dr.phees

The issue is, that wobble was in at all. They should not have started with a situation where they had to solve it. Wobbly rockets were the one big thing to solve to cure everything from bad performance with large craft to issues with landed craft. Sure, there were other issues, but simply the fact that they started with wobbly rockets made me loose all faith. I couldn't believe it when I saw it, but I knew KSP2 was doomed. They were doing graphics bling, not an engine update.

Marketing. Funny, how KSP 1 was made by a marketing company turning game dev and KSP 2 was made by a game dev studio turned marketing company.

There is a brilliant addon for KSP 1, fleshing out the idea with mission ribbons/badges etc. I would have thought to find something like that in KSP 2...

Absolutely necessary. And there is no reason why tanks should not have a toggle button to switch between various fuel setups and a "mass simulator" option (probably using hot liquid lead or quicksilver, as far as I understand Kerbals)

Why shouldn't I send a rock crawling rover to another planet if I want to?

Or simply make a small, "invisible" part, a contrail source, with a simple setting for minimum g-forces or similar. I would be perfectly happy with manually placed contrail sources.

And that is where they are wrong in my opinion. Me playing and liking KSP 1 was the reason for 6 more sold copies that I gave to various kids of various ages of friends and family. And probably a couple more who bought it themselves.

For me it is mainly a result of KSP 2 being art driven. Fleshing out all the planets, the large parts catalogue etc. before you know the core mechanics work seems unbelievably wrong to me. Having a "Testing" star system of a star, two planets with two moons each would have provided everything one needs for proper systems development. The biggest problem are the many many hours spent into the assets. It raises the bar to throw something over board and redevelop if it does not work. It feels, like KSP 2 is already trying to cope with a bad systems foundation, just as KSP 1 did all the time, but this time many people expected to first learn from KSP 1 and have a rock solid base with better physics (wheels for example) to build on. It was clear from KSP 1, that Unity's physics system was simply problematic - but KSP 2 uses it again. With the same bugs, again! That's also why the spaghetti rockets with the "struts" solution simply killed all my expectations - it is just the same process again, the same old bugs, this time with higher hardware demands. I say it again: A KSP 3 should start with systems. Small start, a star, a planet a moon, then work with the community on the systems, multiplayer etc. until it is rock solid, perfectly moddable and performant. Then widen the scope. Another thing that really disappointed me: Why play in the same setting as KSP 1? Same planets, same maps? Why did no one have the idea to have a new setting/background story? My idea was that of a stranded Kerbal Mission in another Star system - the first Kerbals having left Kerbol system. Now they must develop technology and a civilization, starting from some data and basically mission scraps, to get home - a great reason for interstellar travel and possibly the absence of money. That is a pretty standard sequel-setting, but so much more imaginative than the current - Let's do it all again. And it could also have been a tutorial setting, being stranded on a small and resource poor moon, having to get down the potential well to the planet would have been a great setup for beginners. To me it seems all thoughts went into art, none into story, and only a few into systems, but too late. Edit: I think that much frustration is a result from that weird decision to basically turn back the game calendar and clock to the exact same start setting of KSP 1, which makes KSP 2 not a second KSP game, but a remake. A remake must have to be better than the original to be a success. A second game can do things differently. Now they are locked into remake mode, not finding a way out of it. (They can have my idea of the stranded mission and turn back the EA release to build from there, but only if they really start systems first ) They could have sold a limited KSP 2 with a small test star system at a lower price as the "Foundation" version, built on that and finally sold the KSP 2 full version again. I would have happily paid for both. But now they have to work with the money that came in with not a big chance to get much more. Bad decisions all around.

Yet.

This forum was a community once, where people knew each other. Your kind of answer ("only say productive things") is just sad, and your "you won't be missed" is offensive as hell. I, for my part, do miss all the engaging and cool discussions in this forum, and I miss many of the older gang, who seemingly have gone silent over the new Kids on the block. And, yes, I like to hear from people leaving. Not that I like it, but I want to know. There are KSP 1 veterans here, that are much more interesting than you. Next time, save your sarcasm, it won't be missed.

My Kerbals are preparing to have a firework ready on every planet with a surface. They will be fired in queue from outer planets to inner planets, each a bigger explosion for new year celebrations. Sadly I have already stranded two teams without a way to return, but, hey, the show must go on. And they seem to be quite happy with that. Who knows, maybe some rescue mission will swing by one day. I have no pictures yet, but I hopefully will remember to take screenshots of the fireworks...

It is weird iconography anyway. Why not a triangle/arrow?

You can type the _e variant to replace an umlaut (ä/ö/Ü) and ss or sz for ß. But you pretty much never see that in german texts, pretty much only where input devices or fonts limit you to non-umlaut characters. I have not heard of any spelling reform with the goal to remove umlaute. There were some suggestions over the years, the last is from 2001, I think, but I have not heard of any reform being actively pursued. But maybe I'm wrong.

One wonders what has happened. Did they at some point loose their code and had to get it working in a hurry? Those pictures look positively awesome compared to the current UI. Whoever made the decision to abandon that theme should take a step back, look at it again and hopefully understand it was a bad decision. Revert and move on would be a good way to go.

The science implementation, compared to interstellar, colonies etc. is the easy one. I completely expect the other milestones to take much longer.