Bej Kerman
-
Posts
4,998 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by Bej Kerman
-
Cause these act nothing like lagrange points. MODERATOR NOTE: This discussion was split off from: -
Does it? SFS 1 played like SimpleRockets 1 (AKA Juno 1), extremely simple rockets and a limited parts selection in a 2D 1/20th scale solar system. Extremely basic game. Their marketing promo now for SFS 2 just seems like "Look! We can also make a 2D game then sell a 3D upgrade!". No mention of the colonies or interstellar travel that you'd need to be worthy of the "KSP 2 ripoff" title.
-
Why SFS?
-
I'd like to ask why this game can't have its own identity, but I also want to point out that if the price tag on the Kerbal IP is too high for Paradox Interactive, then it's likely too big for Rocketwerkz who is smaller by quite a margin.
-
I think what MechBFP means by "salt" isn't people who have valid criticisms and points of skepticism, it's people with nuclear grade trust issues who think others shouldn't be allowed to watch this project with anticipation, just because they were hurt by a triple-A title in the same genre.
-
Making the player feel bad sounds like the plan.
-
Why do I detect a hint of malice...?
-
Do elaborate - I've explained plenty that this thread is just a soapbox and not the big super-important catalyst you think it is.
- 373 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- ksp1
- source code
- (and 2 more)
-
This is particularly relevant to this quoted section, but I feel it's also response enough to your post here: What competition? Do you mean Paradox Interactive, the company that Take Two wanted to give their problem dog to?
-
I'm being realistic, that's what I'm doing. Worst case scenario, yes, Microsoft buys T2 out because corporations happen to be known to buy things out. There's a precedent for companies making poor decisions and getting bought out as a result. There is, however, no precedent for companies of T2's size using old semi-niche forums to decide what they should do with their games. That's far less likely than T2 being bought out or breaking even. Okay. You know why we're able to gush about all the ports of classic Elite? Because Frontier cares. You said yourself it's not nearly as big as T2. It was formed by its CEO David Braben on the success of Elite II, and he remained the CEO until fairly recently, and he was able to get Elite: Dangerous out with the financial support of fans. So of course the fandom surrounding those classic Elite games had a lot of stock in how Braben thinks and runs the company. And yeah, it would be nice to say all this about KSP. But T2 simply isn't comparable. To reiterate, you're still thinking of T2 as a small humble company that you can grab the attention of with soap boxes such as this thread, like Squad or Frontier. This could not be any further from reality. Needless to say: apples and oranges.
-
Is support for 2.5x scale planned?
-
That's precisely my point. RW isn't floundering about, and it's certainly more transparent than Intercept was with its occasional posts showing novelties or saying "We can render orbits! We can do collisions!", which in hindsight was obviously because they never actually bothered to make any real progress on features like shipment routes or colony building, and these basic elementary features were the most they'd actually got done in the midst of mismanagement while being unable to actually ask Squad how they done or fixed certain things.
-
You've convinced me already Okay, what about the other end of the spectrum? Struggling to cope with change, loss, etc. You don't seem to understand that KSP is now owned by a massive corporation, not a small humble indie development studio. Take Two as a massive corporation does not have its priorities at pleasing fans or maintaining 13-year-old games. It is concerned with its franchises that make any significant return I.E. Grand Theft Auto, Civilization, NBA 2K, Red Dead Redemption... Whatever the KSP fandom accounts for in T2's spreadsheets, now that neither game is being maintained and the latter earned the franchise a bad rep, practically amounts to a rounding error. In this case, 0% because nobody at Take Two who makes decisions uses this forum. And in either case, Take Two will find a way to monetize it somehow as Bethesda did with FO76. Yep. You'll be here, in this thread, when Steve the accountant decides they should look for solutions to their financial problems on the old forum they disowned. If my small collection of old games like Frontier: Elite II indicates anything to me, it's that even if Take Two never decides to start behaving like a small studio and fetch ideas from fan forums, and we never get the KSP 1 source code, there won't be much to prevent me from just emulating my old computer to run my old games like KSP.
-
Both have 'very positive' ratings on Steam, so clearly they're doing something right, even if a minority of people hate them [shrug] I'm inclined to think there's a little hyperbole here, especially given people were happy with Squad, under ownership by Take Two, delivering a half-complete art pass and fireworks to KSP 1 rather than any major improvements. My skepticism comes from the fact that many people have made space games, but none have really broken the mould like KSP 1, and right now Rocketwerkz is facing challenges that haven't been solved before. The Rocketwerkz devs that made Stationeers aren't the only people working on this though, as I said, quite a few devs on this also worked with KSP 1/2 and will be familiar with the challenges posed here. In particular, Harvester who figured out how to simulate interplanetary motion and physics with reasonable stability inside a game engine whose framework started out as a 20km or so square of flat terrain to fly tiny rockets in. So if you don't believe this is any reason to think the game should succeed, it is reason to not be as pessimistic as some are here. Yeah, you were hurt by KSP 2, but that was in the past; this is entirely detached from the AAA games industry and so far there aren't any early warning signs to indicate that the developers are clueless and faffing around struggling to solve basic problems KSP 1 already solved, like in the case of Star Theory trying to make KSP 2.
