Ew this game is so unpolished and so much is missing why would I want to buy this?"

I can certainly understand having such cynicism in this day and age, but we at the very least know that KSP2 is coming to us purposely unfinished, unlike those other titles that either failed to deliver fully on their first releases or promised things that were way out of scope for them at the time.

Well, the GPU minimum specs didn't drop down a whole lot, but seeing how there is already an improvement between now and the first specs is a good sign.

I've been thinking about upgrading my GeForce 1650 super for a while now, but I'm still going to be giving KSP2 a try with it just to see how it runs.

I'm actually excited to test the game as a whole with my current pc. Not all of my specs reach the recommended, or even the minimum in some cases, but I'm a believer that early access is the place to truly put these things to the test for myself.

I haven't seen this in any preview videos yet, so I'd like to suggest having more odd number symmetries for the editor, seeing the only one we have is 3-times symmetry. It would just be a nice touch if, say for instance, you were trying to build certain rocket replicas that have 5 or 7 boosters strapped to it's sides. Having that built in would make things much easier. It's a small feature but one I think would be very appreciated.

Honestly the voice kind of reminds me of the voice of tails the fox. Take that how you will.

I'm not sure optimism is the right word here. I had my expectations tempered as well with the ea announcement, and I'm still very optimistic for the game. I think it's more that people are keeping too high of expectations for the game's current state, and not taking into consideration on how not ready this game is for a full release, even after the development time it's had so far.

I guess this is more of a subjective take, but re-watching the tutorial again didn't give off any condescending vibes for me. It certainly came across though that the point of this tutorial was to teach those who knew absolutely nothing about flying a rocket, and the voice in question sounded a bit too enthusiastic in my opinion, but I found nothing about it or said voice offensive. But still, if you don't like it that's your opinion. I'm sure it's not going to stop others on the internet from making their own, giving you and others tutorials that more so tickles your fancy. With that being said, a point that you made here frankly just doesn't make sense. Case in point: While the first part may be true, despite it's popularity KSP is still somewhat of a niche game with a brick wall for a learning curve, and it doesn't help player retention to have to learn so much when the game gives you so little in comparison. Giving them even a little bit of interactive help goes a long way to have them enjoy the game longer. For that second part, let me ask you this; What would be the point of catering to the existing player base, as in, the folks who already know how to play the game, for tutorials? I can guarantee you that the majority of returning players are only going to look at the tutorials just for the sake of them being new and shiny, and once they see them they'll say, "Ok, neat," (or in your case, "That's dumb,") and move on to the actual game. They'll have no bearing on how any of us will enjoy the rest of the game, so why should they appeal to us when we need them the least?

I like this! I'll plan to help as well. It should be interesting since I plan to have some upgrades sometime in the future to act as more benchmarks.

It seems like in all the tomfoolery that was brought up by the specs announcement, we've looked over a recent sneak peak of an EVA of the previous station: https://discord.com/channels/1039959585949237268/1039972362117988353/1076189963953119242

Yeah, wasn't to happy with that line either, went and did a better rewrite of it

I would just add on top of this that, with how some people are reacting, you would think they were talking about the full release of the game, but we're not. This is still in fact an early access release, with everything subject to change. Things could be buggy. Things might not run too well right now. Stuff won't look as polished. The game currently lacks many of the features promised to us. My PC might need an upgrade or 2 to fully experience the game. My expectations were fully tempered and I have expected or planned for all these things and more. And yet, it still hasn't hampered my excitement for this game to come out next week, or my optimism about the game's future. Is that me just having wishful thinking and being a bit naïve? Perhaps, but frankly at this point I don't care.

Considering that what I have currently in my PC could be considered low-mid to midrange (specs below for reference), I'll be curious to see how well things will be running for me.

A week before launch, and it seems like this game is having a more turbulent touchdown than a ryanair landing.

I have so many anticipated games coming out this year, and I'm so happy that KSP2 will be the first, albeit in early access. ONE WEEK TO GO! LET THE HYPE TRAIN OFFICIALLY COMMENCE!

Just would like to point out the small detail of the cockpit and nosecone paintjob. Nice touch that we'll be able to do that and have craft that at least look like they have heat shielding. Or perhaps there will be an option to have that paint act as a real heat shield in exchange for some extra weight or something.

As I see us get closer and closer to the release of ksp2 early access, it has started to awaken some dormant memories of the hype trains of old. I have to admit, if this thread gets even a small part of the traction that those old hype trains had I think I'll be thoroughly entertained, and a bit nostalgic too.

Well, I guess our kerbals are still going to be dissapointed. Instead of ice cream looking ice, it's ice cream looking glass. Still looks great though!