Jump to content

JoeSchmuckatelli

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,299

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JoeSchmuckatelli

  1. JoeSchmuckatelli
    Yep - that shows up in the first second of the latest development vid. If anyone wants to get WAAAAAY ahead of themselves: Oh - and Elden got it's Provisional PEGI about a year before it released... So, breathe.
  2. JoeSchmuckatelli
    Technically, but not colloquially correct.
  3. JoeSchmuckatelli
    Yeah - they've been pretty open. The (probably) worst thing they could have done since the Covid announcement would have been to try to give a firm, if speculative, anticipated date of release. While frustrating to have to keep waiting and wanting; the release of information about their development efforts and the content we can anticipate is quality stuff. I wouldn't expect them to apologize / explain any more than they already have.
  4. JoeSchmuckatelli
    DogyWall: To save you time searching the pages of this thread - Linky's answer includes a lot of derivative speculation based upon what others have scrounged up previously. Most notably an earnings report prediction that KSP2 would ship during the company's FY 23, which extends from now through Q1 of Calendar Year 2023. Other than that, we're literally left with 'dowsing' predictions, like my "National Churro Day" release. The Q4 timeframe speculation has a lot of weight behind it because it's also the most profitable / highest sales timeframe:
  5. JoeSchmuckatelli
    Neptune experiencing "Global Cooling" Neptune is cooling down and scientists don't know why | Space
  6. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I expect KSP2 will retail 'as a normal studio release' game rather than something from a small, independent studio as KSP was. IIRC, KSP retailed in the $20 - 40 USD range. So, $40 - 60USD not unlikely for KSP2. Some top tier titles are reaching the $70s, so that kind of sets the upper bound of expectations. DLC packs become options for people who really like the game, and keep good content coming - which extends the life & fun of the game. The two I know of cost, what? $15? Not a bad thing. Not onerous... and they did add content which made the game more interesting. What I anticipate (from reading other's expectations) is that KSP2 DLC might offer 'planetary system' packs - which is an order of magnitude improvement over just new parts and science opportunities. They'd likely also include parts and science given our history with the current game; but I also expect the vanilla version of KSP2 to be fairly feature-rich at this point (Also - Multiplayer doesn't really bother me... yes, DLC conflict could occur in a 'down the road' sense; but there are mitigation strategies if multiplayer proves to be a core feature of KSP2 and player's experiences)
  7. JoeSchmuckatelli
    This is the case - in (probably) Niven and Pournelle's sci-fi space battles, what they had was nukes that would detonate near a ship - but the charges were shaped in such a way as to create x-ray lasers as the actual ship-killing device. For a more detailed look: NUCLEAR WEAPON EFFECTS IN SPACE (nasa.gov)
  8. JoeSchmuckatelli
    That is really cool! Plus it grossed out my wife
  9. JoeSchmuckatelli
    This isn't exactly about climate change - but it is directly related to smart remediation strategies in a very important area https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-revive-a-river-restore-its-hidden-gut1/ Plus, it taught me a new term: The whole article is worth a read. It talks about not only smart remediation strategies (required to overcome problems created by past, less informed water management strategies) and the difficulty of the political process to get a program started, finished and then have the success change how people look at similar situations
  10. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I think 'expand the release timing' isn't really an issue... It's going to be what it will be. Rather, the sense of worry I have is the need to adjust my prognostication / anticipation time line and inure myself to a 'wait till Christmas because that's when blockbuster titles ship' time line
  11. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I read this both with interest and a sense of tragedy. It's almost a testament to Tupolev's skill, not that he completed the project - but that he wasn't 'disappeared' along the way. I'm not sure what sense of nostalgia Russians might feel for the years of Stalin... but from an outside perspective? You poor stand-up guys! (The last may not translate well - but this may help translate US Marine to English: EDIT: LOL at the 'swear translator' included on this forum. "Stand up guys" indeed!)
  12. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I struggled a bit on how to respond in a way that doesn't seem married to the 'flaw' of anthropomorphic analogy, and while I wrote: if we exclude the word 'purpose' in its context of 'a thing having a plan or intent', but rather apply the meaning of 'its functional duty' or why it does what it does... there is an evolutionary explanation for what I attempted to communicate. The thread of that is found in this video and the discoveries of Dr. Lenski: ...especially if you watch through the part about hypermutability and the Power Law. Life kind of does 'code for luck', and things do 'keep getting better'.
