ShadowZone

I am actually writing the script for one right now. Not a "news" video since there hasn't been anything major, more something along the lines what I believe are some of the biggest challenges around a certain topic for KSP2. Fingers crossed I might be able to release it this Friday.

first 2 seconds of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaON1dBfsEU I gladly accept my new responsibility as a meme

If it was about the money, they would go for a mobile game. Console market is almost 10 billlion dollars more than PC and mobile is twice that of PC (see below). KSP 1 on console was a bad move because it had to be a port of a game that never was intended to be on console in the first place. If the developers are smart, they will lay the foundations for a less cumbersome conversion to consol for KSP 2. Especially since the upcoming console generation is a PC in fancy case. I get a lot of comments per week by disappointed console players on my videos. And it really breaks my heart that there are people out there that paid money to enjoy the fun we have with KSP and can't have nearly the same experience. And no, "buy a PC instead" is not an option for many of them.

I can only relay the information I have received, and that was that it is a planet and it is named "Puf". The name is also supposedly a hint about the planet's character. But I have no clue as to what that should mean. Potentially a lack of language or cultural knowledge on my part.

No, the cruise stage is jettisoned before the vehicle enters Mars's atmosphere. Tony Bela did an excellent infographic on the process:

Use KAL-1000s to manipulate the RPM to go over the allowed maximum. You can do the same with thrust level on engines, that leads to hilarious results, see Danny's video on Crew Dragon or his single stage to infinity. Yes, you could consider it cheating... or just exploiting that the game allows you to do with the parts available.

That is a great Ingenuity recreation! I especially like the use of the antenna to hide the fact the blades are "hovering" above the body and the use of struts as landing gear. I went with the small grip strips. And yeah, flying is really only possible in the low atmospheric regions. Good thing I am not participating, then The size was something that came about due to the fact that there are no smaller parts than 0.625m ... Ingenuity's body is only 14cm in diameter and has a "wing span" of 120cm. With the smallest probe body I had to make Perseverance around it so large that then the fairing/head shield combo got big and then the cruise stage and then of course I ended up with a 120m Atlas V replica... For the rover's wheels, I went with small rotors and the structural tubes. Luckily those were the size I needed them to be, but I think ruggedized wheels would have been roughly the same size but didn't nearly look as good.

I no longer use two monitors, but I do use a monitor so wide I have KSP running 1440p and can have my browser open beside it. Would love to have the map view separate. However, this would even further increase the divide between console and PC. And console players have been treated very poorly regarding updates. Would hope to see KSP2 giving them more love or design the game in such a way that updates for them can get released easier. But since KSP2 will have multiplayer, this opens up the idea of a "mission control" role in multiplayer. Players 1,2,3 can't access map view, Player 4 can only access map view and is in communication with the other three, coordinating them to rendezvous or tells them when to point their rockets where and how long to throttle etc. Definitely would not be everybody's cup of tea but I could imagine it being fun when playing together. Yes, every new feature adds potential new pitfalls in development. There's no way around it. That's why good product managers /product owners prioritize their backlog based on what will yield the highest impact on the market. We'll see whether or not this will make it. But it's fun contemplating it and having a discussion around it

One more thing about those wonderful rings. Will the particles/asteroids in that ring have a hitbox or will they be just decoration like the trees and rocks in KSP1 and the vehicle will pass through them? Could you bring some of those back home?

Gotta give credit where credit is due.

