WelshSteW
-
Posts
284 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by WelshSteW
-
-
1 hour ago, Vl3d said:
Thoughts?
The one on the right is better. Forgive my silliness, butis that something you've done?
The one on the left looks like they've used the terrain tool for the clouds Darn it. They're just white mountains cut off before they reach the ground. And the water looks crap as well.
But, again, I guess we don't know when these were done, or what's been changed since. I still hold out hope that they're making it look rubbish so we're wowed when we actually play and visit the places. My belief in that is dwindling though. Just one shot, just one, where it looks good. Or at least, where it doesn't look rubbish. Just show us a high res KSC, and a bit of surrounding terrain and sky. That wouldn't be spoilery would it??
17 minutes ago, Vl3d said:Yes, because I don't like seeing clouds that look like a layer of shaving cream PQS terrain.
Need I remind you?
This looks promosing? Way better than that left hand pic. You could argue this shows clouds, and mist / fog (which I know is really just a cloud as well, but still).
Now I don't know what to think
-
1 hour ago, Vl3d said:
This, right now, is the 'proper' release. Because of its limited complexity and because this is where the tutorials are released. (But I would argue that the science mode progression update is the best place for new players to start, not sandbox.)
No it isn't, by definition. It's Early Access.
Proper release will be when the game gets to v1.0 or whatever they call the first non-EA version.
-
1 hour ago, Vl3d said:
That still doesn't make sense from a marketing point of view if they want to attract new players.
EA sandbox is not very newbie friendly. But use whichever parts you like and need to explore the Kerbol system.
I'm torn on this. Will they really want to attract new players to an EA version of the game? Or is the EA version for us, and they'll hype up the marketing and publicity when the game is coming up for 'proper' release?
-
10 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:
I think the devs are sandbagging hard... and Im down for it.
If this is the case they have to be laughing their butts off as forums trip out in fear KSP2 EA won't be very good and I can only imagine the smiles on their faces if we all get blown away..
2 hours ago, Vl3d said:Most likely. I feel like there's some level of trolling going on.
But I'm still not blown away by the clouds. They're to much like haze, too transparent, not compact and well defined, not layered. And there's no marketing for the game. And no info about very important new game mechanics like the mission planner and life support.
I almost put this in a previous post, but I felt it would lessen the point I was making.
We could be seeing 'dialled down' graphics because they want preserve the 'wow factor' for when we actually play the game. It'd be so much more impactful if the first time we see the full, high-res landscapes etc is when we actually land on a planet / moon.
It's probably wishful thinking, but I REALLY hope it does turn out like that.
-
2 hours ago, Domonian said:
Mk 2 nose cone, my beloved <3
This seems to have a much less harsh day / night line? It blends a lot more than we've seen previously.
-
This is the video I was thinking about, and if my web-fu has been good enough, I should have linked the video below at the point where Jordan Pack is saying "the planets are going to be cool, everyone's going to like the planets, they'll be the driving factor for exploration in this game".
So yeah, I don't think it was a stretch for people to think that the planets would look better than they have in the recent videos.
-
Just now, Royalswissarmyknife said:
Shortcomings? you mean your own high expectations they never promised?
They did promise it, and one of the videos of them promising it has been posted a few comments ago.
4 minutes ago, Vl3d said:Dislike my arguments.
I don't really see anyone else asking for the high level of graphical excellence that was promised to be delivered.
I mostly see people coming up with excuses for shortcomings.
I see modders working as volunteers for years to make KSP look amazing and then I see some players say "graphics don't matter, I'm sure someone will make a free mod for that".
No, I'm sorry, but that's not right. It's not fair to expect any improvements for this game from the community. Respect the modders and respect the value of the money you will pay to buy the game.
The stock product has to be good. The graphics have to be as promised so the game sells well. And I'm sure they will be, I just don't see it yet.
I agree with parts of this. The ships and colony buildings they've shown have all looked like a massive step forward compared to KSP1. I don't feel like that step has been matched by the planets / terrain. Which is strange, because I'm sure I remember thinking the planets / terrain were looking good when they released the show and tell video where they went through how the planets were being made? Maybe I'm misremembering, I'll have to go back and look.
Even the launch pad and the space centre buildings have looked good at times.
It could be that they have the graphics turned down, or it could be that they're still working on the visual side of it, or it could be that what we're seeing is it. I think the fact that we don't know which one of those is true is a bit worrying. Would people be that upset if they said "look, we're focusing on the gameplay mechanics first, and the visual upgrades will come later"?
There are a lot more planets now, so it would make sense that getting them all looking 'finished' will take a lot longer, maybe longer than they thought it would?
-
Makes me wonder what sort of content they'll be working on.
Will it be your standard review type content? Not really sure because the game is EA, so it's not finished, and reviewing a not finished game seems a bit pointless?
Will it be tutorial type content? Quite a bit has been made about the new in game tutorials, so I would imagine the KSP2 team are hoping they'll be good enough to make a tutorial video unnecessary (at lest this early - the in game tutorials should be good enough to get you to orbit, and to be able to do a transfer to the nearby moons / planets?).
Will it be basic play throughs? This seems the most likely, imo.
Whatever it is, I probably won't be watching it for the same reason I'll be avoiding the forums for a few weeks. I want to discover things for myself. I don't want spoilers. I want to see the new stuff first hand.
