Search the Community

Calling 911 to talk about the thing I can't talk about.

Honestly, having built forums multiple times over, this is not an easy thing to do. There's so much to talk about like picking the forum software, any sort of hosting or domain names, rules, moderation guidelines, etc. The kind of community we'd want to build making sure it's a safe enough environment for everyone that loves KSP, as well as worrying about any possible legal takedown action from the IP holders whoever they are. I'd be up for it, and I'd support and offer my hand in building it, but I don't know what sort of hunger there is really for the community. Also, as already stated, there's a lot of history here in this place. Including my first posts as Community Manager that I sometimes look back on to remember the good times. All the mod threads, the WIP mod threads, all the vessel sharing, missions, stories, et all. There's just, way to much here and we don't and will never get access to the database to mirror it or save any of it. As the others have suggested, I think the best course of action is a new dedicated KSP fan ran community discord server. That also, is something I have a great deal of experience in building and running and managing, but it's also a lot of work to really set one up well.

Hey there. Thanks for the wonderful mod, amazing to hear you're still working on it! Just going to talk about a problem I encountered with Parallax version 2.0.6 where I would get crashing/freezing/out of memory issues during load screens, and what someone can do to resolve it. From the sounds of it, the upcoming version of Parallax may not have this problem, but I thought I'd post a little write-up anyway in case it helps anyone else using 2.0.6. My system: Intel i5-13600K / 32GB memory / Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB / Ubuntu 22.04 I had been playing with a fairly hefty mod load for a while and thought everything was fine because framerates were good and "top" never showed KSP going over about 10GB memory usage. However, after a while of playing on that save, I started getting issues where my whole system would lock up during load screens and I would have to restart the computer. This was very confusing to diagnose, as I could see my system memory disappearing somewhere but it wasn't going to KSP. It also hardly seemed to matter how many mods I removed from my mod list With the help of the "radeontop" utility I finally figured out what was happening. Essentially, with Parallax installed, VRAM usage was spiking massively during load screens. It was maxing out my card's 8GB of VRAM in a few seconds, then maxing out the GTT memory as well. I'm not an expert, but from what I understand GTT is part of system memory and can be used as overflow for VRAM. By default GTT was set to 0.5 x RAM = 16GB. Once that filled up, the system was getting low on total memory and started paging things out. Obviously that's terrible for graphics performance, and resulted in everything locking up. No idea if it's an AMD-only issue or a Linux-only issue or both. All I can say is it happens during load screens. After scene transition is done, VRAM usage drops down to a very sensible 25-50% (Without Parallax installed, VRAM hovers around 70-80% at all times and doesn't change during load screens) So, if you're reading this and have the same problem, what can you do? Here are the options I figured out - Stop using Parallax 2.0.6 and wait patiently for the update... Reduce your system's GTT allocation. I don't know how to do this or if it's a good idea. Didn't try it myself. Close all other apps that may be using a lot of RAM (looking at you Chrome!) Reduce your mod count so KSP uses less memory, leaving more room for GTT. Not a good solution for me, as I wanted to have more than just the stock planets. Set 1/2 resolution textures in your graphics options. This is actually a pretty good solution... cuts VRAM usage by a lot, doesn't look as bad as you would think. Worth trying. Upgrade your graphics card to one that has more VRAM. No guarantees it won't also get completely filled up. Buy more RAM. Personally I was looking for an excuse to upgrade my system to 64GB anyway, so this is what I did. Now the GTT fills up to a whopping 32GB but there's so much room left over, nothing bad happens. I guess that's a win? Worth noting that even if you don't actually run out of memory, this weird VRAM behaviour does seems to slow down load screens by a lot. Anyway, thanks once again @Gameslinx for the awesome mod, and I'm very happy I can keep using it even if I did just end up throwing more RAM at the problem! And on the off chance any of what I wrote above is new information for you, I hope it's useful for your dev work.

At the risk of sounding condescending, accusatory or offensive (I'm not trying to, sorry in advance), and not knowing how much you can talk about... You mentioned Shana was still hired and working when you joined, pointing to you joining prior to September 2022 where she says (on linkedin) that she left Intercept (something we never discussed in this forum as it was never mentioned IIRC). This means you saw the Design Director leave. Who else did you see? Didn't those consistent layoffs and/or people just walking not set off any alarm?

And it is. But, unfortunately, it's on the job description: once you gag yourself on a NDA, you accept the risk. Been there, done that. My team The team which I belonged took the blame for a pretty stupid mistake made by an overseas team because we just couldn't talk about, and our colleagues (from the same Company, but different projects) assumed it was our fault because we refused to talk about. Sometimes, you just can't win. Indeed. But consider that it was his duty on that previous jobs. Literally, it was on his job description. To what extend this would affect our perception about his working ethics it's something we can debate about. Again, been there, done that. Fortunately I wasn't in a position in which I had to lie to 3rd parties - it was enough and sufficient to stay shut and let people conclude whatever they wanted. But, seriously, between the choice of lying or losing the job and get my cheeks ripped appart on a lawsuit that potentially would cost me my home, the choice would be obvious. It's pretty hard to rise a kid without a roof over their head, you know?

