JoeSchmuckatelli

That is good to hear! I wonder if there is some level of problems in presentation because foundational features developed for the full game are not functional with features turned off. Maybe adding 'For Science!' features eliminates some of that. Maybe just the fact that they've had so many non-IG eyeballs and hands on the game sending in feedback and bug reports + dev time is solving problems they weren't aware of or had not had time to resolve with the EA date of last February. Who knows. I do like hearing positive feedback at this point. I do like knowing that the feature I have most looked forward to has a timeframe when it will drop. So - for me (a guy who stopped playing back in... May???) hearing that there is real progress? Good news.

I think we (as a community) need to get off that "Four years!" thing. It is very obvious (at least to me) that the game that was advertised by Star Theory is a very different thing than was chosen by IG to be developed. This mismatch of expectations is likely EXACTLY why the transition was made. Sure, it would be great to hear some honest explanation - but they likely, legally, cannot talk about it. So when we gripe about 2020 - I think we're being both unfair and unrealistic. ... Having said that, I do think a LOT of the criticism about EA is both valid and necessary. We (players) are getting rolled by an industry 'standard' that seems disingenuous. Older players remember that going "Gold" meant a largely bug-free game and paying full price was worth it. Now, going "EA" apparently means different things to players and developers. We expect a largely functional product, maybe with a few bugs and lacking some features. We DO NOT expect an Alpha experience that we have to pay for - especially when the price to play is effectively 'Full Price'. The developers apparently disagree. (Note: this observation is not limited to IG... it's happening across the industry). I do look forward to "For Science!". I may wait until the first post Science bug patch to play again... or I might load it up just to see what's changed. Still don't know. My tolerance for disappointment has diminished greatly.

It is interesting for me to read through this. Some of what I'm seeing are problems that were identified early on. Especially: No orbit line Landed state while in orbit return to ship to discover it's on a crash trajectory I haven't been following the update cycle - but I assumed those had been resolved. The 'save at every important event' thing just feels very 'KSP' to me and doesn't bug me that much. It was part of the game cycle for KSP; feels like a smart thing for players to continue to do with 2. IOW - yeah its a bug, but not one that overly bothers me. How to effectively use (or perhaps even why to use) 'workspace' is odd to me. I never figured it out. The biggest frustration was when I built a thing I called "Standard Landing Can" expecting to use it repeatedly for different missions and only have to build lower stages... did not work. Every time I would build stages onto the "Standard Landing Can" - even saving the subsequent full craft to a different name, when I next tried to use it for another build, I had to delete stuff that wasn't supposed to be there. AKA I never figured out how to use the VAB craft files effectively. Thanks for the write-up!

Can you expand on this? (Was it a mod that allowed us to see staging info in KSP1 or am I misremembering something?)

I'm interested in your thoughts. I know you avoided a lot of the frustration by waiting - and while you have followed some of those posts and are not completely isolated from the issues - you are someone who is coming to the game after a lot has been ironed out. So, with your relatively fresh eyes on the game... What do you think?

Yes, yes you are banned. Did we not tell you? Hmmmmmm….. I’ll have my secretary get right on that. Sigh. I guess even Science has its limits. Tango Yankee

My son got Cities 2 on GamePass. Trying to run the game at 1080p on his comp (AMD 6600 GPU) and following recommended settings... The game doesn't look great. Certainly not like advertised nor like the CC hype before release. Other major problem for me is that the economic simulation is broken. The movement of goods around the city, calls and pushes and what is asking for what where just does not work. (The devs have acknowledged this). My kid's observation? The economy is so forgiving that the game is little more than a painter... And one that does not look good.

@Gargamel- do you mind kicking this back upstairs with the question 'why does it matter whether I'm signed in or not'? I can peruse pretty much all of the forum while logged in - write and respond to posts etc... But I can't access Science and Spaceflight signed in. Log off and now I can read threads on Science and Spaceflight but not participate. (Logged in - the sub is 'Error 500' - logged out =full access) Am I shadow banned?

Um... No. The criticism and disappointment I expressed back when was real. Still not coming back to the game until after Science drops - and maybe not until after the first or third patch thereafter.

I like the first sunrise I saw over Minmus - a good memory from when I last played so many months ago.

The clearly advertisedNOTadvertised future DLC that matters is the revamp of Industries. I like that they have the simulation aspects baked into the base game - but the base game implementation looks gross to me. Not the painting / designation area part - but the randomly spawning buildings, etc. Hoping that the Industries2 DLC is not something I've made up through wishful thinking... And happens in the first year of release.

