Jump to content

Kerminator K-100

Members
  • Posts

    670
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kerminator K-100

  1. Sadly I can't afford to donate, as I am on a tight budget. I would love to support @Gameslinx in any other way though!
  2. I definitely agree because this would require a weather functionality. This would even add in lighter than air vehicles and we could be able to build airships. Also welcome to the forums!
  3. Eeloo actually has an atmosphere. In the wiki page it says this: Actually, there's a very thin atmosphere around Pluto in real world. In the ScienceDefs.cfg file, it says for the Gravity Scan: { EelooSrfLanded = There appears to be a teneous atmospheric coating around the planet. But it is too thin to affect any spacecraft landing here. } So it seemed like there's a very thin but otherwise non-measurable atmosphere out there.
  4. Metallic Hydrogen doesn't work? I didn't know that. As for the realism of engines, they seem to be trying to keep it realistic while balancing it for fun gameplay. I think you are right that gameplay is key, while sneaking in educational material. The game should focus on good gameplay, but that said, they should not put in warp drives, teleporters, and sci-fi ridiculousness. The game should be based in reality. So far everything we have seen points to that. I wish!
  5. This game seems very glitchy. Is it a problem with Kerbalism? I've been looking into getting it myself and don't want to have a massive game glitch.
  6. When? I don't remember saying that. EDIT: Oh, you mean the wikipedia quote. Yeah that was for No Man Sky, and is what gave me the idea for this thread.
  7. This is a very good point, I don't belive I considered how long the interstellar travel would take, not just in game but real time too. Maybe you are right and they only add two or three solar systems, by the time people have explored all of those, they could have updated the game and added a new system. I also never considered this. I have been using Minecraft as the example here, but Minecraft is tiny compared to KSP2, which has whole star systems. I really do hope the devs spice up the planets a bit though. KSP1 had very little in the way of planet features, besides the Mun and Dres canyons and the Tylo cave. I really think they should add more interesting terrain. If the trailer reflects gameplay at all, we might have icebergs in some of the oceans!
  8. I am expecting realistic engines (This is what you meant right?) and reasonable speeds. I don't expect to reach interstellar travel for several weeks and don't expect to reach an interstellar destination for a few weeks after that (I usually try to play my game realistically, I can only time warp in Kerbin's SOI and only if I'm carrying out a mission), so I don't expect myself to be rapidly exploring. How do you know that?
  9. This is largely what I mean, The Kerbolar system would remain hand created and the exoplanets would be procedurally generated. In response to @Master39 when he said that people wouldn't visit the places, I think you may be right, I personally don't care if most people never visit every planet, I probably will, but the devs will need to worry about it. However not exploring every planet wouldn't cause people to not purchase the game and a huge diversity of planets might actually attract people to KSP2. One thing I think we frequently forget, I am guilty of this, is that we are a fringe group. Many of us will buy the game and complain about our various dislikes on the forums, but the people they need to attract are the new people. So what will most likely end up in the game is what will attract the most new customers, not what we are requesting. Of course they did say that they are paying attention to our comments, but I think the new customers will take priority over our ideas.
  10. It also looks like we need to build the parts, maybe when you have a colony you need to have done some mining before building your rockets.
  11. I'm not saying it would have to be a "bazillion stars", it could just be 10 to 20 systems. The technologies we are seeing (Torchships, Daedalus engines) seem to imply many systems. If the Daedalus engine can go to another system in x years but can't maneuver around the system (because its too OP), then you may only use the engine a few times. However the presence of a lot of systems, would require the use of the engine, many times. They did say some things will be procedural, in this article Nate Simpson says, "These terrains have a certain amount of interacting procedural detail that I think is pretty cool" , in response to how detailed the planets will be. It also sounds like they are doing similar stuff as Parallax, with ground scatter becoming more important. But procedurally generated terrain can be amazing looking. Look at Minecraft, where the entire world is procedurally generated, yet has huge ravines, waterfalls, sweeping mountains. And this was made back around 2012. With modern technologies the devs would be able to make amazing looking planets. While handcrafted planets work for KSP1, KSP2 is supposed to have at least 2-3 (Personally I'm hoping for around 5) solar systems with at least 5-10 planets per system. That would mean 10 - 30 planets total. While I'm sure the devs could do it, I think hand crafting 15 planets would be very difficult and tiring. I see what you are getting at, but I do want to point your attention to other games that use procedurally generated terrain. Specifically Minecraft, because that does seem to be the closest type of game to KSP. When you have a problem in MC, the terrain details don't affect people helping you. If you want to model the problem in the same universe, it will be a little bit more difficult, as you would have to share the seed and the people helping you could boot up the same version. It may help if you give me an example of what type of problem you are talking about, because I feel like we are talking about different things.
  12. Yeah, its Ovin's moon. But I thought Ovin was a Kerbolar planet.
  13. I agree that mods like KER should be put in completely, but mods like Scan Sat, KIS, KAS and EVS (Easy Vessel Switch), Mk1-Cabin-Hatch, and RCS build aid should be partly stock, and mods like NF should not be in stock.
  14. Yes but the trailers seem to be only focusing on the Kerbolar system. They haven't said anything about interstellar travel and are keeping under wraps.