That is an awesome plane! We at Beyond are ecstatic to see this in flight for the first time, and the pilots in the astronaut complex are abuzz with talk of this plane. Many have started arguing over who will fly it first. We have plans to continue flying the Talon as well, and maybe even add some of own modifications to the plane. Thank you to CalSpace for this amazing plane, and thank you to CalSpace for continuing to work with Beyond!

I think there's a widespread misunderstanding about this stuff by people who don't manage investments for a living (i.e., most people). The board and the executives are different groups and sometimes at odds with each other. The executives make the day-to-day operating decisions about the company, the board is rarely involved in any active way unless the executives really mess up and get fired. Leaving aside the misunderstandings about the board, let's talk about the executive leadership of a large company. It is commonly the case that executives and even middle managers of large companies care about 3 goals (with the notable exception of founder-led companies, which sometimes have a long-term vision): Their compensation; The metrics by which their future compensation is determined; and Their personal success metrics, usually the size or revenue of the group that they manage. Not the quality of the product, not the customers, not the shareholders, not the employees, none of those things except as to game any related metric for goal 2. So, you'll often see decisions that from the outside seem utterly baffling and self-destructive, but that's only if you think in terms of irrelevancies like reputation or long-term profits. Executives at large companies are generally really good at optimizing for their goals, it's just that those goals are mis-aligned with anything useful to anyone else. Also, this isn't specific to companies - it's the problem with any large, old organization of any kind. IMO, fixing this would be the most important advancement for the future progress of humanity. In the mean time, the best shot at good games are founder-led studios where the founder is still chasing a vision of great games and the publisher isn't ruining everything.

[snip] So let me clarify that for you. The thread is about refunds and if one should go about getting one. Primarily for Steam. But you literally brought up Epic and how if someone bought on Epic you wished them good luck. I was merely pointing out, for anyone who didn't already know, that Epic has the same refund policy Steam does. With the same option to talk to a human being if you get shafted by the automated system. If talking about Epic's policy is pointless, then it's on you for bringing that pointless topic up. Speaking of things that are pointless in this discussion... No, I have not chosen some arbitrary date for no reason. The layoffs and the building closure are effective on June 28. That was set by the company itself as outlined in the WARN notice we are all aware of and have read. I am waiting until that time - or, rather, giving them the extra 2 days to the literal end of June - to see if they release a statement or not before deciding if I'm going to ask for a refund. Why? Because if they do release a statement, I can read it and see if there's anything in there that could potentially be used to help bolster a case for a refund this far out of policy. Will there be a statement? Probably not. If there is, will there be something in there I can use? Again, probably not. Does it hurt to wait to see what happens knowing that the likelihood of a refund at this point is pretty close to zero? No, it doesn't. Which begs the question: Why do you care if I wait or not? It has literally zero impact on you and what happens in your life, so why do you care? Why throw all this anger in my direction over something that means zero to you? You feeling lonely and need attention?

Some civilized countries (and some very civilized steam employees) do not allow developers to just charge money to say they're going to make a game and then abandoning it. Everyone has the right to ask for a refund, and thanks to Steam, they've got the right to ask many times for a refund, making different or the same case. Which is not the point since most people are way past that, in which case Epic support is definitely one of the worst places, if they even bother replying to you. Steam allows you to talk to a human for refunds after the automatic system fails you. Some people have been waiting since 2013 for an official statement on 2K Marin's situation. You've arbitrarily chosen a date as an ultimatum with almost zero reason, hoping they've chosen the same, or any date, to spend resources responding to the ~120 people still waiting to hear whatever. They've merely respected the law by giving their employees paid heads up time before firing them and have no further obligation with the project or the employees, much less their customers.

Bigger issue is still the heat shield, IMO. For all the talk about the "right way" to test all the things, SLS/Orion people seem awful quiet about testing arguably the most critical component for crew safety with a crewed flight test.

Calling 911 to talk about your dogmas and invite them to your commune.

