Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ahres

  1. Excellent! Thank you. I fall in the latter camp as well, that I want to see in the game what I'd see if it was my own human eyes looking at the game's scene. Which makes me wonder if I'm not explaining very well what I mean, because almost all of your articles are talking about why cameras can't see stars. I don't care about cameras. Gimme eyeballs. Your last article actually talks about what the human eye perceives in space- specifically how Neil Armstrong couldn't see stars until he was in the shadow of the LEM, which is what I desire in the game. *The rest of this comment is Ahres just thinking out loud now* If there's a much brighter object in your field of vision (in real life) or on-screen (in the game) compared to much smaller and dimmer objects in the same view, I'd expect those smaller objects to be less visible or (maybe?) not visible at all. These KSP2 screenshots don't do this and my intuition tells me this is incorrect for our latter camp of human eyeballs. Sure, you could almost definitely still see some stars and the planets (though neither group would be as noticeable). But I don't think you'd be able to distinguish the silhouette of the unlit side of Earth/Kerbin against the faint color of nebulae or the galactic disk, would you? I'd just expect with the Earth/Kerbin and Sol/Kerbol in view that there'd be some stars against solid blackness. I guess you could argue in the Kerbal galaxy these nebulae are much brighter than any that we can see from Earth with the naked eye though.... So now a couple extra thoughts: 1) If my intuition is correct, that'd mean even when a sunlit vessel is in view/on-screen the skybox would be hard to see because the brightness of the craft itself would dominate the stars in the background- assuming you're relatively close to the star that's casting the light. And if you rotate the camera around to the dark side of the craft now you've got the sun in view which would be even more dominating than the vessel was. So... that'd mean you never get to take in the full glory of the skybox until you're on the dark side of a celestial body. Which this to me sounds amazing. It reminds me of the scene from Apollo 13 when Bacon/Swigert talks about how he can't wait to see for himself what the stars are like behind the darkness of the moon. Imagine an unsuspecting player that's seen the skybox at night while in the atmosphere of Kerbin and it's pretty, but then they get to orbit for the first time and after that orbital sunset the skybox just lights up and it's a countless number of stars that suddenly show. We've all seen the pictures, I'm sure. Just stars upon stars upon stars suddenly visible because there's no light from the nearest star or another nearby celestial body or an atmospheric glow that's hiding the view. That would be an awesome experience. Especially for someone that didn't know it's coming. 2) Another situation that arises from this make-the-appearance-of-the-game's-flight-scenes-be-similar-to-what-the-human-eye-would-see argument would be when you're out at Eeloo or beyond wouldn't the celestial bodies be dimly lit? Sure your eyes would adjust and see details but it'd still be noticeably less lit than if you're at Kerbin. That'd be kind of a cool gameplay element that we don't experience in KSP1: to work in low-light environments where you're very far from the nearest star. Yeah... I commented a few times in that Debate. I hope this discussion doesn't devolve into that. I'm not sure your last sentence is really acknowledging what I'm trying to explain though. You can see the unlit side of the moon and stars at night because a) the Earth is shining it's light on it and b) there's nothing else brighter in view. Having something dominantly brighter than anything else in view is the main point of what I'm trying to comprehend. It's been bugging me since my last comment. A lot of physical phenomena are intuitive to me because it's all stuff we experience every day. But this specifically is not an easy behavior to test at home.
  2. Ha. Get your coffee in, Joe! C'mon! Can you point me to some references? I only remember one really in-depth discussion about it and after reading all of it I still have the opinion that when there's a lit celestial body on screen, there shouldn't be a visible sky box.
  3. I still don't like seeing the stars and the silhouette of the unlit sides of celestial bodies when the lit side is on-screen. It just feels... incorrect.
