Jump to content

shdwlrd

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,009

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by shdwlrd

  1. shdwlrd
    From the pink exhaust, those are doped mH engines. That's the color the exhaust is supposed to be. Intercept is going for as much realism as possible, including the proper color of the exhaust. If you go and watch the earlier feature videos, they explain on how they are getting the proper expected exhaust colors.
  2. shdwlrd
    No problem. The only real issue I have with these little niche use case requests is that such a small number of players can/will actually use them. In the case of scripting, you can't use it on consoles. (Well, kind of. Check out Keen's forums for Space Engineers to see the work around they use. That doesn't mean Intercept will do the same.) That means only PC players will have access to something that is considered a game feature. (No, having unlimited access to mods isn't considered a game feature. It's a perk, not a feature.) So what do you do then? You will have to add something to the console version to appease those players. At that point, the base game feature parity between consoles and PC is different. That can have a negative effect on future versions of the game. It's ok for the PC version to have stock scripting support, but not include anyway to access it from the vanilla version of the game. That way you can pull scripting support from the console version and keep some type of game feature parity between the two. Then you can release a separate "add-on" for PC only that adds access to scripts. (Either a sanitized version for general use and/or a modding specific version.) Yes, the console players are technical getting shafted, but what is considered vanilla, they are not. It's ok to ask for something you would like to see in the game, it will give modders and devs an idea of what users would like to see. But for something you would like to see as stock, it really should be something everyone can and be willing to use for all versions.
  3. shdwlrd
    I'm saying I won't use it. I'm not saying it can't be handy. But when you say something like "I feel" it turns your statement into an opinion. That doesn't help your point. If I was really dead set with no scripting for KSP2, the paragraph below would be my argument. "How many active players use KOS? How many players use the mission builder? Compare that to how many active PC players there are? You can't trust download numbers. I'm sure there are many who downloaded KOS just to check it out or a cool script, and nothing more. I'm one of them. You can't trust the numbers of people who either follow the thread or git repository. So how do you know how many players will actually use scripts in their game? A thousand? A few thousand?" I'm not against having stock scripting support for KSP2. It would be a boon for modders. But an in-game, completely fleshed out, made safe, and usable scripting language. It's not necessary for release. It could either be an update later on or an official mod or a cheap DLC or a mod.
  4. shdwlrd
    It really depends. If Intercept keeps the API'S for Luna accessible, then the impact should be negligible. There still will be an impact though. If they don't, then you will have a KOS situation where it updates every 3rd of a second. They can't have it update any more than that because it will tank KSP's performance.
  5. shdwlrd
    It takes a tic to translate the command from one language to another and then another tic to execute the command. An good example is when a Windows game is running through a translation layer for either Mac or Linux. Even if the game runs well on the Mac or Linux systems, the Windows machine will have better performance because the game is in its native environment and no translation is necessary.
  6. shdwlrd
    Optional or not, it's something I will never use. Even if someone does the work, the extra layer of translation will add a performance hit. Won't happen. There's a reason I decided to stop learning coding and not pursue it as a profession or hobby.
  7. shdwlrd
    Me neither, it does makes the ships look "off" when the pods are not included. But now we know that probe cores are still going to be a thing in KSP2. (I hope anyways.) PS. I've done my fair share of adapting game systems and creation. I understand the feeling of frustration transitioning to fun once you get everything ironed out.
  8. shdwlrd
    Yeah, no. I'm not learning code to play a game. I'd rather have an autopilot than scripting.
  9. shdwlrd
    @Vl3d I spent some time last night playing around with the codes in the something more sections. If you try to decode it visually, you will be missing a few bits here and there. There's points where the pulses on the right channel don't show in the spectogram. Also the pulses during the fade out don't show clearly either. If you filter out the rumble and hiss, you can hear the pulses clearly, but they still don't show clearly.
  10. shdwlrd
    It maybe helpful to show where you had to add or remove bits from the image.
  11. shdwlrd
    You're right. That's what was missing from all the interstellar and intrastellar ships. There's no crew sections or pods. The only pods seen are the old KSP1 parts, and one seemly from a mod.
  12. shdwlrd
    I was thinking the same thing. Then I remembered how often I would forget to put lights on my landers and rovers. (Basically most of the time.) Ambient light adjustments is helpful for us players that can't remember to light our crafts properly. It may not be realistic, but it is helpful.
  13. shdwlrd
    These two facts were known from when the game was announced.
  14. shdwlrd
    Thinking about pre colonial VAB assembly for crafts. A shop like what Pthigrivi is describing would be necessary to assemble small packed base modules and craft. I'm thinking it would allow you access to a craft editor and whatever parts you bring with you or are producing are the only parts available. And to not supercede the VAB, you are very limited to what you can build and produce. I'm thinking up to 10 tonnes max dry weight, and no individual parts more than 1 tonne. I'm just thinking of all the times I sent packed Buffalo rovers to bases and the headaches trying to assemble them in-situ using KIS. There was always that one part that wouldn't connect properly and you had to fight with.
  15. shdwlrd
    A small parts factory or shop makes sense. If it's needed to make different craft, no, don't want it. If used for small eva items and replacement parts, it's a useful thing to have.
  16. shdwlrd
    Keep playing KSP1. Orbital mechanics isn't going to change between KSP1 and KSP2. So keep playing and learning all you can.
  17. shdwlrd
    I doubt it, but if that is the case. Yeah, Nate is right, this game is will be literally mind boggling huge.
  18. shdwlrd
    Maybe there will be more?
  19. shdwlrd
    No, that's wrong. The speed of light, seconds, hours, and meters are constants between the KSP and Earth. Days and years vary between KSP and Earth. A year for Kerbin is 9.2 million seconds, a year for Earth is 31.6 million seconds. So for a Kerbals perspective, a lightyear is shorter than what a human would expect.
  20. shdwlrd
    Yes, but the Kerbin day is 6hrs. So 4 Kerbin days equals 1 Earth day. One Kerbin year (426 dys) is equal to ~106.5 Earth days. ~3.43 Kerbin years is equal to 1 Earth year. You see where I'm getting at? A lightyear in KSP would be a much shorter distance than in RL. So the question remains, are the devs going to shorten the lightyear distance to match to the time scales according to the Kerbals.
  21. shdwlrd
    I have to wonder, will a lightyear be scaled down to a Kerbal time frame instead of using a Earth time frame. Kerbal days and years are much shorter than they are for Earth.
  22. shdwlrd
    Good video as usual. I'm surprised no one is mentioning the little comments about Nate repeating what was said the whole time KSP2 has been development. The people at Intercept do care about KSP. (Not anything new there, just find it nuts that they had reiterate that.) I also love how in the very beginning they basically say, no, you're not building your interstellar ship in a VAB. It must be designed and built in orbit. Nice discussion about interstellar distances. I'm going to guess it could take decades game time to reach another star.
  23. shdwlrd
    The one thing I never use since I find it quicker and easier to use MJ and type the altitudes I want. Not play around with a velocity adjustments to hopefully get the altitudes I want.
  24. shdwlrd
    Two questions for you, do your orbits have to be perfectly circular and do the angles between the satellites have to be perfect? Because neither really matter, your orbital period is what determines how fast your comm satellites will fall out of alignment. If you're within a second, it will take a few decades before you have to adjust them again. (Again, KER for the win and why isn't orbital period a stock piece of information.)
  25. shdwlrd
    @Vl3d Since you added your idea on different flight control schemes. I figured I would add my ideas.
×
×
  • Create New...