Well, there is a playstyle called 'Caveman' where you can only play with the parts you can get with No facilities upgraded, no use of Mechjeb, Cheats and other Tools/Mods. So, any Craft is limited to 18 tons, 20 meters in height and 30 Parts. As there is the normal Caveman Challenge (getting all Science unlocked on different hardness levels) I, for myself, took this to another level in trying to Land on Celestial Bodies around the System where its not so easy to get to with this limitations. Landing on Mun ? No issue, landing on Minmus, either. Landing on Duna ? Thats a Task. I did that once and i may have regretted my last words, saying, i was currently building a Caveman Mission to land on Tylo and safely return. Do something, maybe noone has ever done before. Luckily, there is the Clamp-o-Tron Junior Docking Port. As other already Exercised, with this device you can Assemble Big Ships in Space (and even on Ground, you will need it!) to Get to destinations where others haven't gone before while being restricted to the limits of the Available parts, size, weight and number of Parts. As the Words, once they leave the Mouth, couldnt put back there again, i uttered it, so i had to Build it. I had to Fly it. And i did it. The Setup: I will not get into Details, but it can run 4-digit number of parts Craft. At least you need a Rig that can run a 500 Part Craft. The Software: KSP 12.5, both DLC installed, Plain install, no Mods. I have a Savegame here with all Craft Files linked and a ready-to-depart-Vessel, so you can REPLAY the Mission if you want.... Here is The Save File with all Crafts I had to Plan in advance a Long Time, had to design the Crafts, had to take into account to not exceed the Software and Hardware Limits, and had to create this Mission in a way that it stays into the boundaries where tha Risk of getting Krakened is marginal. I had to redesign the Ship several Times because i ran into the 'need too much FLT-400 Tanks' at all etc. So i ended up to get the overall Number of needed FLT-400 tanks down to 100 for the main Mission (really, 100 tanks docked to the Craft, Guess how much Time i wasted on that, Launching and Docking all that stuff ? I didnt took this as a Fulltime-Job but at least, with some creativity breaks where i had to think over the Concept, it took more than a Year. In total, somewhat between 200 and 300 Rocket launches where needed to Assemble everything together, with several complete restarts of the main Project. So in Total i may have had 1000+ Rocket Launches until i Found a suitable way for This Mission. All those failed iterations, we wont Talk About here, but the one Mission that Succeeded--- As there may be others that want to Torture themself, there is also a Savegame here added, so you can Replay the Mission without going thru the slog of Assembling the Craft in Space. The Craft has 500 Parts and is currently in Orbit, ready to Fly to Tylo. Dont forget to decouple the rescue ship after getting to a Higher Orbit for the endless Jool Burn. - i had to retry the Jool Burn 1 Time, the First Transfer was not useful due to Shifted Planes. so i had to wait for a Transfer window where Start and Arrival are on the same axis. But as the difficulty is normal, revert/retry is allowed. - i had to retry the Kerbin Burn 3 Times, the Tools Online for Eyeballing the Transfer from Jool to Kerbin does not take into account that Jool has a Tilted Plane and excentic orbit. - docking ports seem to fail using as decoupler somehow, anyhow. This led to some trouble with the Lander but i evaded it, by manually decoupling it. this led to a very hard ascent on Tylo, i barely made it back to 25km orbit with nearly zero fuel left. I will, nah, maybe may Try to Comment every Picture, that needs a comment, this will take Time... But at least, everything stands on its own. Now here is the Line of 342 Screenshots. Here we start with all the Scienca gathering because the Nodes needed to be unlocked. didnt wasted too much screenshots on them. The first part of the Tylo lander In Orbit Some FLT-400 Launches The Landing Part of The Lander. Too big to Start Alone On Ground Assembling needed Ready for Start Docking to the Main Lander Docking the Fuel tanks for Tylo Descent to the Lander Now the main Structure of the Spaceship to Tylo need to get into Orbit. I created another 2-Stage Rocket that can be docked to existing Rockets on Ground.... The Main Spaceship Structure. Rolling the External Rockets to Dock. second Rocket Docking I try to start the Main Ship with 2 Rockets. Hmm. Better, i misconstructed the External Rockets so i failed to dock them all 4. I Tried... Barely made it to Orbit... Reworking that Set would have taken a few days First, Docking some additional Fuel to the end and trashing the external engines. Adding the Lander to the Top, Facing Backwards Now the adding of the remaining 48 Fuel tanks started for the Main Ship. Asparus Staging, i knew the docking Port issue now, so the decoupling is done by the small decoupler This were 2 additional missions because i need 2 3-Star Pilots. Now the assembling continues Main Ship Ready with 8 sets of 3 FLT-400 in asparagus staging. For the Starting Burn to Jool, i had to add another 2 Stages of 24 FLT-400 each. Now we have 100 FLT-400 Docked Now the Rescue Ship needs to be constructed. It has 2 Purposes: - help to push the Main Ship to Higher Orbit and then stay at kerbal Orbit in case, its needed in Jool SOI for a Rescue I notices i had the 2nd Solar Module docked to the wrong end, so i have to swap it out to the other side. Ship Is completed. Main Ship has 100 Tanks, Secondary Ship (rescue ship for first Push) has 24 tanks. 500 Parts, 293 Tons Caveman Vessel I First lifted the Vessel up to 300Km Orbit Now the Push for a High AP starts. Goal is 5M Succeeded. remaining Weight of Ship is 205 Tons, all 100 Tanks still fully Loaded Starting the Transfer Burn to Jool 36 Tanks Left, Burn Complete That was the Perfect Burn But i had to waste a Bit Fuel because i came in directly hitting Jool. i had to Burn outwards to get 67M PE Planes need to be matched Getting near to Tylo to get a Catch Argl, again a direkt hit I had to get 27KM PE Slowly burning Down to 25 KM Orbit around Tylo Success. Orbit Around Tylo reached. Jeb has to Go. This Lander is Built to work from 25KM around Tylo. Yes, i simulated this. Prior coming all the way along, but This Burn was Real and it Worked. Erm. no small Step. Even some Fuel left, but i can not reuse it for the ascent due to the un-docking issues witch the docking ports. After Ascent you see, due to the issue of having to ditch the 4 Outer tanks on Ground, there is barely fuel left for docking. So i have to come around with the main vessel to pick the lander up. That was really sharp Coming in for Docking. I have to delete alot debris.... Docking to main Vessel Transfering Jeb and Ditching the Lander Now we have to leave Tylo SOI Unfortunately i had Chosen a very High Orbit around JOOL for the transfer. It Took Eons to find a suitable Window This'll Do Many Course corrections needed. Planes and retrograde Burn wasted much Fuel. But i had sme saved from the first Transfer that went Great A Hit. Having To Burn until i have an orbit. No way of trying to Aerobrake this and not Burn off. Now i can Aerobrake a good 1000KM of in several rotations. barely... but it worked around 60KM PE Until i got the PA small enough to stop aerobreaking and getting a stable orbit with the remaining Fuel. Rescue ship is coming for help. Some Tanks for the rescue ship needed. changing planes to match both ships Docking, Transfering all Crew Aand Deorbit Burn Only 2 Meters to Got :-)- Where is the watered screenshot ? Ermon had Orbit Around Tylo. He was the Guy in the Main Ship Jeb has the Landing on Tylo. So he is the One that Went to Tylo, landed and Returned on caveman Level. Hurray Pilots Summary. Facility Summary Science summary. I didnt bothered to take any science from Tylo. Its caveman. what for i need additional science ?

