Jump to content

RocketRockington

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    624

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by RocketRockington

  1. RocketRockington
    Why don't we just ask the guy who did the research, before he was hired by Intercept to add something similar to his mod to KSP2. Clearly one of the best decisions they made. @Nertea Do you want to chime in here, what sort of resources did you find, for why a rocket engine in a vacuum showed a concave plume past the nozzle, rather than linear or convex?
  2. RocketRockington
    One patch vs years of delays. One does not outweigh the other. I also predicted that a lot of users would sing the praises of patch that fixed a lot of minor low hanging fruit and only a fraction of the big issues would have them believing the dev team was working miracles - when mostly what they've done is taken more than 3 weeks of work (the ESA build had more fixes but clearly also had show stoppers that prevented it from being the Feb24 release) and stuffed it into one patch, as well as mostly addressing the easiest to fix items. Let's see what happens with the trajectory of patches - and when they get to actually adding features from the roadmap, rather than trying to fix their buggy mess, which is more relevant to the discussion at hand.
  3. RocketRockington
    Yeah I think it will be a good guage of the quality of their design team. The current EA release has very little gameplay design to it. Some design went it the UI - for better or worse - but I think that had a specific UI/UX designer on board. And obviously there is some high level design to what they decided to keep or change from KSP1, but for the most part theres no gameplay at all to judge by, it's all juat a copy of KSP1 with prettied up graphics and unnoticeably tweaked tuning. This will be the first 'new' KSP2 thing (probably, if it's a copy of KSP1 science that'll also be indicative). And this is also the first place no one can claim the Star Theory thing forced a reboot - the same core design team was there from Uber entertainment days.
  4. RocketRockington
    Yeah I was surprised they released without it. I don't have any idea how they expected to ship without all these caveats (as Intercept) back in 2021, and now they don't even have a bare bones tech tree system. Guess we'll see what they come out with, whether each new feature added comes out as a bare-bones EA versions of the feature or whether significant work is done and they come out as more finished features. If they do come out as just bare bones EA features though, it'll be a further indicator that they've been BSing about things for years.
  5. RocketRockington
    Moar engineers, to duct tape things together. Whether it be the rocket or the game.
  6. RocketRockington
    Yeah agreed. Expect it as DLC rather than a 1.0 feature, if KSP2 ever makes it that far. They already promised more than they could deliver back in 2019 with the same things that are far in the future on the current roadmap. Expecting such a large thing to be added either before or after the roadmap is finished, for free, is unreasonable levels of hopium.
  7. RocketRockington
    Given how many features they already had announced didn't make it into the EA, I doubt robotics was even on their radar. I think you again give them far too much credit for forward looking planning. This is a project that was clearly struggling with scope and execution, not a carefully choreographed & staged development process that happened to be interrupted early.
  8. RocketRockington
    I could see some amount of variance within a nozzle length of the exhaust exit, as there's going to be non-homogeneous pressures within the exhaust, it's not just molecules moving in a straight line and bouncing off of the nozzle walls, but also bouncing off of one another, the gas is atill dense enough near the nozzle. So if say, the center of the exhaust stream is higher pressure than the edges, you could get some hyperbolic expansion. But yeah, after some distance, it should be linear.
  9. RocketRockington
    Yeah that's what I thought as well. Here's a picture of a rocket firing in high altitude test chamber https://www.arnold.af.mil/News/Photos/igphoto/2000699792/
  10. RocketRockington
    Ok yes I had the terms backward. Thanks for the correction, my mistake. But then what was your point in your original post? Showing a picture of the plume expanding outward on the Mun is expected behaviour. Or was that not the Mun? It didn't look like Kerbin or another planet with an atmosphere.
  11. RocketRockington
    Ok, well, if they're close to being done, we should see KSP2 1.0 in just a few months, since they've been playing them for years. What odds on use seeing KSP2, with colonies and multiplayer, done by July? I don't think we can gamble on the forums but I'd love to see how much money I could make off of you if we could