  13. JoeSchmuckatelli
    Because of who we are:
  14. JoeSchmuckatelli
    Interesting. I figured it would be a more lengthy process
  15. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I'm a big fan of Nuclear Power. But what I don't want is a space ship with nuclear power I want a space ship with NUCLEAR POWER (just one that does not require using bombs)
  16. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I wonder if that's because we only have a crude method of releasing the energy. Would be cool if we learned to moderate the power of of the bomb in a slower more controlled way than simply exploding it.
  17. JoeSchmuckatelli
    What is the 'ribbed' section or 'pipes' that we see starting at 0:24?
  18. JoeSchmuckatelli
    That is in line with my original assumption (once you have one working additional solar system to explore, you can scale up later with DLC). But having 3-5 systems at release is 'multiple' ...and with a few gas giants with relatively simple moons added to the list of terrestrial destinations shown thus far with the known planets and unknown gas giants parsed out between the 3-5 stars - that would make the game both grander and more complete than my original assumptions. Would make it feel 'new' and distinct rather than just a modernized update of an old game. That level of change should play well towards getting new players or people who've never contemplated KSP (or who looked 'way back when' and moved on) to make the investment. The risk for KSP2 has always been that (outside of our little community that has stuck around so long) it's too niche. Sure, we will buy it - but unless they have content that will draw new blood, the return on investment won't be favorable.
  19. JoeSchmuckatelli
    You are correct - and as @The Aziz pointed out its something I was blind to. Interestingly - I was under the impression that we've been shown a nearly complete game (with robust features and worlds to explore) - that the content thus far highlighted would be enough for a finished game with two explorable systems - and that doubling of KSP would be enough for KSP2 to be a worthy successor. This impression has intensified my anxiety for a sooner than later release... But since reading Aziz's response to my post above - the scope of the game I now anticipate is greatly enlarged... Meaning the complexity... Meaning they may (and likely do) have a LOT more bug-fixing to do to have a finished product. I quipped about National Churro Day - because I'd love to play the game this summer... But maybe that is overly optimistic
  20. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I may or may not be in the majority with my lack of interest in multi-player as a feature for KSP2... But I do respect that for some it is a desired thing. That said - if there is any single thing that could be (and perhaps should be) cut from the release, it's multi-player (to the extent that solving the problems is delaying release). I have zero experience in game design or the problems of making an excellent single player experience work in a multi-player setting... But the problems raised in this thread make it likely that integrated multi-player is difficult even for professionals. Do we have any sense of whether the design team think of multi-player as a 'must-have' feature or is it merely a 'nice-to-have'?
  21. JoeSchmuckatelli
    So plants hooked up to the myceliumWeb could be sending secret messages?
  22. JoeSchmuckatelli
    That is something I never considered. And having done so, now agree. Dunno how I got it stuck in my head that all the planets we've seen would be in a single system... But while they could... Everything we are seeing is terrestrial. Our surveys show (and our own system holds) that gas giants should be present, too... And they are showing us terrestrial worlds - So there are likely many gas giants we have not seen - with all their complementary moons... The game just got bigger for me. Yeah - there cannot only be one
  23. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I find that acceptable.
  24. JoeSchmuckatelli
    I painfully understand this sentiment.
  25. JoeSchmuckatelli
    My opinion: KSP 2 releases with only 2 visitable systems. Kerbol, which we already know and love - and DebDeb (?) which contains Gurdurama and the others we are excited about (DONK!). Any other star-systems will appear via DLC or a patch in later years. (which, from a 'lifetime of the project' or 'insured future income' sense is, quite literally, brilliant; they develop a system with KSP 2 and the two currently known/planned star-systems - and later, after assessing interest and return on investment, add the ability to visit a 3d (or more) system for the truly die-hard KSP2 fan who has 'Grand Toured' both systems and wants more. If the Kerbol / DebDeb system works... adding additional 'visitable' places should be relatively easy.)
×
×
  • Create New...