Bej Kerman

SpaceEngine did seamless planetary landings and real-scale interstellar and intergalactic flight with 0 loading screens. Paul Furio is not being honest, unless you only cherrypick things that count as games, ignoring all the potential SpaceEngine has for game development - these are all feats that have been done before, even if still impressive. I hate seeing gems like SpaceEngine discredited to make other things look even better - barely two people have been working on it at any given time since it begun development with a single Russian guy sometime in the mid-late-2000s and now all the developers are doing everything in their power to stabilize development due to recent events, so as to continue to deliver actual feats, like a ray-marched real-time Kerr black hole metric running in OpenGL (same for the Alcubierre metric, for spaceships in warp) describing the way light is actually deflected in warped space, volumetric accretion disks around black holes, wormholes with throat length as described by general relativity, real volumetric clouds with no fakery (earlier in development compared to black holes, as paradoxical as that sounds), et cetera. Sorry for that ramble, I just think it was a bad move to claim these are all new feats, that are "unprecedented in gaming", even worse that people are going further to say "KSP 2 is doing something that technically has never been done before". This all discredits others that have done similar things before... Not just similar. but a million times better. SpaceEngine also does seamless travel between galaxies, simulating a cube with a radius of ~30 billion light years (IIRC, it's still on the scale of dozens of billions though), showing you the web-looking way that galaxies are distributed and letting you travel to any individual galaxy you can see.

It should clue you in, tell you the height of the atmosphere and the pressure, not just straight up tell you.

Sure, but this does not need to apply to unfocused vessels. I've made the point before that KSP 2 is a game with sim elements and not vice versa, and I'm happy to bring that up again; anything more than flying your vessel between planets while building colonies would be detracting from what makes KSP fun - not tediously avoiding collisions between two vessels millions of kilometers away, while you're right in the middle of doing something a million times more fun. We haven't mentioned how annoying it would be for KSP 2 to momentarily lag out massively just to calculate a collision and its debris for two old satellites you don't care about anymore that are several light years away, while in the middle of a delicate landing.

Remember that this is a game with simulation elements, not a simulation with game elements.

Fortunately the devs don't actually appear to be doing this for unfocused vessels.

That's the time it'd take to reach Sagittarius A*. There are closer black holes though.

These pointless collision checks do nothing but add busywork for the one player out of a million that ends up unlucky enough to have a collision. Again, massively pointless. There is literally no point in this. Cannot put enough emphasis on that.

Can you draw an example, or explain in a bit more detail?

Worth calling back to the fact KSP 1 has already traded realism for the sake of fun in the past. The planets are at 1/10th scale, atmospheres stop abruptly and Kerbals can stay in space indefinitely. Pointless collision checks are no exception.

Why is this under KSP 1 suggestions/development?

I know the difference between difficulty and challenge, and I'm not sure why you are calling them the same thing. I also don't know why you bring career up.

Or just use starship?

Weird milestone, I know. Worth bringing up, though. The forum's oldest archive is now 3535 days old (9 years 8 months) and has been archived a thousand times - see the first archive of the forum here, archived October 12th 2012. Feel free to discuss the forum's history here including the Wayback Machine and other historic archives.

It's not like this would mean anything besides more busy work for the one unlucky player who happens to have two vessels approaching each other. KSP 1 lets vessels phase through each other but still checks for collisions with planets. Why are you making the assertion that if KSP 2 lets vessels phase through each other (so you aren't having to micromanage orbits around small bodies), then that'll mean phasing through entire planets? if that alarm bugs out, as games are known to do, then you'll come back to a cloud of debris. Maybe the alarm works, but puts you too close to the collision and you barely have enough time to engage thrusters... Maybe just don't simulate collisions between unloaded vessels. That's another thing - the game has to load these vessels momentarily to generate accurate results for the collision. Again, just more detriment for the one player on Earth who ends up with two colliding vessels.

Okay - now I'm trying to picture sky boxes from Portal 2 (where I spent most of the time testing in underground environments and looking for cake... 2D planes that project a much smaller area onto the backdrop of the level, providing the illusion that the level is much bigger than it actually is, as explained in Shesez's Boundary Break series.

Would having dynamic skyboxes (like Portal 2) of a starfield blown up in size across the sky work better? There's no seams and your vessel could travel very far away from the main cluster of stars and see the skybox update according to what it should see in its part of the galaxy.

Nothing here said you'll need to worry about vessels colliding during timewarp - only that you'll have to worry about the vessel you are controlling right now colliding with another vessel in orbit while you're busy using it.

A stellar mass black hole will only look like a neutron star until you're well beyond the point a Kerbal could go without being spaghettified. A supermassive black hole, you could approach the event horizon before being spaghettified. But you would never be able to go anywhere near the black hole due to intense radiation.

You cannot have a hud that resembles this without looking busy. KSP 1 UI is about as busy as you can make a UI before it turns into a joke (KSP 1 UI is arguably already a joke), and that's still far from looking like a real spacecraft control panel.

[snip] Show us or it never happened

I agree with everything else, but 1. this is a tutorial and onboarding issue, and 2. this same argument could be used as ammunition for someone who is against the devs bothering to implement anything beyond the Mun. No-one gets far, why bother with other star systems, or other planets?

They did a dev blog about that. You will have to worry about crossing orbits with time warp. If there's going to be a collision, it's going to happen, time warp or not. Link or it didn't happen

I'm hearing something else

Honestly, it might be safer to enforce a vanilla-only install just to ensure that no-one inadvertently leaves a mod on that, say, alters how the thermal mechanics work.

Wait, so you don't want challenge?