-
I mean, all I can do is wait, and see what it's like. And then put up with what it's like until I can afford to do something about it.
I guess if it's not good, I could come on here and whinge about it, like a complete wang.
-
Just now, Anth12 said:
Well hopefully its good enough to show me potential issues with the game performance.
Running KSP2 on my better computer might hide issues with the game.
4ghz and 8 cores? that should be fine for KSP2 right? What GPU do you have?
GPU-wise I'm fine, I think. My GTX 760 gave up the ghost a few months ago, and I got a RTX 3060 on the cheap from a friend.
-
I have an AMD FX(tm)-8350 Eight-Core Processor 4.00 GHz. It's about 10 years old now.
I'm saving up to replace it (and the motherboard and the RAM), but there's no way it's gonna be before KSP2 comes out.
-
Wasn't there some chat previously about a docks being part of the new KSC?
-
So, now that we know the early access date, what about the time
I'm guessing it'll be US time, and the Dev Diaries and Show and Tell stuff used to come out at 4 or 5pm UK time. So will it likely be that time that the game is released?
-
14 hours ago, BowlerHatGuy3 said:
Though I hope thats comes into the game, I would like for you to unlock it only after your first landing on Duna or so. However annoying, it can be really exhilarating to dodge hills and rocks as you’re landing. You not really going to get that if you know where all of the perfectly smooth parts of the planet are.
That would make a lot of sense. If you had like a mission review type thing, you could see the Kerbals saying "that landing was pretty hairy, maybe we could do with something to identify areas more suitable for setting down?". So the scanner would come into play to fix an identified need? If you never have a hairy landing, you don't get it.
-
11 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:
So, I didn't see or find a topic asking what everyone wants to see in KSP2, even though I know one has to exist somewhere (and where I've probably posted at some point). So lacking the ability to find that this morning, I'm posting this here.
One thing I really dislike about KSP1 is the complete inability to find smooth terrain to land on, whether that's on Mun, Duna, Laythe, or even back on Kerbin. We have the ability to planet-hop at will...but we can't scan the surface and find a decent, flat spot to land on? It's all guesswork in spite of the computing power? Are you honestly telling me that there is nothing available in the technology Kerbals have come up with to find a nice spot to set up for a picnic? This bothers me to no end.
With that said, I hope that in KSP2 we get the ability to scan the surface of a celestial body and get a list of possible landing sites. No more landing sideways, or on an incline. No more guessing if you'll hit land or water. Even the most basic of landers in the early days of Earth spaceflight had the ability to look out the cockpit windows and go "Yeah, that looks pretty flat there". And if this isn't in the base game, I sure hope someone builds a mod for it.
Ok, I'll get off my soapbox now!
That would be brilliant.
It's maybe a bit silly, but from everything we've seen so far, the thing I'm most looking forward to is the new wheels / suspension. The vehicles we've seen driving and bouncing along have looked really good.
The other thing is that the rockets / ships we've seen look pretty good as well? It seems like it'll be easier to make something that looks cool.
-
5 minutes ago, Gargamel said:
So they’ve confirmed multiplayer to be an MMO with an economy and battles? Blech. Not the game I want.
I didn't hear anything about battles? I don't think we'll see any sort of war mechanic. The only competitive thing mentioned was a 'space race', so who can get to space / other planets first.
-
I really hope we have a system similar to the Research Bodies mod, as it fits in really well with how I like to play. I like to explore, and find thing by going and seeing, rather than just having it all in the map view from the start.
-
Ooooooh, I wonder if this means we'll get a release of the soundtrack? On a nice vinyl maybe??
-
Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.
-
So, if I understood correctly, this early access game will be a limited version of the full game? Like, it'll be the Kerbol system, and nothing else? I'm not complaining, that's absolutely fine by me, I just want to make sure I've got it right.
I have to say, it looks amazing. The rover stuff alone has got me proper hyped
we can zoom across and jump around, and not flip! (probably!). Driving looks like it's going to be MUCH better than in KSP1, which I think will make exploring a lot easier. I'm gonna get to see places I've never been before
It's a massive thumbs up from me, thank you guys. @Nate Simpson Be proud of yourself, and proud of the team.
-
IT'S HAPPENING!!!!!!!!!!!
JUST STAY CALM!!!!!
WE'VE TRAINED FOR THIS, STAY CALM!!!!!!
-
12 hours ago, Vl3d said:
Literally right here starting at 14:32
They'll probably show off all the features except for multiplayer, and then at the end of the last video, they'll do a "oh, and by the way, you can do all of this stuff with your friends playing as well" and then they'll show a clip of multiplayer. Kind of like the old Jobs "oh, and one more thing..." bit.
-
52 minutes ago, The Aziz said:
So I had this nightmare few days ago. The KSP2 steam page changed. Now it was saying Late February/Early March 2023. Thankfully I woke up.
Maybe I've missed something, but I'd be well happy with that release date?
-
Well, this was a nice surprise
Thanks for posting it.
Stock VR Support
in Prelaunch KSP2 Suggestions & Development Discussion
Posted
I mean, saying "No, I don't want VR support in the game" is bit stronger than I'd like to put it. I'm not interested in it, and would never use it, but I'm not against it being there for others to use? That option makes it seem like I'm campaigning for it not to be in the game, but I'm not, you know?