  15. Also what does the number mean at the bottom of every post you make? I've been wondering this for a while.
  16. I have seen a few hints toward a procedurally generated system. Mainly this quote: This seems to imply that the exoplanets will be procedurally generated. To solve this problem, I would point to Minecraft. Minecraft manages to handle a multiplayer mode with procedurally generated terrain. Perhaps that is how it would work in KSP2. A server admin sets up a server and people can log onto it. I actually feel that this may be a better system. Although it does remove the idea of discovering new worlds that completely random terrain gives you. I really don't think that that would cause very much difficulty getting support. The number of asteroids in your game doesn't affect the time it takes to get help with KSP. If what you are saying is that there would be strange planets (Rask and Rusk in another system) I really don't think that would happen. They might model the planets off the stock planets, but the difficulty with it wouldn't affect people's ability to help. You could just model it on a stock planet.
  17. So I was thinking about how the devs were going to approach the problem of new solar systems. As we all know by now, new solar systems are a major part of KSP2. It is the main reason behind the new parts and even the game. So how are the devs going to handle new solar systems? I came up with two ideas (feel free to suggest more): 1. Hand crafted planets If you are like me, then this is the first idea you had when you heard the words "interstellar travel". But this would be insanely limiting. First the devs would have to make a sun, planet, any moons and all the other planets and extra bits. But inspiration flags and the work that they are doing to make the stock planets look amazing can't be easy. Also KSP is a game of discovery and imagination. While KSP has all the stock planets named specific names, if you have hundreds of exoplanets, you will run out of names, and the community will want different names. If a planet is hand crafted, the devs will want to make the name themselves. 2. Randomly generated planets After hearing about No Man Sky and all the problems with that, I noticed something: I immediately realized how awesome KSP2 would be if the exoplanets were procedurally generated! You could fly around to the new system, name all the planets with cool names that you came up with (this is the planet of MOAR BOOSTERS in the Jebolar system), and you would be the only person with those planets. This would also take a huge load off the developers as they could just set this up and let people play. They could put in special features like canyons and caves, and let the game engine do the rest. This would encourage you to do interstellar travel, as no one has ever set foot on that planet. With the stock planets, lots of people have landed on Eeloo, and you can just look up a picture of what it looks like. But you would be discovering new landscapes! Many modern video games do this. Minecraft is the obvious one, World of Warcraft, No Man Sky, <--- Example of Procedurally generated terrain So in conclusion: Hand Crafted Planets Pros- More of a Kerbolar system feel Greater possibility of Easter Eggs and cool terrain More manageable amount Cons- Amount of dev time needed Inspiration may flag, resulting in boring planets/names Less exoplanets/solar systems Procedurally generated planets Pros - Much more exoplanets The ability to name them More terrain to explore Cons - Less of a 'homemade' feel that the stock planets have More CPU intensive (if you have a hundred planets) Less of a connect with fellow KSP2 players (its more difficult to make a post about your visit to JebBillBobVal if no-one else has that planet)
  18. What I meant was people who are just coming into the game. An average person will be attracted by the cool videos, see and the new tech, and will do this, destroy the launchpad, fail to achieve orbit, think "This game sucks" and leave a bad review and convince all their friends to not play it. A person genuinely interested in spaceflight will go on the forums, watch some videos, and come back to play the game in a natural progression. But not following the natural progression is a problem in KSP. Many people in KSP use the Saturn V parts to go to the moon and the Saturn V parts are way too OP for the Mun. Its almost too OP for Jool. That leads to people never making it past Kerbin's SOI because they have taught themselves bad habits on Mun/Minmus missions. An experienced Kerbal gamer (like the forum members) will play KSP2 with a natural progression, then play around with ridiculous technologies on Kerbin. I bet even Danny2462 will play the game with a natural progression first, before using a torchship to go to the Mun.
  19. Ok so after watching the Release trailer animatic I discovered that the moon is called Merbol (Merbl? Merbel?)
  20. I know, I was just trying to give my opinion on these questions.
  21. I think they have said some. Are you talking about engine types? No idea I have said this in other places, and I really hope they implement this: Life support. Hopefully along the lines of snacks and Kerbal health. Based off the cranes and resource gatherers, it looks like we may haver to farm the planets. Please don't let there be a tech tree. One of the worst parts of KSP is the tech tree. It is oversimplified and is too easy to beat. You can beat the tech tree without leaving Kerbin's sphere of influence. Personally I hope the progression is more like minecraft crafting recipes. When you get parts that are used to make something else, you unlock it. I also feel that they should change this, but they probably won't. The science collection feels fake and like a chore. Science should be more like the Mobile Processing Lab or the Breaking ground surface experiments. You could put out a thermometer and record the temp instantly - this could give you 10 science points, or you could record the temperature over a period of time - this would give you 50 points. I do think they should keep the point system, but change the experiments. And maybe the tech progression could be based off that, or you give the data to R&D and they give you some parts based off that data. I hope finances are still important, just not like the contracts of KSP. Maybe contracts that are like: planting flags, tourist missions (to hotels, not specific orbits), building/expanmding a space station.
×
×
  • Create New...