Please do, bring us back to the days when we had feature updates and content releases to talk about

WOW.... Talk about a Game Changing experience with this Mod Installed!! Haven't seen anything but Kerbin so far... but I Love what you did... Even the Ocean seems to sprout vegetation!!! Great Work!

Well, with all the exposition and koffee talk dialogue it's actually been a while since I tried to fly anything legit. I guess I've still got it? Though I did lose the starboard small monopropellant tank [ETA: and the docking port] on the Gumdrop in the crash. Ah well. You know what they say in the Air Service. The crash itself was a lot of fun, since I had Infinite Fuel hack running (cheaty-cheat cheat!) and I forgot to turn off the Kerbulan fighter's engine before the ship broke apart. So the tail end splashed around for a really, really long time. I was a bit worried it would slam into Dilsby before he could get the Gumdrop out of physics range. Good times! And RE: that infinite fuel--yeah, the plan was always (like, 8+ years always) to drop Evil Jeb in the ocean somewhere and get Dilsby on an island as far away as possible. I'm pretty sure I could have done that legit, e.g. by dropping Jeb really high up, orbiting, and then making a precisely targeted re-entry so that Dilsby could make his crash landing before running out of gas. But seeing as I want to finish this book sometime soon and in the limited time I have to spend on it, I just flew Dilsby here after the drop-off.

Yeah, but YouTube is where a lot of people will be looking. That makes them prime targets for scammers. I'm gonna bet that the stream Gargamel watched included a lot of talk about cryptocurrency investment and not a whole lot about rockets.

