shdwlrd

Not really. They started with the people who were the most qualified and knowledgeable about the project. They just happen to be the people from Star Theory. I've heard of little dev houses poaching the top talent from large companies. Everyone is fine with that. People actually celebrate when that happens. When a large company poaches from small companies. Everyone is up in arms about it. Remove the size differences, it's the same thing. Each company is trying to increase their pool of talent.

Sorry man, I don't understand your example. I'm from the US. British history isn't that detailed here and cuts off around the founding of the colonies. And there is a few mentions around the war of 1812 and the world wars, but again, not that detaled. World history isn't my thing. Can the world of business change, no. Can it be ethical, sometimes. Is it polite, sometimes. Can it be downright ruthless and disgusting, oh definitely. But the competition will still be there. The winners stay in business, the losers don't exist anymore. It's a lot like life itself. The successful survive, the rest is just food for something else.

The business world will never change, someone will always find their way on top. Either on the dead husks of their competitors or their competitors succumb and join them. The business world is a constant battle for survival where one wrong move, or an unforeseen event can mean bankruptcy. The only way to fix it is to remove all consumerism and services, which isn't going to happen. Sorry but this isn't Star Trek. You know what, scratch that. Even in the utopian setting of Star Trek, there were different contractors vying for work, services offered for payment, and crewmen being head hunted or poached to make the best crew possible.

I think you glossed over my conclusion... Instead of flaming TTI/PD for their apparent motives, and treating Star Theory as an innocent victims or vice versa. (We don't know the full details.) I was making a general statement about the business world. All we know is this: TTI/PD tried to renew the contract with Star Theory. That fell through. We don't know why. Could be either companies fault. Star Theory showed interest to have TTI/PD purchase them, negotiations failed. We don't know exactly why. Either TTI/PD was low balling the offer, or Star Theory was over valuing theirs. Development is pulled from Star Theory, (TTI owns the IP and can do that.) And gives it to a new dev studio that they created. Well within their power to do so. They get personnel that they need continue development of KSP2. They happen to be from Star Theory. It sucks for Star Theory, but is prudent on TTI/PD's part, you know, to reduce the time to learn the code, keep the vision for the game the same, and to save money. (Which is the 2nd biggest goal of any company.) There can be other circumstances that we don't know about to why these people left Star Theory. Star Theory was forced to close their business after not being able to find new contract to work under, or sell a new idea for development. Bad timing, business practices, we don't know. Obviously they didn't have the funds to continue to operate. There is no intent evident in this timeline that shows that TTI/PD did anything malicious. Nor does it paint Star Theory in a good light either. It just shows that TTI/PD can play the game better than Star Theory did. And that's the corporate world.

Every large company has a past evil or few. What TTI/PD did was rather generous when it comes to this type of situation. (What I mean is this; they didn't have to offer anyone at Star Theory a position at the new studio after pulling KSP2 from them. They could have replaced all personnel working on KSP2. And yes, I do realize it was financially motivated, but it didn't have to be done.) If you have read the WSJ long enough, you would realize this is minor evil compared to other acts that other corporations have pulled in the past. Yes, it's sad that Star Theory had to close it doors. It sucks that the remaining staff was left without work and I feel for the people that still may be out of work. The corporate world is nasty, dirty place where every nicety is vailed in corporate interests. Even the truly good companies will have to something distasteful at times to survive. At the end of the day, it's just business as usual.

Interesting bit of history. Never knew that part of the story of Dodge's founding.

@Poodmund thanks for posting this. Very interesting article. Everything in the article isn't unprecedented. It happens in all industries. Contracts get pulled or expire. Companies headhunt or poach people who are familiar with the project preramitors. Its just business. No need to get upset about it.

Sounds a lot like USI:LS without MKS installed.

Same here, but don't forget the pretty pictures part. I got some good pictures of the planets with the cateye? mod with DOE. Too bad I lost the screen shots many updates ago.

