Jump to content

Bej Kerman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,002

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Bej Kerman

  1. Bej Kerman
    FAR has just as much "hey why didn't you watch this youtube tutorial" stuff as basic orbital mechanics, a pillar of KSP. We are getting better tutorials anyway, might as well make aero as good, if not better, than FAR.
  2. Bej Kerman
    It's not about shying away from teaching them, it's inviting them. Motivation is a huge factor in someone's willingness to learn. If they find they like flying planes, they can find a way to fly them more realistically. But a player shouldn't be frustrated to a point where they have no interest in learning further, and I believe some percentage of the newcomers would by an aero model that's not appropriately designed to introduce them to the concepts. That's a tutorial problem, not an aero problem. This is 100% in the realm of bugs, not realism of the aero model. Hm. This is in the realm of tutorials, not the realism of the aero model. Can't have it both ways ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  3. Bej Kerman
    KSP 2 shouldn't shy away from showing players the reality of designing an aircraft.
  4. Bej Kerman
    Type Ia supernova aren't singular events, they repeatedly detonate every time they accumulate enough mass. Where'd you read that?
  5. Bej Kerman
    It would be far more practical to just have small isolated servers hosted by players and dedicated hosts.
  6. Bej Kerman
    Maybe have a special fuel and sacrifice efficiency for better thrust. Maybe a bigger engine or rotating panel that deploys another engine with a stronger TWR Although my idea sounds a little silly If your idea has no scientific basis then it won't end up in KSP 2.
  7. Bej Kerman
    Yes, if you rely on an exploit that probably won't exist in KSP 2...
  8. Bej Kerman
    The server just doesn't send you the filtered info. So you're effectively playing only with your 5 or so friends.
  9. Bej Kerman
    Why not have many servers ran by players where some are safe and others let you grief?
  10. Bej Kerman
    The MMO part is the one that allows you to interact with any player on the server inside the same persistent universe. Doesn't mean too much when you have to isolate your group from everyone else because everyone else is just causing you lag without adding value to your gameplay,
  11. Bej Kerman
    I highly suspect that KSP 2 is going to work like Minecraft, the only limits are set by the hardware you're running your server on. If you want to run the 2b2t of KSP, your best bet is good hardware or a subscription. With a highly creative game like KSP 2 that prides itself on mods and customizability, it's the best bet.
  12. Bej Kerman
    So your solution is to have a local group of players on an MMO that can only interact with each other. Might as well just cut the MMO part ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  13. Bej Kerman
    It's OK, the planets are big enough! That's what KSP is known for, right? Huge planets. No, they've got a point. It doesn't matter if you've got 5 or 500 players, you're only going to be in close quarters with players you've arranged to meet. You might as well just run a local MP game rather than go through a massive server for virtually the same effect.
  14. Bej Kerman
    No it's not. Come on, all of us together - so we can see the crazy contraptions launching and zipping around in real-time instead of only on the forum, Reddit, YouTube or KerbalX. Come on, jump on board! That's simply an unrealistic dream.
  15. Bej Kerman
    That sounds kind of.. empty. Because you've spent months asking for an MMO that won't happen. 5 players is a decent amount, you could assemble a large station fairly quickly with 5 people working together.
  16. Bej Kerman
    The fact that you have to go through the resource gathering tech progression phase of the game to do anything. The game would just take too long for it to be a "let's knock down 30 minutes whenever you're free and see who can get the furthest" thing. What you're thinking about is a sandbox-only custom-rules multiplayer system. Why not just start an MP save that already has a buffer of resources? Intercept will have to consider the players that can't be bothered with progression and other kinds of fluff when thinking about the options you'll have access to when creating saves.
  17. Bej Kerman
    Citation needed "Competition" can mean "let's knock down 30 minutes whenever you're free and see who can get the furthest". Why 8 players? Why 50 hours? Why? What's wrong with just hosting a private game whenever a couple of your friends are free? Why would it need to be centralized? Nope.
  18. Bej Kerman
    "Co-operation between players" does not in any shape or form mean "MMO". Like any other news site, take game journalist sites like pcgamer with at least 5oz of salt; journalists simply cannot be trusted to speak about anything without injecting thrills into their articles at the expense of honesty.
  19. Bej Kerman
    May I ask what types wouldn't expand to encompass light years within the mere centuries that saves may last in KSP 2?
  20. Bej Kerman
    If KSP 2 had a nebula in it, it would probably encapsulate the entire group of stars the game includes
  21. Bej Kerman
    To reiterate That has nothing to do with anything here, it's a completely different problem that would be better suited to a thread specifically about on-boarding. Here we are discussing the aero model itself.
  22. Bej Kerman
    That's a completely irrelevant problem. The discussion here is that aerodynamics should be overhauled - FAR is a golden standard here. How the game goes about explaining it is a different problem altogether - besides, if it came to Take Two forcing players to watch tutorials elsewhere, we would be saying "improve the tutorials!", not "cut orbital mechanics". Things like this should be in the game, and fully explained. No point introducing scenarios where a new aero model isn't fully explained for the sake of instigating a pushback against said aero overhaul, because the problem would be the on-boarding and not the aerodynamics model.
  23. Bej Kerman
    Like when it was implied precise landings being a necessary thing you have to do in order to build colonies up in the KSP 2 trailer (that was a fun discussion), I feel like people are scared of no longer being at the top of KSP's difficulty curve. Orbital mechanics and basic aerodynamics, we've already conquered that. Precise landings and aerodynamics that works? That's further up the difficulty curve than where most of us are at so it should all be simplified. That's the general sentiment I see being repeated with many experienced players, notably both here and back when we realized we'd have to start refining our pinpoint landing skills to be able to efficiently build colonies - imagine if a new player said that KSP 2 shouldn't have orbital mechanics because they were lower down the difficulty curve and thought having to learn everything in order to play looked scary. I just want to make it clear that KSP 2 having a longer difficulty curve shouldn't be something to be scared of. We're being put in the same situation we all were when we first discovered KSP and we're scared of having to relearn things, but we shouldn't be. I'd say having to relearn things in order to be able to play a higher quality game with a better aero model and richer progression should be welcomed. If you could learn orbital mechanics in KSP after being led to believe space travel is as simple as going in a straight line thanks to the likes of Star Wars, then you most certainly can adjust to a better aero model already having picked up some basic intuition from the KSP 1 model
  24. Bej Kerman
    Makes me wonder why they're sharing stuff there when there's a perfectly good forum here that doesn't have a log-in barrier
  25. Bej Kerman
    Well it will be interesting to see how they solve this problem, I think the nearest star will have to be very close. May I ask what said problem is?
×
×
  • Create New...