Honestly, I can see this point of view making sense. Rewriting all of KSP from scratch in a new engine, and focusing on just getting the same core mechanics in place, and expanding it later. The problem, of course, is that an enourmous amount of the new content you're going to be adding after the inital release would be way quicker and cheeper to impliment if it was developed in parallel rather than haphazardly duct-taped on top after the fact. Sorry! I've editied it now, so that should be fixed. That's not possible though? You can't reuse Unity scrips and settings in Unreal. You can resuse 3d meshes and some animations, but those are often some of the easiest parts of a development project like this to make anyway from how I understand it. Anything else has to be recoded from scratch. Of course, that's not to say you can't look at KSP 1/2 code to get insperation and for use as a guidebook, especially if you're able to talk to the actual KSP 1/2 devs, but a lot of the systems KSP 1 and 2 used aren't optimal anyway and we'd want to rework them when starting fresh in any case. I mention all of the budget related stuff later. But yeah, I basically agree with this assessment. Reusing code is literally impossible (you could maybe put some of it though converters? But you'd still end up spending more time doing that and patching the result into a workable state than it would take to redo it from scratch). Yeah, I think releasing stuff in smaller batches would be a better idea. I mostly just didn't want to type out a couple dozen update lists to be honest. Again, I agree, a higher number of smaller updates is better. Life support, yeah, okay I can see the arguments against it. I guess the modding community would have that covered anyway. I'm glad you like the idea with the tethers though! Other launch sites would be included earlier, I was talking about cites and things. I'm not sure if the demand for that is high enough though - it probably isn't, on second thought. Interstellar is basically non-negotiable in some form or another though, given how popular it is even in the buggy state that KSP 1 mods have it in. Yeah, I thought I might have made a mistake with the placement of that. I guess putting career mode closer to or on the inital release might not be that hard upon second thought. I'm not talking about mods here, so I don't really understand what you're asking? The real-life stuff is part of a DLC because it's a too much content for mods to make, but too niche for it to be in the base game. It would completly overwhelm like 70-80% of players and make them stop playing. When I say every real spacecraft, either flown or even just designed, would be in it, I wasn't kidding. Even just the command pods section of the parts list would have well over a thousand parts in it. I'm also super skeptical if this would ever actually happen, I mostly just included it as a whish-list item. It would be a lot of effort to make a DLC that not many people would buy. What? The second DLC package I proposed was the one with RO in it, the first didn't. I think it would be pretty cool if we had not just RSS, but also real-scale kerbal systems and various other real and fictional star systems as well. And I didn't get rid of kerbals in favor of humans, I explicity said it was a toggleable option, probably one that would be off by default. Again though, this would be a lot of development work for a niche product, so it's mostly a wish-list item. I guess given the modding support here will be much better than in KSP 1, we could just rely on community mods to do all of this for us anyway. Yeah, okay, that might be optemistic. I figured that the 4 year figure for KSP 1 could be improved with a larger team size and a clearly defined roadmap to start off with, and the 3-4 year timeframe for KSP 2 was while dealing with massive problems and inefficencies that we wouldn't have. But, yeah, it is possible if things go suboptimally that we could be looking at 4 years to 1.0 rather than 3. Keep in mind though, you say we would have to redo all the code from scratch as if that would make it harder this time around... but the KSP 1 devs had to do that as well. Obviously. Because they were making the game for the first time. So we know coding KSP from scratch takes 3 years with a team of 12, and the features I'm talking about adding to it here aren't substantial enugh that it would massively increase that time, especially given we'd have a team of like 70 people. And doing it in Unreal shouldn't make it automatically take longer than Unity. So it should be fine, but hey, I don't have much actual software engineering experiance (or any really) so I'm probably wrong. All of this makes a lot of sense, and I more or less agree. The one thing I really disagree on is procedural tanks - I think there should be an enormous amounts of varients avalable on every part, but I don't like true procedural tanks in the stock game because when you have too much free choice, it ironically feels very limiting. If we limit it so you can chose between the standard stock dimaters and a couple dozen length varients, then maybe I guess I could get behind it, but in general, while I like procedural wings (or more accurately, I can tolorate them in stockalike games), and stuff like radiators would probably be fine, I think the tanks should still be lego-like. That's just my opinion though, if the community disagrees as a whole then obviously their thoughts are more important than mine. That's fair! But given that any future KSP sequel that doesn't go to EA is guaranteed to fail, I guess that means you're just going to have to wait a few years longer than some others before getting it. Which is fine, EA isn't for everyone by definiton, it's for a small number of people who can act as playtesters while the rest of us wait to find out if it's any good.

The "uni-body" Shuttle Agena or Big Agena would have been 1.875m KSP scale... +/- Most of the drawings I have of it show it at 10ft. BUT most of the drawings of it are.... um light on the details. Most of the documents that lead to the SOT tanks for Agena as well as the rear deflection "skirt" are the ones with the Uni-body shuttle Agena. Agena 2000... it is debatable. Some people talk about it as a 0.9375m dia tank inside an extended fairing. However, I do agree with you Agena 2K would likely have been 1.875m and IMHO would have used Centaur GCU for simplicity. But then again we will never know. Honestly though, that is so far into the future... oh Snap. I just thought of this as I was typing. Lo-MSC may have proposed Agena C for it. Agena C, which never got more than 3 steps down the "can we do this" decision tree, was to be 1.875m ksp scale (10ft IRL) Powered by 2 engines...