  4. Only six posts before you Also, please make sure you eat more variety than cup o' noodles for two months.
  5. I second calling this new supposed race the Gerbals until we know otherwise.
  6. I agree with this wholeheartedly. I’m not saying it should be humanity free. For what it’s worth, Joe, I’m almost always in agreement with things you’re saying around the forums. The crux of my complaint is if there’s going to be canonized alien life in the game, keep it microbial or something along those lines. I don’t want to see an ancient spacefaring civilization that somehow flung its home-world into the outer reaches of the solar system or whatever have you. Life is so incredibly rare. So. Incredibly. Rare. We have the Kerbals, which are “a representation of us” as the devs say. Us humans are all we have. It feels like (just my opinion here) that the Kerbals should be all that the Kerbals have.
  7. I wish I could say the same. But, just because I’m not excited about it now before release doesn’t mean I won’t warm up to it later. How about you explain how I’m “gracelessly” wrong instead of just saying I am? I’ll even give you an example: I actually think you’re wrong about me being wrong. Why? Mathematically, that’s 4 Easter eggs out of 50. Or 8%. Only 8% of the Easter eggs that reference non-human endeavors or discoveries. So when I say “almost”, I think 92% is really quite in line with what I said. You should be careful when saying someone is gracelessly wrong. If you don’t do your homework beforehand, it may in fact turn out it’s you that’s gracelessly wrong. Graceless, because you’re telling someone they’re wrong when you haven’t even checked to see that they might actually be right.
  8. I did say "almost" now didn't I, Bej?
  9. If you want to go the "to be fair" route, you'd acknowledge that almost every easter egg in the game is just a nod to humanity's own spacefaring endeavors and discoveries. I talk a lot more about this in the other thread that I reference, so I don't expect you to know my exact thoughts. The gist of it is that I fall in the "keep the aliens lore out of KSP" camp and give me more of what Pthigrivi and I talk about in this thread.
  10. If you want to go that route, then you should know that at least a portion of the music in the livestream is confirmed to be from the KSP2 soundtrack. The music they use in the show and tells for Pol, Mammoth-II, engine exhaust, and others that has the deep percussion to it was confirmed by Nate Simpson to be composed by Howard Mostrom and part of the game's soundtrack. Of course, that confirmation is years old at this point so I haven't taken the time to find Nate's comment about it.
  11. That portion is some of the Show & Tell music we've heard before, it's my favorite as well. Thanks for putting this together, Bej!
  12. While you're right. There's a couple things I've noticed so far that might interest some people. First, it appears to be part of the KSP2 soundtrack that's playing. I say this because it includes the show and tell music I've come to know and love. Second, it says "Beta Gameplay" at the bottom. Meaning what you see is what we'll actually get. Here's what I've noticed so far: The clouds cast shadows and change shape as they roll along. At night, the sky reflects off the water and looks amazing.
  13. The lighting at separation is awesome- as is the audio. Interestingly, the contrails disappear at staging. Suppose it's just an altitude threshold that dictates when they're displayed and the video just happens to pass that threshold at staging?
  14. This. Please. This is exactly what I was expecting the game to be.
  15. Sheesh, I apparently need to work on the tone I'm trying to portray. I'm stating my opinion as descriptively as I can and it's being received as... whining? You guys can't just say, "that's a valid point, but it doesn't look like the game will be going the route you were hoping for"?
  16. The good news is, I don't see this easter egg being something that opens the door to unreal tech. I want to say we've even heard from Nate Simpson that there won't be unrealistic sci-fi tech in the game. No warp drive or things like that.
  17. Oh whoa! I've been making sure I've checked off all the boxes for things that I need to do in KSP1 before KSP2 releases and I thought I had them covered! But I haven't actually taken the time to plant a flag on top of K2! I'm so glad you mentioned that haha. Thanks for being understanding, it's very appreciated. Especially coming from you, where we've spared some in the past. I'd come to the middle and agree with you that an elaborate easter egg would be fun, with the care being taken that it's at least somewhat discrete. The equatorial mun arch is getting close to being really quite prominent. I mean, you can see the thing from orbit.... But I haven't thought long enough about it to opine what would be an acceptable degree of noticeability for an elaborate easter egg that spans interstellar distances. I should note that I have the trust in Nate and the Team to get that nailed down really well, so I'm not particularly worried.
