Bej Kerman

Sorry if not being blindly optimistic gets your pants in a twist.

Failures are standard in the industry, yes.

No Man's Sky was also tight lipped during development, and probably because development was a trainwreck. What bad stuff could be happening BTS to KSP 2 to warrant these tight lips? What warrants keeping normal gameplay behind closed doors? We've already seen cinematic in-game shots, give us proper gameplay footage. Release was scheduled a long while back, it's about time we know what the game looks like now.

And is the reason KSP why people try it and say it's too difficult. For a game as complex as KSP is, some hand-holding would be helpful for player retention. KSP 2 is making the tutorials more than adequate, unlike in KSP 1. Your LEGO doesn't need cutscenes and hand-holding. I understand what you mean, but I think LEGOS is oversimplification of what ksp is and what ksp2 will be. Saying it's Lego and expecting them to fly interstellar with the proper amount of delta-v without an understanding of what it is goes to the other side of the spectrum. As I've already said previously, tutorials are going to go way further with helping you than cutscenes. I want to stress that just showing someone a game spontaneously without telling them what the funk they're looking at and using their reactions to said game makes an inadequate argument for, let's say, cutscenes. Avalancha's wife probably never seen a tutorial and was probably being handheld by Avalancha without them explaining what they're doing - they get to space with a capsule, a rocket and a fuel tank and, because they've had inadequate time to adjust to the game and have never seen tutorials before, they think "What now?". It has bogall to do with cutscenes and attention spans. To put my argument another way using your helpful analogy, "but my wife said "What now?" after being introduced to LEGO for the first time and building a little tower of 2x2 pieces. A book and a movie would go a long way to keeping her, and other new players who probably did a lot more research before having to spend physical money on the LEGO set, occupied". Not that Avalancha said this word-for-word, that's just how I see what they said.

You're argument runs straight past my post and off into the distance that's exactly what I meant, you and I we have that attention span and creativity, but lots of others don't. I'm saying that Kerbal has such a unique baseline already, it could hook that many new players with cutscenes and handholding, you wouldn't even believe it! Your argument has also ran off into the sunset, and it seems to be winning the race. Cutscenes and handholding would hook in only a few of those attention-span-lacking players and drive out the majority that believe KSP's story is your headcanon. You're arguing that LEGO would pull people in if it had extra Michael Bay and lens flare. You argue that your wife has no clue what to do now, but that seems to be because you just dropped the game in front of her without explaining that it's a LEGO set, nor without giving her adequate time to gain her bearings. Cutscenes and hand-holding go against KSP's sandbox-and-imagination design .

How many lamps did you use?

Dude, it doesn't matter. What are you arguing for here? That rockets be made stupidly efficient for the scales of the planets here? What is your end goal here?

KSP 2 has boom events if that's what they're called, and I anticipate that the game will have a way of telling you that children are being made.

Sounds good on paper, but NMS shows that being interrupted so the game can celebrate for you isn't too fun. It'll probably be a mod, and if light cutscenes are your thing, great. I just hope the base game avoids any form of inflight interruptions be it cutscenes or milestones.

See how much further you can go. KSP doesn't need stories or cutscenes, not if you have the attention span and creativity. It's a lego kit that teaches you astrophysics, not a film with elements of astrophysics, to put it in other words.

Sounds a bit unnecessary, rotate the craft back then build. It's 2 seconds with the rotate tool. If you really want, a more fitting suggestion would be to have an option for the symmetry and default orientation axis to follow the root part so you can build an inclined ship.

Yeah but they set Kerbin's gravity to be almost the same as Earth's, and it is really a huge amount of difference compared to real life how much fuel a ton is. My point stands, fuel is still overpowered with how tiny the planets are here.

None, that's exactly the idea. Set your launch inclination by rotating the craft on the pad. I don't follow. That just sounds exactly like using the rotate tool but with extra steps, like you can't just pull into the wanted orbit after launch.

What would the difference be from just rotating the craft?

Does it matter? The game would be too easy if rockets were any lighter. I do recall that rockets have been made very inefficient and the gravitational constant very strong in KSP to counteract the miniaturized planets so that physics remains the same while burns don't take as long.

I feel like the most interstellar travel will take is 80 years by the time you're at the top of the tech tree.

I'm guessing it's also what Kerbals use to transport oxygen around their bodies.

This is a non-problem. There's no reason colossal engines shouldn't be used to also speed up interplanetary travel.

You don't need the loadmeta.

That's not how jets work.

These people are masochists then. Well I don't know what your problem is. Not at all. Then I'm not sure why you're here if you clearly don't care about the sort of content this thread is about, This is the equivalent of walking into a museum just so you can say you're not interested in fossils.

You aren't interested in these old relics? If you know the No Man's Sky fandom, you'd know a lot of people like to get the older versions of NMS running, released before Sean fixed everything about the game.

KSP 2 won't be poorly optimized. Graphics will be better and will likely run better than KSP 1 with 300 mods.

The way I see it, the player's actions are programmed into the probe from launch, not sent.

These supply missions clearly aren’t going to be following a real trajectory. It will simply look that way. I know, but how's the game going to handle a player building a craft with just enough dV to do the most efficient transfer in the nest 200 years?