I agree management has a much larger share of the blame than Nate (or T2. Everyone likes to talk about how easy it should be for large companies to throw away their money and be happy with delayed and over budget projects, until someone you are paying is behind schedule and wants more of your money. Now also imagine you just lost a billion dollars in the prior year and they want even more of your money.) Because he lied to us. We may differ in view in how much (some or not at all) of the blame is on him. Personally, the fact that much of this is still here say makes me less interested in playing the blame game. Thats hard when you were in the room, nearly impossible for outsiders. But the timeline of events in Shadowzone’s video seems pretty rock solid, parts being collaborated by ex employees who are willing to post publicly. Going by the timeline as presented and nearly universally accepted then we must agree Nate knowingly and purposefully lied to the community. Was he at fault for why the game was where it was at the end? To what degree we may never know. But we know he lied. These lies include: The state of multiplayer (it’s so fun! When in reality it was soft canceled shortly after launch) EA is for feedback! It’s the Kerbal way! (It was always about money and they never once actually wanted our feedback, look at wobble and font.) We don’t want to alienate old players! (They very much wanted the new audience more, things liked by the old fans were thrown away if they were obstacles to a wider audience. Like occlusion for satellites or progression metrics beyond science points.) And the big one, we’re fully funded! (They were on thin ice and knew it from before the EA launch.) As I’ve said in previous comments, this does not make you a bad person. I’m not wishing ill will on anyone. I’m in a financially secure enough position if I was asked to lie to a customer I would find new employment. Thats easy for me to say in my position but harder for others. I can’t judge others who can’t make the same decision and still be confident they can provide for their families. So him lying for his employer doesn’t make him a bad person, and doesn’t mean I wish him any ill will. I still hope he can provide for those he cares for. But it would be rather ill advised to buy any product being sold by the guy who now is known to be willing to lie to get you to buy products. As such, I’m not buying anything from him again, and nothing from T2 again as they have absolutely disrespected this community in the non communication following the closure. If that means you think I’m mad at him, then I hope you can follow my reasoning. I personally don’t think I’m mad at him, just not willing to give him any more of my money. These are wise words and apply to many industries. Thank you for sharing your insights, and I hope those entering new careers listen to what you have to say, whether they will be the ideas guy or the practical engineer, or wear both hats.

I don't understand why anyone in the community is mad at Nate. Did he make some bad decisions? Sure. But the bad decisions that he made were not the ones that effectively killed KSP, 2 it was the idiocy imposed on the devs by the higher-ups., all the secrecy, not letting the KSP1 devs talk to the KSP2 devs, etc. IMO the problem is that TTI has Management that regard coders as interchangeable office-workers rather than as skilled artists - and being a skilled coder really is an art, due to the complexities involved in coding. Anyway, from what Shadowzone said in his video, I can only shake my head in wonder at the level of incompetence in the TTI Management that they can take a much loved franchise like KSP, with a generally intelligent and well-informed community that nokws what it wants, and posts about it in these forums, then go and ignore the community, and make hiring, and working conditions guaranteed to result in failure and annoy/upset the community.. If anyone should be fired, it's the management above Nate for dooming the project to fail by their idiotic decisions. It's that management that lost TTI $70 million, not the devs.