  18. Interesting! Do you have any theories about which planets are which then? If the green is Jool (which sounds like it almost definitely is) and the purple is Eve(probably?), why isn't Duna shown? Or Minmus? Unless it's covered by the arch still. Fascinating!
  19. For all of the opining that I've done on this thread I don't want to lose sight of the fact that we finally got a Feature Video that was all about Howard's work. I'm super stoked about this and have been waiting for it ever since the game's announcement. Can't wait for the Soundtrack Feature Video!!
  20. Of course I know this, Mech. But it was present under the guise of it being a realistic geological formation. Now it's being portrayed as a highly improbable ancient alien relic. I was hoping the game wouldn't go that direction, but now it has. It's a reality I'll have to come to terms with. Good point.
  21. If you could keep your responses to my posts consolidated, that'd be great, thanks Bej. You're right about your first response. Humankind's history doesn't need to dictate KSP2's storytelling capacity. I'm sure you know better than I that the existence of a spacefaring species is one of the most improbable anomalies in the universe. Adding the presence of a second one? Even more so. You're responding to my opinions, which is all that they are, and that's fine. Just like I'm usually compelled to respond to yours. I simply had the hope that we'd finally have a space game that leaned into the sobering reality that what we have here on Earth is so incredibly rare that the human race likely goes extinct before it ever discovers the presence of another spacefaring species in the universe. Your second response is... meh. Even just a couple extra seconds of thought would have enlightened you that I mean a sentient being setting foot for the first time on some faraway celestial body somewhere. Not to mention, life, in any form, is incredibly rare. So, while humorous, Larry's situation is so highly improbable to the point of near impossibility that it's kind of meaningless to me what you're describing. I'm simply conveying my feelings and personality. The exploratory mindset that I have is one major role in why KSP is my all-time favorite game. As I said, being the first to set foot somewhere is a highly inspiring event to me. That feeling is diminished to some degree as I view the feature video today. That's all. Again, throw me a bone would you? I can't keep up with you. You're right, I should've spoken up sooner. I'm not a fan of the SSTV broadcasts either, if it's an inconsistency in my thoughts that you're looking for. The dead kraken never bothered me because I received it as fun nod to the developmental bugs in the game. Nor the whale skeleton. Nor the Roadster. Nor the Duna face. Because they were all simple nods to humanity's own existence. The SSTV and now the arch... these are different. These are canonical references to something that hasn't been observed in our own universe with one incredibly improbable exception. That's where the line is for me, apparently.
  22. Good ol' Bej, I knew you'd answer. I apologize that I didn't articulate well enough. I simply mean in the history of humankind we haven't found evidence of an ancient spacefaring civilization leaving something behind that we stumbled upon. And any reasonable amount of statistical background would inform someone that we realistically never will. Ever. I was hyped for KSP2 because of how much we've heard that everything we'll be discovering in the game will be geologically realistic. Now we've got things in the game that instead of describing a realistic geologic past, could be describing the actions of an ancient, highly, highly improbable spacefaring species. It's the frontier spirit in me I suppose... there's something awe-inspiring to me about knowing I'll be the first one to set foot on this body. Now it turns out that I've already been beaten to the punch and there was never a chance of me doing so.
  23. Yeah... I'm not thrilled about it. Now one of the coolest natural formations in the game turns out to be an unrealistic ancient relic. I liked the game because I got to explore what was naturally, geologically possible out there in the cosmos. That feeling is now greatly diminished.
  24. I have very mixed feelings about this.... It's super cool that they added something to the original game in reference to KSP2 but... what in the world is this? This hints that there's some kind of ancient spacefaring civilization. I know there were a vocal few on these forums that wanted something like this, but I really didn't. KSP hits so well with its players because it's so similar to humankind's own history. Except we don't have anything like this going on in our existence, and we (almost definitely) never will.
  • Create New...