Bej Kerman

I don't know. Do you find KSP fun?

Overrated, you go 70 million kilometers for what's essentially Minmus without the near 0g antics. Underrated: Duna. Not far, has a thin atmosphere that makes building aircraft challenging and fun.

I'll tell you myself - I posted in here before only to have no-one reply to me because someone else showed up lol

What are you talking about? Rings are tied to the axial tilt and won't budge due to the relativistic effects that keep them around the rotational equator. Seasons are caused by the orbit of the planet moving the Sun from out beneath a planet's axial pole, and not the axis spinning away.

Then they'd either make the DLCs free, have them as toggleable options or just keep the gameplay focused and the gameplay loops tight. Evidently they're milking the game for all the players will pay for trivial additions. Well an indie dev kept KSP 1 afloat for a decade, why can't the KSP 2 team keep it afloat without milking it horrendously?

Except you're wrong because most of the marketing has to do with making space travel and physics accessible to a wider audience. The editor is a necessity to KSP's goals.

It isn't hard to search 'dark/luna multiplayer', put it in gamedata and find a good server. Usually there's 2/3 people on these servers which isn't bad. I'm not sure what world you've been trapped in. Exactly.

I'd like it if Intercept could get it right from the getgo, make sure the base game is as complete as possible, and refrain from milking it overtly. Outer Wilds is an instance of a game where the one and only DLC adds what's essentially a microcosm for the (already perfect) main game's story, and Mobius have pledged to only release one DLC. The devs aren't overcome with greed. It'll be a turnoff if I see KSP 2 milked like this, containing stuff that should have been included in the pricey base game. Besides, mods will probably already do all this but better, so what's the point?

Don't KSP 1 multiplayer mods do a good enough demonstration of the basic concept?

And only then? Having to spam click when opening the game just to escape the pointless dumb cinematics that fulfil a job already taken by the teaser isn't nice.

I hate it when fans of something refuse to acknowledge anything negative about their game.

Let's all laugh at an industry, that never learns anything tee hee hee!

Probably because you designed it asymmetrically or messed up a setting on one of the ailerons. Have you also tried doing Alt+X? That'll reset your trimming.

All of these are pretty much a given for KSP 2, except alignment indicator.

Pretty much all of those are going to be in KSP 2 in some shape or form given that they just patch the holes in KSP 1.

You don't. You'll have to be just above the atmosphere or in a distant orbit. It isn't that complicated of an issue. and I'm not sure how a figure 8 orbit works in your head because that would require several bodies in a perfect balance. Don't get how it's confirmed without a source I did doubt that, with KSP having its own system wide N-body mod (Principia), that a bunch of very skilled devs working on the game from the ground up would have trouble with localised 3-body, and part with something like patched conics as horrible as it is beyond the simple configurations KSP 1 has.

A timer does this how? Why are the other solutions not valid?

Never happened unless there's a source. Patched conics just won't work around Rask and Rusk lest the game ends up feeling amateurish.

In my time playing SR2 I haven't found myself mixing parts with conflicting art styles because of its customisability, nor have I had to go on a trek for a tank of the right size. Not saying it's bad, heck it'd work a lot better if all parts were categorized properly by cross-section, parts could be painted however we liked and it had the auto-adapt feature of SFS - probably why I'm excited for KSP 2. But if we leave charm and intuitiveness for a sec, procedural parts wipe these problems out just by being procedural. Not having to worry about the only adapter that fits being fugly is nice.

You have a way with words. That's still an unnecessary step. I don't get how a glorified loading screen that doesn't even load anything solves anything.

I have never seen a problem with being able to click 'fly' and be there ready to fly my rocket. I'm not sure what's wrong with not having the intermediate step of waiting out a timer.

Can we add procedural parts to this list? I know it's taboo on this LEGO-obsessed forum, but this little mobile KSP 'Spaceflight Simulator' does it in a LEGO-like manner. There are no adapters - instead, the tops and bottoms of fuel tanks auto-resize to match what's on their top and bottom. It still feels like LEGO but you never have to dig through a list of adapters for the right one. You just put a fuel tank on the blueprint, put a short fuel tank on the top of the same width and put a small item on top - the short fuel tank turns into a correctly sized adapter. This is a nice bit of finesse most other space flight sims don't have.

Nertea's Near / Far Future mods did KSPIE in a stockalike manner that doesn't introduce heinous amounts of bloat to your game, and does it in a way that you don't need documentation that doesn't exist in order to figure everything out. SimpleRockets 2 did this well. You can automate anything using Vizzy, but you need to know how to automate things - you can't just use a porkchop graph and plan a crazy efficient maneuver without having to know anything about orbital mechanics or programming. SR2 also has an auto-burn option for maneuvers to assist with engine wind-up and wind-down times, but you still need to know orbital mechanics to utilize this. Back to the point, you can download craft with Vizzy scripts built in, but this doesn't get much more complicated than automated liftoffs and semi-manual barge landings. Yes, SimpleRockets 2 comes with an ocean barge. Yes, there aren't any RGB lights like in KSP 1, but at least we have something to land eastbound rockets on. Where was I? Oh, SR2 does MechJeb without making it too versatile and cheaty - if you want auto barge landings, you'll need to either practice piloting or programming, not just pushing a 'land here' button.

Which they won't be, they'll cost ore (probably) and I'd imagine the KSC will get a monthly ore allowance that can be saved by recovering parts.

1. KSP is not that sort of game, where you have winning, losing and horrible artificial limitations. Those were bolted on later into the games' life cycle and Intercept is going to make sure they don't make it into the sequel. And, as the above posters have said, KSP isn't about winning and losing - it's not a competitive game, it's a sandbox for exploration and discovery, Having fails and wins would destroy that element. 2. KSC will be decentralized, with space centers on all different bodies. How do you lose the game to a bad decision on the KSC's part when you have 50 other self sufficient, independant bases?