Nuke and I have variations on the same Gigabyte Aorus monitor. Mine is the FI32U, his, (IIRC) is the M32U. Mine came out first & was hideously expensive and has been fantastic. Exactly what I was looking for in a 144hz 32-inch 4k monitor. I've also got a 3070. That said - 3070 is ENTRY LEVEL for 4k. As in it will run old titles just fine, maybe with some features turned down. Modern never-optimized games however are beyond its capabilities at 4k. Case in point: KSP2 = 15-20 FPS. I'm hearing that I can't even run Cities 2 at 4k. I'm currently waiting for the 5000 series to come out, as I just cannot get myself to buy a current gen given the incremental increase they offer at 4k (w/in my self-allowed budget). If I might suggest - don't get a 27 inch 4k. Just don't. If you feel like 27 is what you want, get a 1440p at that size. 4k @ 32 is better pixel density than 1080p at 24, but the monitor size fixes most UI scaling. ( @Nuke has some different thoughts on this with certain programs) - but for me, using the MS Office suite I've no problems. Can have two full sized windows up side by side and work on/from both with ease. GL!

Won't lie: that was an impressive response. Well played, sir

That is good to hear. You should go! So - coincidentally I was searching for content about Westward Expansion for my students and I stumbled across this video about one of my favorite parts of the country: Ironically, in a completely different tack I looked up the population of Chico when I lived there (about 35-40,000) and today (102,000). I'm not sure I'd recognize 'my' town now that it's ~ three times larger! Also, some of my students chose to write about the native peoples from that part of the Sacto valley, and I'm starting to wonder if the Universe isn't trying to tell me something. The piece of land between Chico and North Oregon is some of the coolest and most mixed terrain the US has to offer. With the added advantage that you can drive around a lot of places and never see another soul. (I've fished creeks with the fattest trout that acted like they had no experience of flies having hooks!) High mountain deserts, deserts, forests, rainforests, volcanoes, crater lakes, cinder cones and lava tubes, and, of course, rugged coastlines. Hell, there's places out there with ferns taller than I am (which takes a bit of doing). Also - the beer is good. Like REAL GOOD.

You should publish this. It's really good advice that I wish more people would take to heart!

Are we so certain? If Uncle Joe isn't watching him, might he just do something for himself? (The KGB certainly did) Are Cosmo-naugts known for the collective thinking? Okay - how cool are the magic tricks? Advanced Technology good or quarter behind the ear good? Also... Have you been to rural Oregon? Ruskie gets a 50/50 chance of getting a stoner or a shotgun wielding 'Murica Furst guy. (or the stoned version of the latter - paranoia is baaad, maaan)

Apparently I need the Nvidia 5090 to enjoy Cities Skylines II in 4k. - no, seriously. Given the GPU is delayed until 2025, that would also give the devs a shot at optimization. Could also be the year KSP2 gets Science!

This is slightly different. For the last several months I've had access via mobile but not PC. Then PC worked for a bit... But now I can't get there from either platform.

I don't think it was for me. While a big driver was gaming for me - I've been super busy doing other things... And I find it actually improves my work flow. With old eyes, I can have two windows up side by side at full resolution and am not seeing any major UI problems in the productivity programs I'm using. The gaming front was a predictable hit, performance wise - but a 24 inch 1080p was just frustrating me back when. I walked away from a game I enjoyed for a variety of reasons but (like you) thought that KSP2 would be playable. Nothing else has really captured my attention. Cities might be - but people with better GPUs are downscaling to 2k and turning off features... So that's a 'wait'. Yet it's the cautionary tale as well. 4k gaming isn't working (yet) absent spending absurd sums... And now a delay? Pfft. I thought they were only looking for the candy crush crowd?? Are you seeing anything that suggests they can compete for actual gaming rigs? Snort. I give it another year before it looks like a playable game.

Massively disappointed again with the state of the GPU situation. I'm loving my 4k monitor size (32 inches) but not a fan of the entry level performance of the GPU I could afford (3070). Back when I bought it, it was great for 1080p - but entry level for 4k. I figured it would be OK to use for the anticipated cycle and that eventually price /performance would settle out. Nope. Now I'm hearing that there isn't likely to be an upgrade to GPUs until the end of 2025. That breaks the 2-year product cycle path I'd been hoping for. (I typically skip generations between purchases). 2020 = 3000 series 2022 = 4000 series 2025 = 5000(?) series. ... Sadface

Regular as air traffic

I went through the list... Despite having an advanced degree, I'm probably only qualified for 'Barista'.

How well integrated are the Soviet / US teams? Do they have a competing viewpoint on one side of the argument or the other? (could be an interesting side story - the argument and resolution) Isn't the design problem, Monolithic = many launches to build, but less cost later Modular = fewer launches to build, but extended service launches required? Is there a pressing need to get it done soonest? Or all in one go?

Man, that sent me down a rabbit hole of research... Thanks! Also - I appreciate the S. Manley vid. Now that image is much closer to what I expect to see in 2029 than the rocky/iron images floating around lately. Appreciate the response!