JoeSchmuckatelli

Until they play the game

I want to see it fly before we start trying to figure out how many D7 Plutonium Dozers it can ferry to Mars

2019 video?

I get that - and I've admitted as much in a previous post. Maybe I need to quit feeling so snarky about the KSP (HEAVILY MODDED) comparison complaints and just breathe deeply every time I see another one. The thing I picked up from the Marketing Interview was that the Art Department isn't trying to compete with mods - but is taking inspiration from them (because Nate did when setting the direction of development) - and working on making a better looking KSP that works with a lot of the stuff from Mods integrated so that the whole functions better. I don't expect RDR2 levels of ground graphics in a game where I'm trying to launch rockets out to explore. Instead I'm in the 'good enough' to have a modern feel camp. https://kerbal-forum-uploads.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/monthly_2023_01/export_1674606147611.mp4.de8db7ccb21315ba6687c5111f086c2b.mp4 The ground looks pretty good here.

Planet looks good. Real good.

So... we are all about the visuals, not the performance?

Until I started looking into that - it was really hard for me to picture. I kept expecting something mechanical rotating. Instead, it's the flame front going around the toroidal chamber - which I couldn't wrap my head around with the spike until I saw a video. Amazing the things folks will come up with!

Thanks - I'll start there!

Cool!

I'm gonna have to start googling. I'm not getting a good picture of how this works - but it sounds very interesting. If I find a good video or animation of how it works - I'll post back in case this kind of engine is as new for others as it is for me. Thanks guys!

First I'm hearing of this. Is this a possible something to look at improving efficiency of current rocket engines or something else?

I support this - especially because I find the idea of panspermia to be an attractive theory and a likely thing we discover evidence of in the next few decades. My thing with Kerbal is how wonderful it has proven towards getting people interested in spaceflight and science. It's always been about taking what is possible but exceptionally difficult, and making it accessible. Thus, it does not need a sci-fi element to succeed. So adding the ability to discover microbial life or even plant life on a wet planet in another system fits within the core metric of the game. Having a few disjointed and unexplained anomalies is just fun and does not detract from that. But - having an overarching sci-fi narrative that 'explains' Kerbal? Shrug. Dunno. Might work. But not really necessary. Despite what I wrote above... I do not disagree with this at all. It's a dichotomy. I think we will find life anywhere it's possible... But so far we haven't. We need to look a lot harder with even more capable drones in greater frequency... And give the Mars program success so far - I think we will

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2023/01/25/glowing-spiral-appears-hawaii-satellite-launch-cprog-orig-aw.cnn

I think it's funny how people get so wrapped in the idea that Kerbal should humanity-free. It has always been a human-spaceflight Sim with call outs to our space race and endeavors. Sputnik parts, shuttle parts, ESA tie-in... The whole shebang. The Kerbals were just a little fun part of the game that actually humanized it far better than it would have if we'd have seen little people analogs. Getting mad that it's not 'pure' or human-reference-free misses the whole point of the game

I don't think we should have to wait for Resources update. KSP had basic ISRU - all Resources is going to do is work with the Colonies mini-game so that you can build stations and automate processes (likely like a Satisfactory-lite). Certainly it is going to be a more complex roll-out. But I can see basic mining parts coming with the Science update so that they can test systems before the roll out of the more complex ideas they have for the full fledged ISRU and resource-gathering-and-shipping plans for later updates.

Lounge topic

This latest is cool - and creepy in equal measure.

Well played, sir.

It was - but another poster has been prolific lately with look at this mod stuff and my residual annoyance popped up. Not a gig at you... You just reminded me that some people are doing that.

I read that - but aside from 'dramatic claims require dramatic proof' - the guy at the end of the article saying, "we don't know exactly what we are seeing - but we do agree that we are seeing something - and maybe in 10 years we will know what"... That guy is who I'm hearing.