The thing about journalism is this: every article is approached with a certain bias. I am confident to claim this because I was an editor for a national newspaper in my country for many years. Everybody has biases, and these biases influence the way we write or talk about things, most of the times unconsciously. If you look at certain wordings in the article, it is clear that Schreier approached the story from a "poor indie guys, they didn't deserve that" mindset. The article begins: Okay, "it struck them as bizarre" ... who exactly? All of the employees? Or just the few that Schreier was able to talk to? Look at the rest of the article, most of the comments are from former Star Theory employees. Of course they are not happy with how things turned out, who would be? This is now their bias coming through in their comments, understandably. Then there are other wordings like "It was strange and disconcerting news..." or "cutthroat standards of the business" or "extreme tactics". This makes it clear to me that the article is not intended as a mere report of the things that happened, but Schreier wants to tell a story. The story of a small indie studio eviscerated by big corporate. Side note: when I started as a journalist, I was mostly criticized for my writing style by my colleagues and bosses, not my fact checking or objectivity. Sometimes entire paragraphs were re-written by them to make them "prettier" or "more exciting" to read, at one point even completely distorting the meaning of an article at which point I protested and retracted my name from that piece. Again, who said that? The disgruntled former employees? Or did Schreier also talk to people who are now at Intercept/PD/TTI? What was their measure of "proceeding smoothly"? I hope this does not come accross as me trying to discredit Schreier. Far from it, I applaud him getting that much information out of the events that transpired. I myself tried to find out more about the dealings that led to the transition from Star Theory to Intercept but hit many brick walls on that end. But, and this relates to EVERY type of media, be it an article, a news broadcast or yes, also my youtube videos, every type of media is produced with at least some type of bias. There is no objective truth in media. The only thing you as a journalist/reporter can do is to try to be as objective as you can, get as many facts as possible and have the guts to accept facts that are not in line with your own confirmation bias. The latter part has become a huge problem in media general over the past 10 years, by the way. Based on the information available to him, I do believe Schreier wrote the best article possible, but with a certain picture he wanted to paint. Now, to my own bias. I am over 40 and have lived through 4 to 5 takeovers in my line of work. Some friendly, some hostile. In neither case was the transition completely smooth. And in every case there were things that happened that left a sour taste in my mouth. Especially the first one, that was brutal. There were shouting matches, tears, thrown objects, almost fistfights, livelihoods destroyed. During another transition, the new bosses fired a pregnant woman, which is illegal where I live. They then retracted their decision for fear of litigation and payed her a hefty amount of money so she would leave on her own and stay silent. What happened to ST sounds like a walk in the park compared to that. Loyalty in business doesn't mean much, to be honest. That's why there are contracts. I had people claiming "I'll stick it to the new bosses" or "when they do this or that I'll leave, that will show them" just to have them stick around for a few years more after realizing that other companies wouldn't treat them any better but probably would pay them less. Also, I really want this game to succeed. Does that cloud my judgement? Maybe. I like to think I am old and jaded enough that stories like the current one don't faze me anymore and that that is the reason why I can stay so calm in the face of it.

The switch to Intercept happened in December according to the article. The pandemic was a non factor in the US at that point.

Exactly. I also looked into the three key people I mentioned earlier. Jeremy Ables is now listed as Studio Manager for Intercept Games, but he was with Star Theory for five years, being CEO for more than two. If your CEO who was with the company for half of its lifetime immediately jumps ship when a new offer comes in, something is up.

