Bej Kerman

The underlying changes especially excites me. Individual features are sweet, but not even going beyond what we already have in KSP 1 + QOL, seeing the work the crew has put into how resources flow, improving how the game deals with physics and high-speed collisions, how the editor handles parts that are placed but not attached to other parts (permitting ofc parallel vessel construction and workspaces ), et cetera. All this is going to make KSP 2 worth the wait, even under EA conditions

Delivery routes will be coming before or at the release of interstellar-scale parts. The devs have put emphasis on this one. If you have any concerns about resources and milk runs, assume that you must only send a ship of resources up to a station once. You're frustrated at the idea of kilometer-scale stations because you think you're going to be sending each ship up individually, at least telling from you saying "Citation?" about this feature the devs have put emphasis on before. You won't be sending each ship up individually.

Without elaboration, I'm not sure what the point of notifying the forum of this was.

By launching them into orbit and connecting them up, just like building a space station. How would the engineers fit the modules in the VAB? Nevermind the monster lofting it to orbit. Cool, let me build it and forget it. I'm here for the spaceships. Yeah, and in order to build spaceships of the scale you're wanting you cannot build them without OABs which themselves will require modules on a similar scale to interstellar rockets. KSP 2's resource management has been explained to be "build it and forget it" itself so I'm struggling to see your issue with KSP 2 properly modelling the steps humans would go through to build interstellar vehicles.

Sorry, how else were you expecting to build OABs? Interstellar scale construction is a physics problem and just lofting each piece one by one isn't the answer, especially when you can't fit a Daedalus engine in the VAB (which is a very reasonable restriction).

Because you were slamming the whole font rather than simply noting that the font doesn't properly represent descenders. There's probably a simple fix without throwing out the entire font. Just move the descender ones down a bit and adjust the above-line segments to line up. There's no reason this font couldn't represent descenders. It's not a fixed display, you can use a theoretical extra row of pixels below the existing ones for special cases. You don't need to blame the entire font - don't be biased. And I'm sure the graphic designer behind this font will have them fixed with feedback.

They've got better things to do right this second than deal with implementing the eye candy systems they made, and presumably haven't yet scaled to work everywhere under every imaginable kind of terrain.

Not if I don't know what the terms are, no.

Then use the grass

And I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that the information to the Intercept Discord has been made available to the entire community so further elaboration really isn't needed. However, in the interest of making sure you have it: https://discord.gg/interceptgames Not touching it unless I have a good reason to participate in the first place.

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say I am not joining this discord unless you elaborate.

We don't know. It falls below the minimum requirements so probably not. It is also worth pointing out that a GTX 1650 Ti portable will be less powerful than its desktop equivalent.

I was sure this was made explicitly clear by the boat launch site option

I wish I didn't have to repeat myself. EA is NOT FOR A WIDER AUDIENCE. EA is targeted at people who are going to be reporting bugs and trying to make the most of the development period. It is not a release. In 99% of developer projects, juggling optimisation at the same time as adding things hurts efficiency, so expect that the current high demands are a result of rushing to get EA out and won't hold true closer to launch, or maybe even a few months from now, depending on developer priorities. Key words: closer to launch. EA is not a launch. It's an open window into the development process. Just to make it absolutely clear that your expectations are not in check. The $1000 graphics card builds are not aimed at the kids you keep bringing up. This They complain about being condescending but all they've done so far is complain about the fact a voice actor didn't have / didn't put on a deep voice on. I get the impression if they were face to face with the VA or the staff member they were a client for, they wouldn't be giving out all these strong words. Again, points for bringing up representation! Inb4 men get upset over the leading figure for all the newbs learning KSP 2 not being some super manley ultra uber masculine goit Note to moderation: "goit" refers to the British slang insult popularized by Red Dwarf, derived from goitre (i.e. a pain in the neck), not the Urban Dictionary definition. It is intended as a point of sarcasm, a joke, and is not intended to offend men outside those who would genuinely get annoyed by someone in a video game not being a man. Second, slightly more important note to moderation: the forum directed me to page three of this discussion, and was not aware of the moderator request to "keep the discussion focused on Scott’s video here" - apologies!