  12. RocketRockington
    I'd guess a couple of thing. First, there's the fact that a multiplayer feature is, by gaming executives, a slam dunk as far as increasing sales. You look at the top grossing games out there and they're all multiplayer. Multiplayer helps spread word of mouth, promotes socially incentivized purchases - your friend has the DLC so you buy the DLC - and in other games makes selling cosmetics a cash cow instead of a novelty. Second is just a pure failure of imagination, coming up with other things to sell as top line features.
  13. RocketRockington
    We have this Orion footage of reentry trail. The FX Nate posted to me look like a tiki torch with a flame shell modelled around the center. That's not reentry plasma. There's no shock front, just a a shader expanding a shell around the model. It's going to look weird around a conical capsule if the flame surrounds the back, and doesn't have an ionization control following it. But who knows what they end up with, it's just a still shot with little context. What I do wonder is what Nate was talking about saying the game was delayed for quality purposes in 2020 and 2021 and didn't ship with even a basic reentry hearing system in 2023.
  14. RocketRockington
    Who knows. I was kidding. Tbh I don't think we ever get to 1.0 as defined by that roadmap anyway. I strongly suspect that we'll never see multiplayer, not as anyone imagines it to be at least. Maybe as some janky leaderboard thing, but not two players flying rockets side by side.
  15. RocketRockington
    $40 DLC
  16. RocketRockington
    Yeah I also don't get how the colony game will be present without resource gathering. Is ISRU not the point of colonies? Well the roadmap is short on details, best not to read too much into it
  17. RocketRockington
    "1. When do you think the game will be at a similar level of KSP 1? (minimal bugs, science mode & stable" Your parenthetical here does not seem like KSP1 equivalency. Even KSP2 with the full road map could still be missing many things that KSP1 has in terms of QOL and smaller features.
  18. RocketRockington
    Just FYI your screenshot looks like it was taken on the Mun. As an aerospace engineer, you should know plume expansion changes based on ambient pressure - an underexpanded exhaust at ASL will not be underexpanded in a vacuum - in fact all engines in a vacuum will be overexpanded, as you will never have an infinitely-long nozzle. ——————- MODERATOR NOTE: This thread was split off from:
  19. RocketRockington
    The jokes just write themselves. Well, I hope at this point you're learning not to over promise and underdeliver, at least, but at the same time I think it'd be useful to have other people with more credibility communicate with the audience.
  20. RocketRockington
    I think they're unlikely to bring those back, as that's work for them, it's not just dropping them in game. It's already likely to be kind of silly that the player will have so many current-tech engines when, most likely, once they start founding colonies they will have access to a smaller list of future-tech engines that make everything in the current engine part list completely obsolete. KSP mostly tried not to completely obsolete engines but I think KSP2 is clearly going in the direction of 'no, all these engines are pointless now, use the 'questionably plausible' metallic hydrogen torch drives now.
  21. RocketRockington
    People seem to be reporting very wide results - I've seen some reddit posts saying they're getting 2x the FPS from before, some saying no change at all. Weird.
  22. RocketRockington
    Surface areas is going to be consistent, it's a flat plain, not a small sphere. Natural glasses just don't make these nice flat shiny plains. It's too viscous, too heterogenous.
  23. RocketRockington
    Yeah it's just unfortunate that they ended up ignoring what NASA told them. As was posted in another thread, you don't get glassy smooth surfaces like that from volcanic activity, there's no glass volcanoes out there. Consulting with NASA!= Listening to thier advice.
  24. RocketRockington
    So overall the same, basically? If you're gonna keep going with this tabulation, it'd be easier for people to understand if you tracked the delta, but of course thats up to you.
  25. RocketRockington
    There's KSP 1 mods for procedural wings. B9 proc wings, for instance. Also a KSP mod if you want a KSP2 style part manager - it's called part commander. There's also mods that let you paint parts, especially procedural parts. There's really almost nothing ksp2 does besides better, licensed music that ksp1 won't do with the right mods.
×
×
  • Create New...