It's certainly a delicate matter, not being helped by the article using words like "cut throat" etc, mixing reporting with opinion. Let's look at the facts: T2 hires Star Theory to work on KSP2 in 2017. In August 2019, the game is announced. In November 2019, Star Theory gets a 6 month extension of their deadline (according to the article and based on the fact T2 announced the delay in a press release in November). Somewhere around that time, the Star Theory founders try to sell their studio to T2. Ok, let's pause for a second. I was in Seattle and met the developers in September. I also saw bits and pieces of the unfinished game. Until then, the release date was always communicated as "Spring 2020". Nobody of the group that was there actually believed this to be met, especially with how unfinished the game still looked at that point in time. So, here's what's been bothering me: Why would you try to sell your studio to your customer while working on the customer's intellectual property? I usually am more in line with the "big corporate bad" sentiment, but to me it sounds a bit like the Star Theory founders wanted to make a quick buck with a management buyout. We also don't know what the terms they wouldn't accept were. Jumping to conclusions like that unreflected load of drivel of a video somebody posted earlier doesn't help but stir up the pot. Continuing the timeline: At some point in December T2 pulls the plug, cancels the contract with Star Theory. This is where everybody is screaming bloody murder now. What we do not: Was T2 trying to facilitate an amicable transition before contacting the developers directly? Were Star Theory's founders' terms so outlandish that negotiations simply broke down? Or the other way around? Unfortunately the author was not able to talk to the founders, so this remains a mystery. February 2020: the "new studio" video is published and the takeover of the KSP2 devs appears to be complete. What makes me tend to believe this was less scummy than it appears is this: The three top people of KSP2, Nate Simpson, Nate Robinson and Jeremy Ables immediately took T2 up on their offer. Immediately (article quote). I have met Nate Simpson in person and KSP2 is HIS baby, he is living and breathing nothing but love for Kerbal Space Program. So I think he had no choice in the matter if we wanted to keep his sanity. Not sure about the other two, though. We can also infer two things: First, T2 still believes in KSP2. The project was not cancelled, the deadline was even extended further. Second, T2 believed in the work the developers at Star Theory were doing, otherwise they wouldn't have offered all of them (!) contracts within Private Division's "Intercept Games" studio. What makes me nervous: They are looking for a "multiplayer designer" via their jobs website. This could either mean that multiplayer is nowhere near completion yet. Or that they now are actually trying to include microtransactions via some multiplayer angle. We don't know. And we can only speculate until we have more information - which I am trying to get currently. Let's see what the reaction from Private Divison / Intercept Games will be.

I finally was able to show KSP in it's full glory by recreating the KSP2 trailer using just stock parts from KSP1: And I put all those crazy vehicles in here: https://kerbalx.com/hangars/90035

I made a Cybertruck and flew it to Duna on a Starship. If you prefer still pictures, I also put something on Imgur: https://imgur.com/gallery/tjODKOS

I too am very interested in this. I got an entire mission planned where I would revisit the Outer Planets and collect surface science. But of course there's nothing there yet. So I tried to fiddle around the configs myself and created a OPM_rocsdef.cfg file where I tried to invoke the Gilly ridgeline but on Tal. Game didn't crash but I also didn't get any Gilly ridgelines on Tal... hmm... Plot twist: I have no idea how to mod this game

I tested the Launch Escape System for my upcoming "Apollo 50 ... LITERALLY" mission. Just some minor damage. Next iteration works better

I landed a Saturn V. On its side. Sort of.

Well... And then there's the undocumented hours in my RO/RSS, OPM and older version installs.

@AFF I totally had the same problem with wheels during my "Purple Pain" Eve exploration series. That planet is just evil. As to the thread: I did a Blue Moon lander replica, flew it on a New Glenn replica and tried to land the booster on a ship. Things didn't completely turn out as I planned...

I paid 18 USD to see "Avengers: Endgame". I enjoyed myself for 3 hours. I have more than 4200 hours clocked in at KSP - and that's just my Steam install, my other variants (RO, OPM, ... ) not counting. I paid about 30 USD back then for KSP and 15 for Making History and I will gladly shell out 15 for Breaking Ground. All in all a total of 60 USD for a game that already gave me thousands of hours of fun. Triple A titles ask for the same amount of money for a hammy single player campaign and a derivative multiplayer part I am not interested in. Add to that, KSP taught me a lot about orbital mechanics and space travel and opened my horizon in all things space. That's invaluable. And of course it's a monetization strategy. The base game does not have the same pull it did years (!) ago. The company behind this wants to survive, maybe hire another dev or two. I can live with that.

Oh that will definitely go up on my channel.

UUUUUUH YEAH! The things I will be able to do with this. 500 ton Kerbal BattleMech incoming!

I failed miserably trying to get an Orion/ESM/ICPS thing into an orbit around the moon in Realism Overhaul. Any variant or mod part I test, the ICPS inevitably runs out of fuel way too early. I mean it would be a lot more bearable if my RO install would start in less than 8 minutes...