Jump to content

Bej Kerman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,004

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Bej Kerman

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. Bej Kerman
    At least come up with your own ideas lol https://outerwilds.fandom.com/wiki/Brittle_Hollow
  7. Bej Kerman
    You're copying the links incorrectly.
  8. Bej Kerman
    There's one thing we can agree with
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. Bej Kerman
    Yeah that ain't true chief
  14. Bej Kerman
    That is the complete opposite of what I am saying. Having 2 aero models as options is overkill.
  15. 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.
  16. 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
  17. 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.
  18. Bej Kerman
    I'm willing to wait as long as possible for the aerodynamics to not be so easy to exploit. FAR might be harder to use than stock in some cases, but it feels far more fluent when you get the hang of it. If KSP 2 considers realistic aero model, I'll definitely wait another year for any kinks to be ironed. I mean, through my eyes, the KSP 1 aero model is hacky, the atmosphere feels soupy and planes don't feel as good to handle nor easy to flip and pull stunts on, and it doesn't feel like something to come from KSP 2, but we'll have to see.
  19. Bej Kerman
    I'd rather you didn't confuse or conflate mine preference for there not to be delays for the sake of a specific, optional feature, with any form of impatience or wanting things rushed in any way. Aerodynamics and, most important of all, polish, really matters to me. The team should be given as much time as is reasonable. And, besides that, aerodynamics is quite a bit more than just some optional feature. The game past orbital mechanics hinges on it.
  20. Bej Kerman
    IMHO I'd rather KSP 2 come out as intended at launch rather than rush it for the sake of my impatience.
  21. Bej Kerman
    It isn't any more impressive than what games like SE and NMS have pulled off. It's impressive. It's also not new. Because this... "A level of detail at a scale that big is simply unheard of in gaming. Incredibly impressive work!" this simply isn't true. Plenty of games have this detail at this scale nowadays. I'm not diminishing what the devs did, I'm simply saying other games have done this and will continue to do so. I'm simply contradicting the notion that this is level of detail is unheard of, and in truthfulness, saying that diminishes the hard work other games have gone to in order to further procedural generation. Space Engine is a passion project by a single person, and it's had levels of detail that have come close to this since 2010. It puts KSP 2 on a podium where it doesn't necessarily deserve 1st place. Same. Peace. This would be an awesome detail to the game and I'm also hoping that resource deposition is sensible in matching its environment though hopefully not being cartoonishly obvious so we have to still probe and prospect with caution. I do fully agree there, it would bring some strategy to KSP 2 if things like this were knitted together. Mountain bases on Kerbin, seasides, rivers canyons, etc. could have different weather to the plains elsewhere, for instance.
  22. Bej Kerman
    They curated some procedural generation, that isn't new or exciting. That's a massive leap in logic, it's more like saying that other games have also done procedural generation - just that the curation is done though having players share their finds instead.
  23. Bej Kerman
    You said it yourself, the difference is curation. It's still just procedural generation beneath the curation. It's still just the same stuff as ED, NMS and SE. Going back to the point, KSP 2 isn't breaking any new grounds.
  24. Bej Kerman
    What.
  25. Bej Kerman
    A part of me will be really disappointed if the realism doesn't approach Ferram. Aerodynamics shouldn't be baby-proofed; I feel the same way about aerodynamics as those who were scared of orbital mechanics being simplified when KSP 2 was earlier in development. With spaceplanes and such being so prominent in KSP, the aero model should be held with almost as high of a regard as orbital mechanics.
×
×
  • Create New...