Scarecrow71

I disagree. You can use map view to get an approximate idea of where you'll land (and probably used it that to plot the deorbit burn anyhow). And you've got the altimeter which can switch distance to sea level and actual distance to the surface to determine if you'll hit water or not.

So, with it being Thursday, I went and re-read @Nate Simpson's post again to make sure I didn't remember anything wrong about when we can expect communication on the next patch. And I was, unfortunately, remembering wrong. Here is what Nate said: Read that again. It's not a promise that we will get communication this week, but rather we MIGHT get communication this week. Not feeling really good about KSP2, TT, IG, PD, or anything associated with this at the moment. We can't even get straight answers from the devs on stuff at this point. I'm about ready to just wave goodbye until something actually happens.

5/10 Seen you around, read some of your posts. Decent person.

Granted. I wish that wish would have been harder to corrupt.

I'll just learn new songs on the guitar.

Again, I haven't played it. And the amount of information available in the wiki is a bit thin; I'm going off of what I see in trailers and press releases. It could be a dumbed-down version of KSP1...or it could be that KSP vets are just lashing out at it over their anger with KSP2. Until/unless I play it, I can only question why it has things that were talked about for KSP2 but aren't there yet.

Free games every Thursday on Epic. This week is several DLC packs for The Sims 4...which is also free on Epic.

I'm going to start this post by saying that I have not yet played Juno. All of the opinions I am about to express are based solely on the videos I have seen, which includes a few tutorials. With that said... What I am really confused on here - or, rather, a few things I am confused on, really - is how Juno is capable of doing everything that the KSP2 team says KSP2 should be doing but isn't. A few examples: Procedural...well, everything. Multiple tutorial videos show tanks, engines, wings, and other parts as being completely procedural. Yet, the general consensus here (from what I gather, anyhow) is that procedural things beyond wings would be too complicated or cause too much stress on the game. How is it possible that one game has been able to accomplish this while at the same time the largest game in the space (no pun intended) can't? Or, perhaps, won't? The biggest example I could possibly show people is the tutorial on how to get to orbit (which I won't link to in order to keep the forum as clean of non-KSP videos as possible). Google it and watch it; the person running the tutorial uses both procedural engines and tanks on the same craft. And we can't get that here? Custom scripting language for automation. Apparently, you can use Vizzy to automate just about anything on a ship, which should be the same as the Action Groups here. And the Action Groups here in KSP2 just don't seem to work very well (if at all). I'm not saying one is better than the other, especially without having used Vizzy. But it seems that Vizzy is far more intuitive and scalable than the Action Groups. Custom planet creation. Why on Kerbin do we need mods for this in KSP2 but this is stock functionality for Juno? Anyone can, apparently, create a planet in Juno and then share said world with the entire community. I'm not saying that this is a live-or-die thing here...but really? We are limited to the Kerbolar system unless we get mods or interstellar (which, apparently, Juno already has)? And that doesn't even take into account the things that are currently broken in KSP2, like Maneuver Nodes and Trajectories. And by broken I really do mean that they exist but are either far too fiddly and/or don't work properly. And no, this is not me shilling for Juno as I have not yet played it. I'm simply making the comparison between what we were supposed to get from KSP2 and what (apparently) Juno/SR2 already has. And Juno dropped IN JANUARY, a full month before KSP2. I guess I'm just confused as to how one game can pull this stuff off and the other can't. I know there are different code-bases, but really? Using the largest game in the space (again, no pun intended), and its code, and you can't get this stuff? Am I missing something?

The thing with the roadmap is that it shows you what larger features are coming...but it gives no detail as to what needs to be there for those features to be both complete and playable. And so this is where the speculation on what is or is not vital comes from.

And in my experience with KSP2, I have seen nothing anywhere that indicates the terrain has been updated or is better. Every place I've been, whether it's on Kerbin, Dres, Mun, or any other planet, just looks flat and dull. Sure, things look good from orbit. But once on the ground? Nope.

When you look at what the modders have already done with the lack of support, it really makes you wonder what they could accomplish with said support. Or what the game devs could do with the code if they leaned on the modders for help or to even bounce ideas off of. Some of the mods are nothing short of unbelievable when you consider they had almost nothing to go on for coding. I have to disagree here. While I do think that things look great from orbit or during fly-by, I have seen nothing to this point that made me think that the graphics or terrain were awesome. Most disappointing were the rings on Dres; I specifically went to Dres to see the rings, and all I got was a few flat, grey lines spinning around the planet. I know the argument here would be something about performance, but what I saw was a real letdown. I don’t think I could agree with this statement any more than I do. Everyone - and I point a finger at myself first - makes one comment or another about what they have read or heard or think they've seen somewhere. It would really help to get this compiled in one place so we have a data dictionary or a timeline of what was said and when and by whom.

Kspeanutiscursed

Neither, it'd be an ice-scraper. Is the kraken hungry or angry?

Granted. You have a supply of ink refills for the Infinity G-2 pen. Unfortunately, there is no Infinity G-2 pen, which makes them useless. I wish I could ice skate.

I'm curious to know what Juno is doing that KSP isn't. I watched one of the videos this morning, and apart from being able to create your own planets (which is technically supported via mods), Juno looks like KSP. Like, exactly. like KSP. Even the maneuver nodes look like they were ripped off from KSP. Now I've never played Juno, so I could be way off. Is there a demo out there that I can confirm or deny my statements with?

Yeah, I'm mainly talking about stuff like temperature or pressure readings. What is the difference in transmitting and returning. There is none. And I fully agree that stuff like samples should be returned to get full marks.

Not without Minions. What are Minions?

You ever see a screenshot from KSP (1 or 2) and then try using your mouse to pan around in said image? Yeah, me either.

For those of us who are lacking in google-fu skills this morning...can someone link to the videos in question so we can absolutely go watch them ourselves?

I don't know if that's a necessary feature, but it would be nifty to see what percaentage of players actually go to other planets.

Oh, second click today!

Yeah, that's the big one right there. Doesn't make much sense to have science stuff if you can't take temperatures. And you can't take temperatures if re-entry heating and such ain't turned on. Good point, my man!

[snip] I see the magnetometer boom and two goo capsules. I believe there is a gravity detector, and perhaps a radiation sensor? Without seeing the backside, I can only speculate on thermometer and/or barometer. I do like that it is all-in-one, and it looks like it could be either attached to a probe or has its own probe core so you could leave it in orbit as a relay.

I asked in the thread if this is in addition to what they said they made or if they scrapped it all and started over. My fear is that they started over.

Not all crew reports are made the same. For example, why can't probes take the temperature of the surrounding area and transmit that back to the KSC without losing Science points? What is the actual difference between a crew report and, say, a pressure reading?