Bej Kerman

What information? And how did you discern that? Where does this come from?

"This game is a waste for me therefore it's a waste for everyone" seems to be how these people think. You speak complete logic, but complete logic didn't draw these people to winge about this game every day instead of just sticking to the KSP 1 forums. I didn't waste my life 2019-2023 checking on KSP 2 every single day and making it the one thing I fantasize about every night, and it shows in the fact I haven't torn my furniture up over EA not arriving with the flagship features immediately in the game.

No. Not either way. My comment was directly and only about future patches. And my response is the same either way.

First, just because other people reported performance increase doesn't mean everyone did. I did not. I've been at 20 foe since launch, and the last patch did not affect that either positively or negatively. And I'm just saying that doesn't represent the majority of players who do see performance gains. Either way.

The only people who are going to be mad about this blunt but honest post are those who say nothing helpful. We do listen, but we won't bend our opinions to the will of some forum plodder. I don't suppose you would be somewhat peeved if I explained that the people whining endlessly about KSP 2 just don't listen to reason and would rather stay seething about time they spent 2019-2023 hyping instead of doing something useful?

There isn't a file. The subforum was not aptly named IMO - for some posts there's no exchange; it's an esoteric reference to old telephone systems. But anyway... You want to look for ship files in C:\Users\[USER]\AppData\LocalLow\Intercept Games\Kerbal Space Program 2\Saves\SinglePlayer\[SAVE]\Workspaces. Alternatively you can copy a workspace json and paste it in-game

Assuming we even get them. Which I have next to no hope for. What do you mean? Most people reported performance gains and we're only a few patches in.

It might for some people, but not for all. I have seen zero improvement in frame rate or graphics with either of the first 2 patches. That's unlucky Hope you have better luck with the next few patches and updates.

Which, if I may ask? It's measurable.

Is it not rude to ping Community Managers over a daft joke?

What's your source? KSP 2 literally just came out and already runs much better than it did day 1.

Noted.

You cannot say this when IG specifically says they want feedback. So you're saying you think IG never cared about feedback as long as they're not taking advice like "build your game on a codebase that is literally unfit for its own purpose"?

In your opinion.

I'll spell it out then. Building off of KSP 1's codebase is a stupid idea, and when 98% of the forum is stupid ideas like this or people who do not understand development then it's no wonder the team isn't taking advice on the backend of things when forum-goers think it's a good idea trying to shoehorn interstellar into a game that mods demonstrate isn't fit for such features. Yes, despite the fact you label it "stubbornness". KSP 2 benefits a lot from Unity features KSP 1 didn't get just through updating.

I've never seen any mods that have fixed the god-awful UI and attempts at running interstellar modpacks just lead to the usual crashes or save corruptions when trying to mount these missions. KSP 2 on day one was similar, but after a few patches I've been able to cruise around without finding part modules missing or anything, and mission-breaking bugs tend to fix themselves after a reload. The developers are here and are fixing bugs, which I couldn't say for Squad. KSP 2 just came out and I can confidently say the stability has gone up more than I've ever seen KSP 1 do over the course of 1-2 patches. Mods fundamentally suck. Sorry, but even having thousands of mods provided for free, it's still a high price to pay for a fractured experience with no sole dev team to consult when things go awry. You are absolutely free to ignore their acknowledgement of the bugs and the fact they've went on to kill many of them.

To put it nicely, because next to nobody on this forum is fit to be giving development-oriented suggestions, and in addition the team is not deleting the last five years of progress to work on KSP 1's dated codebase for some "power to the users" gorm.

KSP 2 was literally made to avoid all the crap KSP 1 is plagued with by virtue of running off a horrible amateur codebase from 2011.

As far as I remember, K2's experience allowed him to predict the release of science a month after the appearance of early access. May I ask what experience you have in the gaming industry (besides mistaking doors for rendering artefacts, of course)?

If listen to you, it turns out that making games is now almost impossible and difficult. And KSP2 was born by the collective efforts of great professional developers, like Saturn-5. On Unity, Chinese developers somehow created Genshin Impact; on UE, indie developers create incredibly cinematic scenes that are difficult to distinguish from reality. What is done well in KSP2, better than in other games? Tutorials? K2 has experience and has eloquently explained their reasons for what they said. This is incoherent and in addition you mistook a clear piece of geometry in the KSC for a rendering artefact while looking for more reasons to slam KSP 2, which to me demonstrates the lengths you are willing to go to in order to void saying anything nice about it. I know who I am listening to.

Tip for future shots, you copied the URL of the thumbnail, not the actual screenshot I'd say these parts do a fine job of what they were made to do! Here I used a Truss (pretty much the same thing) to make an XL encasing for an RTG so the cross section remains XL through the drive section. I'd wager these parts weren't really meant for when you need solid metal bits in your builds.

I get the impression you want procedural editions of these same things I'm asking for. That sounds very tantalizing to me. I was actually considering asking for something along those lines initially, but then I backed off from that. Mainly because I get the impression that procedural is hard. The procedural wings and toobs are both bugged. Especially the toobs. Yeah, that's basically it. I mean, I was really only asking to be able to toggle a skin on/off for all the outer sides all together. But if it wouldn't be to difficult, the individual sides would be even nicer. That's something I decided to hold off on because I think just being able to skin the whole part would be good enough most of the time. I just figured applying these ideas to tubes and fairings would be better because instead of applying a quick and cheap solution to what I'd guess is at least 100 parts just to achieve one goal, tubes and fairings would become much more powerful tools which can achieve the same thing and more. It'd be a challenge but a worthwhile one if done right. I just don't believe in temporary solutions

Then maybe we could have square tubes - even better, a proper advanced editor for fairings so we can customise the cross section and make advanced shapes. Other than that, I'm not seeing much reason to add a fuselage tweakable to all those structural parts instead of just a few tubes and fairings - I think it'd be more benefit to just do that and let you stick parts on procedural bits, like you can already do that with wings.

Would "ability to attach objects to fairings and tubes" be better?

Tubes and fairings can be linked, no? You can't attach stuff to fairings, but you can attach stuff to fairing roots then offset them onto the fairing itself.