Hello guys, gals, and nonbinary pals! The purpose of this thread is to act as a place where we can brainstorm ideas for how we would want to see an eventual sequel to KSP be developed so that it can avoid the pitfalls the current KSP 2 fell into. That is to say, I want to try identifying what went wrong with KSP 2 development, and much more importantly, figure out a plan of attack for how a hypothetical future attempt to develop a KSP sequel could work. After all, there is an argument to be made that a lot of the issues that occurred with the KSP 2 development were from the people in charge not understanding the community and what it actually wanted, so by getting together as a community and brainstorming all of this now, if someone does try making a KSP sequel in the future they’ll already have this as a good jumping-off point for what they should do to make us happy. So, without further ado, to start us off with here are my thoughts: Based on the recent digging by ShadowZone along with trawling acorss the various threads on these fourms, I think it’s fair to say that KSP 2 failed for the following primary reasons, in rough decreasing order of importance; 1 - Company upper leadership not understanding how game design works, leading to such problems as a refusal to commit to changing engines or refactoring code despite the scope of the project requiring it 2 - An overcomittance to secrecy causing years of work being wasted on reverse-engineering KSP 1 code rather than just asking the KSP 1 devs, among other associated problems 3 - Improper management resulting in massive efficacy losses (e.g. developers being moved around constantly and not being given time to settle) 4 - An unwillingness to pay developers respectable amounts 5 - A lack of interest in community input resulting in prioritization of the wrong things When designing a KSP sequel, there are basically two options. The first is to use the unity engine, reuse much of the KSP 1 code, and essentially aim to run a short, cheap project that delivers a highly polished version of KSP 1 with a bunch of the best mods being incorporated into the stock game. This is, to put it mildly, a bad idea, given that the KSP 1 engine and code is almost completely incapable of properly handling that, as anyone who has played heavily modded KSP 1 will know. Implementing anything like interstellar, colonies, and especially multiplayer, would require so much work to update the existing code and systems, and work around the limitations of unity, that it would be cheaper and faster to go with option 2. Speaking of which, the second option is to start from scratch in a new engine, and develop a game that is a true successor to KSP 1 rather than a polished version. I think this is the objectively correct course of action to take, however it seems the upper leadership for KSP 2 disagreed. The original plan as I understand it was to do option 1, delivering a better version of KSP one with some mods made stock, using the same engine and code. However, scope creep then very rapidly increased the goals to include interstellar, colonies, and probably the thing that killed it; multiplayer. This would require a new engine and refactored code to work, but the upper leadership was made up of business executives that had never coded a game in their life and who decided to explicitly make that not an option. Thus, the KSP 2 team was forced to develop a game of impossible scale using old, outdated code, and a bad engine, and to make it worse, while they were handed all of the KSP 1 code to work from, they were not allowed to talk to the original KSP 1 devs. That decision alone probably cost them a year or more of development time. With all that out of the way, if a development project for KSP 3 was announced tomorrow (or if KSP 2 was restarted from scratch), and I was somehow placed in charge of setting the development goals and pacing, here’s what I’d do. Firstly, start from scratch in a new engine, probably Unreal. As far as I’m aware the only good alternative to this would be building a custom engine, but from how I understand it the development costs and amount of time required would be incredibly prohibitive, so Unreal it is. Secondly, don’t have any secrecy. Have all of the developers talking with the public, be very transparent about what people are working on, and what the roadmap is, and be prepared to listen to community feedback and change accordingly. Release to EA as early as physically possible, and while we would probably have to charge full price for it, make it exceedingly clear (and in legal writing) that if we don’t fulfill our roadmap goals within a certain amount of time we’ll refund all the copies sold regardless of playtime. Also set realistic goals, and prioritize getting code and core system mechanics working first, then optimisation, and only then user experience and graphics. Of course in reality all of these would have to be developed in parallel, but I would want there to be a heavy emphasis on leaving anything that's purely visual/graphical for as late as possible (though obviously you still have to develop your systems so the visual stuff is fully integrated when the time comes and isn’t just duct-taped on top like most KSP 1 graphics mods are). Design the game's code and systems from the start for modability. I’m not sure if we could do something quite as far as what, say, Hades and Hades 2 do, where literally all of the game's code is unencrypted and open for anyone to see and edit, but if that’s possible it would be great (I’m not aware of actual downsides to doing this, it’s just that there’s so much cultural momentum in the industry against it that it would be hard to the leadership to allow it even if it would make the game way better for no extra cost). Pay the developers properly, and don’t put people in management positions who don’t have the experience required to fulfill that role properly. In fact, if possible a worker-led development program, such as one done in a cooperative or other worker-led company, would be ideal. All empirical data collected to date indicates that worker-led companies are multiple times less likely to fail, are more stable, produce higher-quality products, have way better working conditions, and the workers enjoy their jobs orders of magnitudes more. Interestingly, the people in worker-led companies usually vote to reduce wages rather than lay people off in times of hardship, which is usually the right move because losing talent is really bad. The only downside is that the per-unit cost of their products is usually higher because they pay their workers more, so even if they never go out of business, they have trouble climbing up the ranks in the market as it were. Still, for developing a game like this a high amount of workplace democracy would seem to be key. Oh, and don’t implement multiplayer. From what I’ve seen, everyone on here who’s familiar with game design seems to agree that it’s a massive undertaking that would take an insane amount of effort to pull off even when starting from scratch, and it’s not super clear to me if the demand is even remotely high enough to justify that. I would love to hear all of your thoughts on that though. So, with all that being said, here’s a rough roadmap of what I would expect from release onwards. Of course, I’m not a software engineer, so I may be overly optimistic or pessimistic here. Also, keep in mind that while I lay it out in just a couple of major updates, I think in reality it would be better to do this with a much larger number of individually smaller updates, but I don't have the patience to write all of that out, sorry about that. Oh, and I would love to hear all your thoughts on the order I've put all of this in, especially the career mode release, since I'm not certian myself if it's the best. Initial full release (1.0) - Recoded from scratch