I'm actually annoyed by people comparing KSP2 with heavily modded KSP. Maybe they're trying to say something - but there is so much wrong with the comparison I don't even know where to start

Ara does mention the aspects of security/secrecy and the work-from-home challenge. Implication was that Take-Two had (has) great concerns about protecting their IP and investment and it took weeks to solve how to get people the machines to work on and establish procedures for work flow, sharing and securing the project. Not a whole lot of detail - but the 'work from home' challenge was real, and did result in a very real slow down of production. But the thing he stresses is that it did not result in a dumbed down vision but rather the technological needs slowed things down more than anything (I heard this as both the WFH aspects as well as solving the physics / programming challenges) - the tech side was hard. I also interpret this as a 'back to the drawing board' type thing with regard to getting the right people in place to push the development in the direction they wanted to go... rather than what it may have been when the studio split happened (this last bit is a LOT of interpretation / assumption - but it might have been true).

In case you missed it Notes from 'Marketing Interview' with Ara Joseffson, Senior Marketing Manager for Private Division (observation- interviewer isn't really a KSP player; played it 'a bit' in 7th/8th grade, sounds like it): Take Two's first EA title. (Noted that Squad's KSP was EA at first, too) "All of... pretty much all of the" foundation of the game is complete / will be complete for EA. Some of the other parts (Colony, on) still in development - so unfair to hold later game stuff till that's polished; thus EA. The other stuff are 'huge expansions'. EA unlikely to be perpetual because they have a clear roadmap. Clear focus of the early part of EA will be balance (engines, etc) and focus on onboarding. But for Intercept, 1.0 is a clear picture - they know where they are going. The interviewer wants to know 'what's the balance between simplifying the game (Casual-ifying) KSP2 and its current audience who likes the technical difficulty and realism. Ara does a good job of threading this - 'They don't want to take away the difficulty of the game' - but the things that might have been difficult for new / inexperienced players should be made easier by tooltips, UI and video tutorials (vs text-heavy). "None of the challenge has been taken away - if anything, it's harder. Colonies and Interstellar are harder." Some things that were added in KSP as mods (alarm clock, planners, etc), are now integrated into the game, which will make it work really well on more PCs. Base code works better with 'mod ideas' being part of the original plan, rather than tacked on. Happy with and supporting Mod scene. Colonies must be built - and uses the same physics system of the base game. It will be Kerbal; reactive to terrain and physics. So players will have to have a Kerbal strategy to how and why and where you build it. All of these factors will have 'a gameplay impact'. Colonies will not be "an aesthetic building game." Partnering with real-world colony and hab planners (reference: ESA tie-in from KSP). Orbital colonies will be easier; but landed colonies will be more difficult because of the physics and terrain of different places. (You can build one wherever you can figure out how to build one) Goals, narrative aspects, lore - will come out later with 'Progression System' to 'unlock mysteries of the universe' - but not a required part of the game; players can go for, follow the proscriptive aspects if they choose to... but they'll be there, emergent, for players who want that kind of thing in the game. Don't want to alienate current players who like the realism / difficulty; will do collaborations with real-world agencies... but not likely to collaborate with fictional franchises or games (Star Wars/Star Trek/Fortnight - yes, this was a question). If someone wants to mod those elements in... fine, but nothing official is likely. So collaborations will be NASA, ESA, ULA - etc. Interstellar - 2 additional solar systems confirmed, will not be the only additional solar systems. Going interstellar is HARD. And the other planets create harder puzzles, like endgame content for more advanced players. Might be 'a true endgame' at some point - related to the Progression System 'lore' stuff. Multiplayer - WAAAAAAY down the line "So Far Off". At the very least it will be Co-Op. Players can work together - one can be the orbital planner / pilot & 'handle all the flight' while someone else can build a colony (role-play different aspects if desired). Players don't have to be in the same SOI at the same time... BUT - "It's Still a LONG ways off" ("very challenging technological feat that I'm sure the engineers are battling with") but - "I know they've figured out quite a bit of it". Delay - Covid slowed things down massively. Security, work from home, etc. Covid did not impact the vision of the game. A lot of the 'slowdown' was the 'tech side'.

Tornado alley shifting East? https://earthsky.org/earth/tornado-alley-dixie-climate-change/

I am so glad YouTube has a fast forward function. There is a ton of info - but what a horrible interview. The Host needs to go back and edit out 95% of his blathering nonsense and edit in the question Ara answered. After the first segment I found myself FF'ing every time that dude started bobbing his head and only watched the parts where he finally allowed Ara to talk. Still - good stuff.