KSP already takes aerodynamics into account. No need to add unnecessary strain on the system. The stock comms blackout and needed network is enough, no need to add delays into the equation. Despite the fact that afore mentioned mods are covered in the stock game play, if you want to make your game more difficult, go for it. My mentality is to add useful functionality without replacing or duplicating what is happening in stock. (Ignoring part mods of course. ) The only difficulty based mod I'd like to see is persistence rotation. I would like to actually hold a telescope at a fixed point during time warp.

The only beta I can see is an limited demo. No future stuff, no interstellar. Colonies and orbital stations would be ok. Basically to see if it will run ok on your system.

Firespitter, FAR/NuFAR, Connected Living Space, Remote Tech are a hard no. Unless you want unnecessary difficulty in you game. Firespitter can be replaced with the stock animation module. Research bodies, Plane Control Switch, Procedural Lifting Surfaces, are a maybe. The rest could be useful. From the initial images from the devs, looks like fuel switching will be stock. (Unless they want to duplicate all the tanks for the new fuel types they will be adding. Possibly adding hundreds of new parts to the list.)

I corrected it for you. I still stand by my statement.

I did say if they find a good medium between the two, it might be worth adding. If they do add anything, the automation will have to be effective in it's stock form, even if it's limited in scope. Then you can add on to it.

Have you tried setting one up in KSP? My nightmare is trying to setup my X52 when I can't even get my cheap Logitech joystick to work right.

Why don't you want an autopilot in stock KSP? I've played Autonauts. It turned very tedious after programming the 30th robot. How would you remove the tediousness of programming your maneuvers, going back, correcting the error, and doing it again. It would lose the fun factor very quickly. I personally would rather do a mission all by hand than sit there and program everything that would need to be done in a mission. In all reality, I probably won't really get too deep into KSP2 until there is a full featured autopilot available either by the devs or the modding community. @mattinoz that would make KSP like Autonauts, boring and tedious.

You also have to account for the players who don't want to, or can't program. You also have to understand that there are players that are lazy. They don't want to spend time before they do a mission to code all the maneuvers they will need to complete their mission. They will either do the whole mission by hand, or will find something the does all the maneuvering for them. Yes, there is a good learning potential with something like KOS. But a good portion of the players can't/won't use something like that. Can there be something in between KOS and MechJeb that can be done, well yes. But when you have programmed all the modules you would need to execute your mission, you've basically recreated MechJeb by hand, without the GUI.

You have a good point. But the mention of milestones affecting colonies, makes me think something akin to contracts could be present in adventure mode. Definitely some clarification will be needed from the devs, but it does seem like you can go off script and still have something to do outside of just exploring. So there could be some sort of contract or mission system in planning. I'm just speculating at this point. It's a good question that I hope the devs don't take forever to answer.

But all space flights are controlled by computers. Now, a person has to take control only when the mission falls out of the set parameters or if there is a computer failure.

It wasn't the contracts per se, it was the mechanics behind it that killed the career mode. Now what KSP2 is trying to do is remove the minutia that plagued the career and science modes in KSP1 and make it more straight forward. It's good to question if funds and contracts would be included or not. But with such little information about the adventure mode outside of an idea and mention, you can't say what will be in there or not. It's just not worth getting up in arms over right now.

It looks to be a future edition of PCGamer magazine. The date says July 2020, originally thought it was June. Probably an editor's proof.

I'm going to guess it's the launch/stage button or the space bar. I would be really surprised if it's an autopilot. Click "go" and it would run through any maneuver nodes you may have.

I would be interested to see how this would work. Would it just be some generic suggestion? Would they do some detailed analysis of the failure and make some suggestions from there? I guess that would be good for console players? Or would they allow you mess around with part settings and such while the game is paused? No more sniping that one elusive part you need to activate while your craft is tumbling. I just hope the subassemblies are surface mountable and more intuitive to use. It's a pain to remember to reroot your assembly before saving it. That can be done in KSP now. Are they using a separator or another tab to do so? Overall, I do like what I'm seeing. The only real negative is the UI layout and that is minor issue for me atm. What I would like to see is a short clip of someone building a rocket or plane. Or some images for the editor UI.

It looks to be from next month's PCGamer magazine. It may end up on their site soon enough.

I really hope that is the case. I do like the UI, but I hope it's has some ability to rearrange the different elements.