whatsEJstandfor

I'm so so so so hopeful

someone """accidentally"""" leaks KSP2's source code, assets, etc T2 claims the entire project was a loss with no future ability to generate revenue, and gets a big fat tax write-off win-win?

I mean, you can sue anyone for anything. The question is whether you'd have standing, and I don't think you would. I don't know if there's ever been precedence for this, but I think T2 would successfully make the argument that, when you pay for a game in Early Access, you're paying for the game as it is at that moment, and there are no contractual obligations to give you updates or get the game to some 1.0 release.

I think that this has always been what would end up dooming the project. This is the kind of bad managerial decision that gives me the feeling that there were fundamental misunderstandings of what the community wanted.

I think I found the one they're talking about, from May 17:

This was pretty cathartic to watch, and to get confirmation on things that I feel like we all had assumed for the past 4 years.

i was making a funny haha, not being serious lmao

I own less than one T2 share through an index fund, so I will demand to speak with the CEO post-haste

lmao I had never heard this story. This is incredible. I'm kinda wondering how this doesn't count as lying to investors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_Marin

does_he_know.jpg

The right love him, dude Yeah, you do it by inheriting wealth made from apartheid and then buying up already good companies, taking credit for their success, and then becoming incredibly divorced and uncool

no thanks

live look at the hype train

Omgomgomg I'm so happy

Do you think women are pregnant for 12 months

A 2060 Super was pretty underperformant when it was new, but you should still be getting better framerates than what you listed (I'm assuming you're playing at 1920x1080). This is a dumb question but are you sure that your GPU is plugged into a x16 PCIe slot?

Posting this here since this thread is more relevant, but in response to @MARL_Mk1's post: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/224277-developer-insights-23-black-hole-sun/page/3/#comment-4378423 About the suggestion of having the department heads give little progress updates each month, I love this idea but my fear, given how communication has been the last few years, is it'd just be several people saying "we're working on cool stuff but can't go into any details yet" each time. And, to ask a question in response to the hypothetical quote I just made up, why specifically CAN'T you go into any details yet? Is it because marketing thinks revealing too many details will make people less interested? Or is it because those details haven't been finalized? If they haven't been, why not give the details along with the caveat that they can still change (which should be implied regardless since this is early access)? Or is it because you're not confident about the state of development, and think that giving details would make us lose confidence, too? What do you believe is the benefit of continuing to be vague and coy? Whatever the answer, I'd like to suggest that the good will lost from keeping the community out of the loop outweighs it. EDIT: To clarify, these questions aren't aimed at @Dakota; they're aimed at whoever the people are who make decisions on how much info to release and when. Whether that be a higher-up at IG, or PD, or T2.

Are there going to be any weekly or biweekly non-KERB updates? I get that there isn't much utility in the KERBs if the focus is now on new features instead of bugfixes, but the community's biggest complaint has so far been, imho, a lack of regular communication, so this move feels super tone-deaf

I'm quite sure that the reason Nate didn't publicize it was because it wasn't his video. Like, clearly it was recorded weeks before it was published. Was Nate supposed to say "I did an interview with a rando; be on the lookout for it at some indeterminate point in the future!"? What if that rando had decided to never actually publish the interview. Now Nate's on the hook for something he had no control over. As for publicizing it after it the video was published, that, again, doesn't seem like it should be Nate's job; it's the video creator's. That we didn't get wind of it on the forums until someone else happened to stumble upon it should lead you to be critical of the dude who did the interview, not of Nate.

Probably not. At least not yet.

I've been trying to stay stock for as long as possible but boy oh boy, does that mod look like it'd go down real smooth

But that doesn't show AP/PE for a planned maneuver, which is what I think OP wants. Very much agree that it should be a feature, though.

I don't know why everyone's so incredulous; I've had this exact same issue several times (though, I think, not as often as you). In my case, like yours, the chutes will either not deploy, or only a subset of them will. For the ones that don't deploy, no amount of clicking "Deploy" or the other buttons in the Part Mangler or adjusting the deployment pressure or whatever has any effect. It's as if the chutes become purely decorative. I've seen it often enough that I'm surprised how it appears that a lot of people have not.