-
Real data is being used for these tech demos because it's easier to tell when something's wrong. Dean Hall has said the fictional system they plan on setting the game in (if the stock game doesn't feature interstellar; he has said the game is being made to handle interstellar should modders want to add different systems) will be somewhere between 1/10th scale like stock KSP and 1/4th scale.
-
Dean Hall, CEO and one of the developers on this, has said to maintain a healthy skepticism. But just to instill some hope in those who are still doomeristic over KSP 2: unlike Star Theory, RW isn't being pulled left and right on a low budget by upper management, and they're demonstrating an understanding of the challenges posed by this game. It's just a techdemo, yeah. But it is more meaningful than flashy marketing, and Dean Hall has said so much they want a solid framework first rather than bolting things on like Harvester did with KSP until technical debt becomes too great to manage. So far they've also demonstrated running two physics simulations simultaneously in the same scene that can run at different tick rates. If you haven't figured out what that means for KSA: people hoped KSP 2 would LOD physics so that large vessels don't hog your CPU's runtime, and Uber/StarTheory/Intercept never bothered with it. KSA's framework is already being designed with this in mind. Lastly, Rocketwerkz has did Stationeers and several other successful projects, and they hired lots of people who've had a history developing KSP 1/2 and mods for it... including Harvester, someone that I expect a lot of people here would trust with their lives. So even if this is a massive undertaking, they are going in with far more experience than "yeah, we're the studio who made Planetary Annihilation and not much else".
-
Yes but this isn't healthy. There are scientific papers shorter than the amount of characters you've spent convincing people Take Two will pay attention, and running the forum equivalent of a change.org petition certainly won't grab T2's attention. They're a corporation that's currently entirely concerned with GTA VI, not a small company run by ex-indie devs who have the bandwidth to listen to fans, and maybe people still aren't used to it yet. Why can't you just be happy with what you've got? That might be possible but it's also a different game - JNO isn't a KSP replacement, it is its own game with its own identity, its own design philosophies, it's successful and has its own fandoms, and the devs probably don't want to lose the identity of their game, to have it melt into KSP 1 just so people can migrate from KSP 1 and still hold onto it, just so people can have their cake and eat it. I agree. You've not got infinite coins, and it would be a shame to waste them all letting the world pass you by, just so you don't have to let go of the hope anyone at T2 cares about KSP more than they care about their multibillion pound GTA franchise. Me personally, I'll come back to KSP 1 occasionally, loaded with tons of mods, while occasionally checking in on the development of KSA with healthy skepticism. It's better than spending forever here...
-
Can't you already bask in its legacy just by playing it (ideally with at least 150 mods)? It's not that simple... Take Two is doing its best to forget KSP ever happened, and your best bet if you really want to respect KSP 1's legacy is to just follow what Harvester is doing (I.E. Kitbash, the Rocketwerkz space game) instead of hoping that Take Two - ran by greedy suits - notices a meagre forum poll and changes its mind after losing so much money to the same franchise. There's no use getting worked up over what cannot be changed, can't you look forward into the future and see there are new things happening to be excited about?
-
Dean Hall from Rocketwerkz has recently unveiled a new game or game engine based partly on their design proposal submitted to Take Two that was turned down in favour of Star Theory, and much of his commentary on Reddit and Discord has shown a laser-focused commitment to making the game easy to mod and making it perform much better than KSP 1/2, or any other space game/sim for that matter. It's also got Harvester, Blackrack, and several other KSP 1/2 alumni and developers on board. How is this relevant to this thread? Well with Take Two trying to distance itself from KSP effectively ensuring you'll never get the source code legally and there being a new KSP-derivative space game on the horizon that's getting developed in a joint venture between the studio that made Stationeers (who, again, was in the final run to get the contract for KSP 2, and lost to Star Theory because their proposal didn't have pictures) and ex-members of Squad, Intercept, and the KSP 1 modding base, I fail to see why you are so invested in KSP 1's source code. It simply isn't happening, and there really isn't much use for it anymore. At least not if Rocketwerkz - again with Harvester and his 13 years of experience on board - can make their new space game work.
-
Imgur? There's a community there?
-
The state of this thread now is not encouraging.
-
Communication has definitely been weak. During the outage, the most communication I could find from our moderators was Vanamonde 3 days after the outage began replying to an obscure Reddit post (0 upvotes, 4 comments) saying IT was fixing it, then the Dakota tweet which was mostly shared on the Discord to my knowledge. No stand-alone post to my knowledge was made by the moderators acknowledging the outage, and the forum megathread that was made a whole week after the outage started was made by an r/KerbalSpaceProgram moderator and not anyone affiliated with this one. I know the moderators wouldn't have been able to say much the fan-made forum megathread didn't, but it still would have been better than the one reddit comment and a tweet.
-
That was a bit of a scare. Hopefully that goes to show you shouldn't keep all your eggs in one basket
-
Lol ok. Most people who hate Unity as a game engine fixate on bad examples of its use and don't notice when it's put to good use. I can say wildly exacerbated RAM issues is not a universal problem with games based on Unity.
-
KSP's bad architecture isn't Unity's fault. The game's RAM usage not being optimised when there's a ~4gb RAM ceiling imposed by the original 32 bit architecture is even worse.