Indeed The NERV was going to be my go-to engine for interplanetary stuff, but when I saw the stats of the SWERV engine in @Space Scumbag's handy part overview video, my mind immediately changed. It's nice to see some love given to this engine niche. Thank you for saying this People are so used to Squad's atrocious management that we're already seeing expectations for new features right out the gate.

And you would be surprised if I told you that helicopters aren't the only imaginable thing that can take off and land vertically? Funny you are so confident that robotics are coming, because you saw a feature that we all know was added for SpaceX style return boosters - and, failing that, jet-powered VTOLs. Yes, things do exist that take off and land vertically, that aren't helicopters. Until the team gives an update on their previous statement of robotics not coming to release, do not be so sure X is coming because you saw a rock, seen a cloud that looked barely like a duck, or made some other similar mundane observation that barely relates to X.

I do believe the highly condescending tone you used to describe the VA and what they got paid to do would qualify this as irony. Why would they charge £20 more than KSP 1's £30 for a game whose developers have not given up at the bottom of the hill, whose developers are going to spend the next few years doing more than what KSP 1's devs did - muck around trying and failing to redo the asset art styles I don't know, probably to do with the fact the devs know what they're doing and aren't, for example, going to push a career mode out, see it fail beyond a few hardcore players, and completely give up on making it make sense. It's nice to see people talk about things like this, so thank you

What? Excuse me, but what? I don't see any identicality here. The parts look completely redone. KSP 2 has dynamic textures and details that weren't there in KSP 1. The medium cockpit (formerly Mk2) flows better and isn't relying on textures that barely changed from their Spaceplanes+ counterpart. Even the parts whose styles were untouched still got redone with higher quality models and dynamic textures, like the Terrier and the aforementioned medium cockpit. If you see any part you think looks like it was ripped from KSP 1, feel free to screenshot it and show us, because I do not see anything that looks like a KSP 1 model. And that's one the main reason I never tried parallax, it's a technical marvel and an incredible mod, I won't deny it, but the art style is... Debatable. The bubbles you find on Eve belong in No Man's Sky... I don't understand why they didn't just stick to the usual formula of rocks everywhere. Yeah, it looks cool in a soft sci-fi space opera, not so much in a game where the primary challenge is wrestling the rocket equation. I'd call it another win for KSP 2.

Not to mention the chatter feels like it's a part of the universe with its atmospheric effects and responses to flight events, rather than being a popup that just randomly plays sound files. Wake me up when modded KSP 1 exceeds KSP 2? Consider me dead

High-power engines are not coming until later on. The best you've got for EA release is the SWERV nuclear engine that outputs 700kn at 1450s, and uses hydrogen like the less efficient NERV. Until then, those and the ion thruster are your most efficient engines. Please, temper your expectations. No-one said anything about releasing far future engines with EA - these things are coming later on the roadmap.

Ignoring EVERYTHING, every improvement, big and small, for the sake of pushing the inane idea that Intercept is conspiring to scam us. Don't forget that Squad is still asking £30 for a broken, bare bones game they no longer bother to properly support. So if you want to egg on anyone, it is not Intercept. It's not the developer team that is still developing things. Except for the parts where they promised to deliver more.

There is no highlight in the map view, and either way the shadow on the night side would indicate it is not an interface element.

Basic physics? I mean, robotics is nice, but we can all live without it.

EXACTLY!! I can't begin to understand how having these things integrated into the game is somehow on the same level as needing to stack 30 mods to cover basic things like this! As Matt Lowne stressed, this is the baseline! This isn't modded, this is the pad modders launch from!

That reads to me more like a basic UI element with very little impact on performance, but it probably is toggleable. Settings for these definitely exist. Not from what I've seen. It hardly covers anything at all and barely lasts a fraction of a sec.