RocketRockington

Snacks were a running joke in KSP1 that also had no LS. It's just an easy, silly gag. I wouldn't read anything into it.

It was posted on April 1st and showed just about nothing. Maybe don't eat those words just yet

Given some of the game design decisions evident in the current build, I think the Intercept team has a vision of the game more similar to pre-1.0 KSP1 vs what KSP evolved into by 1.12. Things like wobble rockets and imprecise maneuvers and no dV info on stages. At least at this point of the game. Tbh I don't have a lot of faith in them, but maybe when they release colonies they'll give better QOL for making transfers. Or maybe not. They're so far behind on so many things that they may just be scrambling to throw in whatever they can right now - which will mostlya amounts to bug fixing for the near future.

97% at this point. And also how little there is to do in the game. Hopefully T2 sticks to funding this game through yet more tribulations, but I do wonder at how many times the KSP2 project management will be able to screw up and keep getting another chance to keep stumbling forward.

They could implement them as non-physixally simulated structures. Just like KSC - colliders you bump into but can't move. Guessing that's what they'll do for surface colonies.

Are people from the discord migrating here?

Isn't there a different subforum for posting craft?

Yeah it's quite sad, I feel bad for the Squad team, they worked quite hard keeping the community happy and delivering version after version with new stuff - not without it's bumps but pretty good for a small team. Only for T2 to buy it and squander it with this mess.

Likely. KSP2 salt mining idle game would probably outsell KSP2 at this point! Even better - it's free.

I think any features outside of the lane of needs bringing the project toward 1.0 are very unlikely to happen. It's much more likely artists would work on more future tech parts, and engineers will work to finish the roadmap, with possibly some additional QOL aims directly at the needs of that roadmap. The team clearly can't work fast enough to hit even the barebones deadlines management wanted to hit (for which I blame management, not the team, btw), expecting extras is silly.

KSP2 failed to reach a peak of 1000 players for the first time today (peak was 918 - 3.5% of its peak player count) - and bottomed out below 400. We're still likely 1.5 weeks away from the next patch, so unless the next patch makes a more significant difference, around, or the patch cadence gets faster, KSP2 may be dwindling for a long while - likely at least until Science gets released.

I'm pretty sure they'll just leave it up to a modder to do anything realistic, and it will always just be non-collideable particle FX.

Nah those people have real work to do. Nate at this point is more marketer than developer, and he likes to hear himself speak so much he'll give an interview to a coat rack. Seriously though - that kid must have some special skill getting interviews, he's got a long list of indie designers he's flattered not giving him one, A few that has genuine hits even. Good for him. I do agree with you that I would like to listen to anyone BUT Nate though, I trust 0% of what he says.

Yeah I'm an RP1 player, throwing stupid amounts of extra dV at a mission just isn't an option. As much as it's a KSP meme, make boosters is a dumb solution to problems a lot of the time, and climbing the ladder to learning more elegant solutions is one thing that always appeals to me. But I guess KSP2 is really meant more for the luls than the engineers, at this point in time.

These are such weird things to not have paid attention to. I'm guessing when the devs were having so much fun playing KSP2, very little of it was playing the space portion of the game. Goofing around with a plane around KSC is what I see most people posting on reddit for instance, when it comes to KSP2.

Special relativity disproved!

@JoeSchmuckatelliYou're not alone. Per Steamdb charts, the game has fallen to its lowest player counts yet, the patch gave it a bump that reversed the slide for about 8-9 days, but it's now fallen under pre-patch player counts. It'll be interesting to see if Patch 2 causes a similar delay, or if there will be any turn around if/when T2 starts marketting the game again. There's also been falloff in KSP1 players too, seems the hype around the release of KSP2 got people playing KSP1 again and that's fading a bit now as well - though KSP1 still has >3x more players than KSP2.

Actually all we have confirmation of is that robotics won't be in the game until 1.0, they didn't commit to adding them ever, I think Nate was 'hopeful' about it, which basically means 'we have no plans for it whatsoever'.

Ok that's fair. I know some players are pleased with the title. But I don't think it's unfair to say many are not, I'm not just stating an opinion as fact here - it has a 50% review score on steam after all, which, given how positive the community for KSP is on average, is pretty low - the average review score for a game on steam is 80-85%. https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/fixing-steam-s-user-rating-charts From my perspective - when a passionate developer starts answering questions about future plans in vague ways - and after they have been hyping the release of the game for years, it gives me alarm bells from prior titles, makes me think of Peter Molyneux and Sean Murry and Todd Howard. As was pointed out in other places, this is a 'fool me once' sort of situation too. From my perspective, if you took the most negative reading of things things Nate has said over the last few years, you'd have more accurately predicted the state of KSP2 now than a neutral or positive reading. Hence why I'm taking the most negative reading of what he's saying now. I don't really understand why people still take those statements at face value - or sometimes even inject an implausible even more positive spin on them.

I think multiplayer is a poor choice for KSP2, particularly since it sounds like they didn't come up with a better solution than the mods did, which is extremely cumbersome. It's expensive to implement and given KSPs nature, a smaller fraction will enjoy it vs most games. Your personal anecdotal is an outlier, to me, but of course that's just an opinion...then again, the dev team themselves did put it last on the roadmap. I don't think someone who thinks every game ever should have coop though is thinking rationally in the slightest though, so I won't argue with you further, especially since you sound like you're back to a hiatus.

The philosophy change was giving the hard core community what they wanted, mostly. Stuff like robotics and dv readouts are not new-user features. Other than increased localization, I'll grant that expanded the player base. If T2 was thinking that long term, they wouldn't have launched it yet. This launch will be a permanent stain in KSP2s potential. Take2 cancels plenty of games that don't make them money, you're just thinking wishfully that they'll see the value in a very long term play. They did not expect the terrible launch that happened. We have direct evidence of this - after seeing how bad things were, they pulled the marketing spend. You have no evidence to back up your points though, you're just repeating yourself endlessly.

No I don't care, my opinion is pretty cemented. But it would have been better PR.

They had the option to say nothing at all - just not even pick that question to answer.

What? Squad added those features. It wasn't T2 calling the shots. T2(in the form of Private Division) is just a publisher. They don't make nitty-gritty decisions like that. Squad did have some changes in leadership - HarvestR left, some devs left, new devs joined, they got a new lead designer. Still Squad though. Having a disastrous launch harms long term revenue. Very few games recover from a disasterous launch. No Man's Sky is the exception, not the rule T2's long term vision of continuous cash flow isn't selling the base game and sporadic DLC. it's about continuous monetization of cash shop features - is that what you're advocating for KSP2? That's going to be an unpopular opinion. Unfortunately KSP2 promised not to even do DLC before reaching 1.0, which seems like its years away at this point. So they're stuck selling the base game - which, as I said, is selling REALLY badly.

Citing a prognostication you made 6 days before launch - after reactions about the ESA event. Truly you are a master of foresight. Anyway, I've strayed off topic enough, I was just surprised to see you come back from your month long hiatus to start defending the project management decisions again. Anyway, I liked tuning propellers in KSP1, so to each their own. I found it a fun use of KAL, and if it had just been stock-propeller engines, like some mods, there would have been little gameplay to them. The more realistic physics it added - in particular, allowing differential torque for yaw control on quad rotors - fantastic.