Jump to content

Bej Kerman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,012

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Bej Kerman

  1. Bej Kerman
    60fps+ will be supported better in the future but it's not like human senses will be upgraded to notice the change better. 60fps+ will be overwhelmingly pointless for the time being.
  2. Bej Kerman
    Muddy textures are one thing, but I quite frankly can't see why anyone would care about getting above 60fps when most people can't distinguish between that and 50fps.
  3. Bej Kerman
    It's lovely to know that you guys are helping release us from the horrors of KSP 1's collision detection!
  4. Bej Kerman
    Rename KSP 1 Science to Enthusiasm and give player science for explosions. Got it.
  5. Bej Kerman
    That just sounds utterly pointless. Why should there not be any diversity skin colour? While we're at it, why don't we remove female Kerbals?
  6. Bej Kerman
    1. Orion isn't majorly flawed as long as it's not being used near planets with important colonies. 2. It makes perfect sense in the Kerbal Universe. I'm not sure what idiotic nonsense you're seeing in Project Orion but it just seems to be you.
  7. Bej Kerman
    Absolutely not. Handcrafted systems gives us room for intricate but semi-realistic systems that hold a lot of charm. Random generation has proved to have no charm, it doesn't always generate realistic things and it is not intricate. Elite, NMS and SpaceEngine don't ever give us planets that have any unique properties unless said properties were handcrafted beforehand, nor do they hold any stories or charm.
  8. Bej Kerman
    Um, what? Are you talking about the film Sunshine, or what?
  9. Bej Kerman
    When you're having to haul thousands of tons to orbit, it won't automatically make anything easier. A ship that zips across planets via brachistochrone trajectories will be subject to the same challenges as any other heavy ship in KSP 1.
  10. Bej Kerman
    Kerr geometry, including the four dimensional temporal structure of the hole and the ringularity, can be calculated on a home computer, albeit very slowly: http://www.madore.org/~david/math/kerr.html#videos The much simpler Schwarzschild geometry can be done real-time, and there's no doubt Intercept could pull it off: https://ebvalaim.pl/en/black-hole-simulator/ It's possible, but there's not enough interest regarding black hole interiors.
  11. Bej Kerman
    It was a very specific idea you put across, so I'm just gonna go ahead and doubt that lol. Pretty much that part of Outer Wilds 1:1.
  12. Bej Kerman
    I personally don't care how fun an exploit is, I'd much prefer realistic aerodynamics. This, bugs being dismissed because they're fun, is a mistake I hope KSP 2 avoids. I want a solid game, not one full of bugs that are only ever 'fun' in very specific moments.
  13. Bej Kerman
    Bugs and performance made me drop out ages ago. Maybe I didn't bring rose tined glasses but I just can't have fun with KSP 1 when it's, for the most part, broken. RAM usage, bugs that break ships but stay on board with the game because they've been introduced in-universe as the Kraken, a charming artstyle that got replaced with much more generic 60s textures, basic features like alarms and craft searching that took until KSP's final breath to be introduced, inaccurate physics warp with countless accuracy related bugs with no way to disable inaccuracy without BetterTimeWarp, a low time warp cap that results in Jool transfers being a massive bore, all these things just pushed me off and so far I've been waiting a phenomenal amount of time for KSP 2 to drop so I can get back in without having to put up with all these issues. I expect KSP 2 to bring new players to the table thanks to the fact that it isn't just extreme fanatics that can put up with all this. I don't understand how others can't see KSP as a broken game.
  14. Bej Kerman
    At least come up with your own ideas lol https://outerwilds.fandom.com/wiki/Brittle_Hollow
  15. Bej Kerman
    You're copying the links incorrectly.
  16. Bej Kerman
    There's one thing we can agree with
  17. Bej Kerman
    Uh, no. The original aero model doesn't remain in the difficulty settings. Let me just establish this in concrete: I believe KSP 2 should have a realistic aero model from the start and try its best to unify the physics among all clients. It should also have a good physics system from day one, one that won't need to be replaced for a while, maximising time between major versions that may involve craft breaking. Have you got this, yea? What I'm saying is: no more than one aero model in the game, don't replace physics too often like KSP 1. lol no.
  18. Bej Kerman
    When I say FAR in stock, I mean a singular aero model in the base game. I never asked for two. I believe it's been made clear enough by others that a secondary model is 1. going to bloat the game, 2. spaghettify the code and 3. only make things confusing for the craft sharing community. It's one thing to have to give your modlist for a craft, it's another thing to have to give your difficulty settings. So far, these things have been trivial, like re-entry heating. But a secondary aero model is ridiculous. What I'm saying is that KSP 2 should minimise the amount of physics things that updates change. This can be done if we just stick with one aero model through many updates.
  19. Bej Kerman
    The entire point of getting physics right in the first place is to minimize the hassle of sharing craft between difficulty settings and entire versions.
  20. Bej Kerman
    Taken the words right out of my mouth. Sort of what I was trying to get across with "Having 2 aero models as options is overkill", it's just somewhat unsustainable and would probably end up with spaghetti code in the game before launch. Besides that, FAR shouldn't be as difficult to implement as it was with KSP 1. Intercept is building the game from the ground up and there should not be nearly as much problems as there were with fitting FAR into KSP 1. Intercept has all the money they'll need and an entire blank slate - it should be easy for them when it was possible for a single guy with no extra income to fit FAR into a game it wasn't built for. To cap this off, I just simply don't get why having FAR from day one would end up with KSP 2 being rushed as AlinghtyR thinks I'm saying, and why we'd want KSP 1's problem of an evolving physics engine breaking rockets again when we could delay KSP 2 a few months and end up with an aero model that'll stick for longer and result in a more rigid game. Again, I completely agree with you and I don't want 2 aero models nor do I want the aero model to change between updates obsoleting stuff. I want Intercept to get it right from day one, even if it means waiting longer - it would mean a lot if things weren't breaking and physics wasn't shifting between updates.
  21. Bej Kerman
    Yeah that ain't true chief
  22. Bej Kerman
    That is the complete opposite of what I am saying. Having 2 aero models as options is overkill.
  23. Bej Kerman
    Not an exoplanet but... Archurion - A dormant black hole holding Kerbol's small globular stellar cluster together. The black hole's deep gravity well opens up new possibilities for passionate daredevil pilots wanting to push their skills to their highest. Vulkan - Orbits relatively close to Archurion, going around at several hundreds of kilometers a second. Reaching this planet would be a case of burning retrograde for many days, whittling down the semimajor axis of the orbit before coming within reach of the planets' tiny gravity well.
  24. Bej Kerman
    Switching from stock to FAR midgame is going to really mess things up. Fortunately KSP 2 was built from the ground up for stability and it should be a walk in the park - relatively speaking - to do FAR. I asked what the deal with a secondary model is I.E. why you insist on switching models through post-launch development, not what it is. Can't say anyone else's patience and good will are gone - I'll wait as long as I like for a solid, future-proof aero model that ensures future stability
  25. Bej Kerman
    ...MAIN... ---------- Meanwhile, I was clearly referring to a What I mean is that I want realistic aerodynamics from launch to minimise broken aircraft from updates. Not sure what the deal with a secondary aero model is.
×
×
  • Create New...