razark

Or maybe an abstract viewpoint that has no physical existence, and is therefore not limited by the physics that affect physical cameras? How about while in IVA? Is there a camera involved there, or do we need to start checking each Kerbal to make sure we're properly limiting to what a physical Kerbal eyeball would see, with appropriate visual defects?

Because there's a viewpoint that you can see things from, even though it's not actually a camera. If it is a camera, how does it manage to survive that white-hot plasma without being destroyed? Why do we continue to see it during the plasma blackout, instead of losing the signal it's transmitting? Because it's not a camera, it's an abstract viewpoint that you can view the world from, and it's possible to show the virtual world of KSP without the limitations that we are used to seeing from physical cameras. Kind of like we can also hear things while in space in KSP. I mean, the stereo system following the rocket around should simulate physical speakers, just like the viewpoint should simulate a physical camera, right? Therefore, we should not be able to hear music in space, nor the sounds from our own vessel. Hell, you should also be holding your breath while viewing your ship in space, since there's no air, either. Just so long as they make it all optional, we can all be happy with our own ideas of what it should look like.

If it's a camera, why do we never see it when looking out the window in IVA? What is this camera-carrying vessel that follows all the Kerbals and rockets and rovers and planes and boats around, with absolute infinite delta-v? Why is the KSP camera crew given such powers, while the Kerbals we control are limited to mere physics? Answer: Because there is no camera. Therefore, giving the viewpoint faults that result from physical lenses is pretty dang silly.

Saw this earlier. Sad to lose one of these great aircraft, and the people involved. Which one did you get a flight on? I'm hoping to get a chance one of these days. There's a couple here in Houston, one of them just a couple of miles from where I live.

Hopefully, someone would notice them returning. If there's no communications, and it's a crapshoot where they're coming down, they should be prepared for a long survival situation in potentially hazardous conditions. The only obvious result is that eventually the crew draws straws to see who they eat first.

If I remember what I heard, it was described as both one shot and a series of long shots in the making-of video.1 What stood out to me was that someone said it was being done in real (or near-real) time. Watching the trailer again, it looks like all the "night" shots could have been set in underground bunkers on the trenchline. There's one part (0:52) where it looks like the character is moving through a dark tunnel towards a well-lit opening. 1"Filming was accomplished with long takes and elaborately choreographed moving camera shots to give the effect of one continuous take."

Ah, so it was good as its own thing, not a replacement for a beef burger.

How does it compare to a real burger?

It's not an acronym. It's probably called a silo because it's shaped like one (except buried underground).

Easily. We want resource X. If we don't have it, we will not be able to do Y. They have resource X. If we take it, they won't be able to do Y. Therefore, we will take it from them by force. (Insert any X and Y that you want. Also, it holds true for (certain types of) crime.)

See everything you can.

It's made clear that the Vulcans were doing it from Earth orbit in the 1950s in one of the series, so it makes more sense. Of course all this sci-fi magic technology exists (or doesn't exist) purely on the whim of the writer, for the purpose of telling a story. If the writer wants the story to be about how the two species interact and resolve conflicts based on the two cultures colliding, the aliens will speak English. If the writer wants the story to be about the two species having to learn to communicate, the aliens will speak something else.

We've been sending out huge amounts of communication since we learned about radio. This is likely with any species we would be wishing to make contact with as well. Learning to communicate may be the earliest and easiest step. For example, in Star Trek, Vulcans had been observing Earth for a long time before actually making contact.

Which is fine with a camera that has a lens. The viewpoint in KSP is not a camera, though, so lens flare is an added effect that serves to lessen the reality of the world.

I buy it every time I run across it. Which is not very often at all.

THIS community doesn't recognize a quote from a very Kerbalish movie?

While you're looking at that argument, keep in mind that you're discussing: A) a space station large enough to be confused for a moon B) a space station capable of destroying a planet without suffering any ill effects to propulsion, shielding, life support, tractor beams, surface mounted point defense, air space traffic control, or any other systems. C) a universe where cybernetic space wizards with laser swords are an actual thing. I can only assume that a civilization that has managed to come to terms with those points can handle see-through hanger doors/force fields. (Once you add space magic, anything is possible.)

To be fair, Snark's response1 in the second post is not an "official" response, and it wasn't until the 11th post by @MechBFP that an official response was posted. Besides, if you've spent any time on these forums (like I know you have), you know we're all about posting random, conflicting facts that we've gathered from all sorts of sources, mostly being our own imaginations. 1Seriously, @Snark literally said:

And they will, if past experience is any indication. (Perhaps I should have added a "" or "" to my comment?)

You say that as if it's ever stopped the forum from speculating (or claiming we were promised that X would (or would not) be added to the game). This seems an odd statement to me. Science Mode is a subset of Career Mode (being Career - budget), so I'm not sure how they could combine them. I'm curious to see what they come up with, and if it will answer people's complaints about the current career mode.

I'm going to use the <not yet released> to break the <not yet released> and do some <not defined enough> on <not planned for release, but the community thinks it will exist> while <insert random, undefined speculation here>ing. With two melons, and The Artichoke. Either that, or wait to find out what I can actually do before making any plans on what I can actually do.

I certainly hope not.

Nope. Those are based on the vibrations of atoms, and X vibrations occur in one second, by definition. We could redefine that as 1 second = 2X vibrations, or 10 billion, or .314159X, or 13X, or X/(the number of potatoes in a bag on my counter at 9:13 am, 23 August 2007), or any other number of vibrations we define. I never said it was a good idea, or likely to occur. Only that our system of timekeeping is quite arbitrary and human-defined, and human-defined systems can be redefined or replaced (like the metric system replacing imperial (almost) everywhere). I mean, why does the day start (approximately) halfway between sunset and sunrise, instead of 00:00:00 being set as sunrise on the equinox or solstice? Why twenty-four hours divided into twelve hour halves, divided into sixty minute hours, divided into sixty second minutes? As the rest of the world is so fond of telling America, base 10 measurements are so much easier to work with. 500 seconds being 5 minutes is an easier conversion than 300. It's all completely arbitrary in the first place, and then we throw daylight savings time in to make it even worse twice a year.

So? We've also quite clearly defined what a year is, and had lots of practice. What one group of humans defines can be redefined by other humans, especially when it is not connected to anything except what we have defined. The best we've got is the day. Anything smaller is just human definition.

Right. We should standardize on something that makes more sense. Sure. It's not like hours and minutes are actually connected to anything in physical reality. We all just sort of collectively agree to pretend it's X o'clock.