in Unreal engine, utilizing 100% new code, and heavily optimized. - Graphics on par with KSP1, but using all-new systems and with allowances in place for them to be properly improved in the future without it just being a series of patchworks and band-aid fixes like it is in KSP1. - All new parts, most redesigned from the ground up to be more internally consistent and fill gaps, and with most stock KSP1 parts represented out of the box. - Complete UI revamp across the entire game to improve user experience as much as possible, including a redesigned parts window and filters in the VAB so that when thousands of parts are added in the future finding and sorting them doesn't become a pain. - New resources and resource systems, including new ISRU systems, for a more detailed and realistic experience while still being streamlined and easy to understand. - Systems in place to allow for easy integration of robotics parts and kerbal-deployable parts in the future, maybe with some limited number of them already implemented. - Very basic science mode implemented, but no career mode yet. First major update (1.1) - Graphics improvements. - More parts, think stuff from stockalike station expansion, planetside, the near future mods, etc, along with all the KSP1 DLCs and some of the stuff they planned for KSP2 (Orion etc). - Basic life support system, with 5-6 new resources, as well as simple crew habitable volume requirements, all togglable in options. - Interiors properly modeled and visible through windows, and going on EVA fully animated with the hatch opening and everything. - Kerbals now only carry small SAFER-style jetpacks in their inventory, and go on EVA by default using by fully modeled tethers and climb along the outside of vessels using a completely new set of climbing mechanics. MMUs are separate parts like command chairs that they can get in to fly around properly. Second major update (1.2) - More graphics improvements (now up to the standard of heavily modded KSP1). - More parts, mainly focusing on high-tech stuff. - Other star systems and interstellar gameplay mechanics. - More structures on Kerbin, including entire cities, along with new launch sites. Third major update (1.3) - More graphics improvements. - More parts. - Career mode, completely overhauled to use a better progression system that feels more like an actual space agency, with programs instead of contracts, and part unlocking based both on science collection and the programs you’re running. - Colony system similar to what was planned for KSP2. - FreeIVA polished and implemented into stock, maybe with VR support. Real History DLC - Basically Bluedog Design Bureau, Tantares, SOCK, KNES, and every other stockalike historical parts mod you can think of, but all put on several metric tonnes of steroids. - Virtually every spacecraft ever conceptualized or designed, let alone actually flown, in the history of the human race, all meticulously modeled to 99% accuracy (more accurate than BDB for example), while maintaining a stockalike style (though they would all be fully in scale to each other, not shifted to conform with KSP's 2.5m, 3.75m, etc diameters). - Plus all the launch stands and pads to go along with them. - And a revamped VAB parts list system to allow for you to actually navigate all that. - Would probably require a significant team of 3d modelers working around the clock for years to complete, hence why it’s a paid DLC. - Full compatibility with the RO DLC mentioned next if you have it installed. Realism Overhaul DLC - Pretty much RSS/RO, but with the polish one would expect if it was properly integrated into the game itself, and even more attention to detail and features, for example: - Procedural crewed pods and modules, with editable interior layouts and systems. - Procedural engines on top of a selection of most real ones. - Procedural tanks, with the internal bulkhead arrangements and all that being customizable. - Human rather than kerbal astronaut models (togglable if you don’t want that). - Improved structural simulation system, with internal part stresses properly modeled, so the weight of your tankage and structure now actually depends on what it’s supporting and how many gees it’s expected to endure, etc. - An aerodynamic simulation system that could make FAR blush, plus a thermodynamic simulation system to match (togglable). - Principia-level n-body physics (togglable). - The option to play in either RSS (plus real nearby star systems) or 10x stock. From what I can tell KSP 1 got developed to 1.0 in around 4 years, by about 12 people, and KSP 2 went from having all work on it restart to 0.2 in a little over 3 years with a team of 70 people, while also dealing with massive management inefficiencies and trying to work systems into the KSP engine and code that would be faster to just do from scratch. Therefore, I would optimistically estimate that we could probably get from development go-ahead to 1.0 on my roadmap here in about 3 years, assuming a development team of 70 people like KSP 2 and it’s properly managed and well-funded. From how I understand it the fully burdened cost (e.g. the entire cost the company pays, not just their salary alone) of a software development employee for this sort of role is typically about 200k per year, and the KSP 2 team had it capped at 150k by upper leadership that led to severe issues. For some margin of error, let’s say 250k then. That means, for 70 people for 3 years, the total dev cost to 1.0 will be about 52.5 million dollars. To get to 1.3 and then the DLCs is harder to estimate for me, but let’s assume 5 years, so 8 years total. That means the total dev cost from development go-ahead to DLC#2 will be 140 million dollars. KSP 1 has around 100,000 reviews on Steam. On average, games on Steam have 63 sales per review, and though this can be lower, it increases the older a game is so it’s probably actually higher. In any case, going by those figures that means KSP 1 sold 6.3 million copies. The price of it changed a bit over time, but was usually around 40-50 dollars. That means we have an existing playerbase of 6.3 million players to attract, not counting new players. If we price KSP 2 at 50 dollars, and only half of them transition over to KSP 2, that’s 157.5 million dollars. If the two DLCs each sell for 10 dollars and attract a total of 0.5 million players, that’s another 5 million dollars for a total of 162.5 million. That gives us a total profit margin of 22.5 million dollars, which is very tight, but might be just about doable. Keep in mind, that was assuming 70 people and a total dev time of 8 years. Given the DLCs are unlikely to be very profitable relative to the cost of making them, if we delete those and scale down to, say, 3 years to 1.0 and 2 years to 1.3, so 5 in total, and redo all the math, accounting for no sales from the DLCs, we get a total dev cost of 87. 5 million and a profit of 70 million dollars, which is much more workable. So, does anyone have any thoughts on these ideas? Am I being completely nonsensical and not understanding how game design works? I would love to hear some input on all that, and also if you have completely different ideas on how to go about redeveloping KSP 2 I would love to hear them as well! There was after all also that recent tweet after all from Jundroo, the Juno New Origins devs, about potentially getting some of the KSP devs onboard and reworking Juno into essentially a KSP sequel, I would love to talk about that but unfortunately I just don’t have the knowledge about Juno to be able to comment, especially given I’ve never played it or followed it’s development, but I'd be happy to hear others discuss it. EDIT: Okay, so, I wrote that post pretty late last night, and I’ve now had the chance to think about some stuff, and I want to expand a bit on my thoughts. Firstly, timescales. I’ve gone crawling across the forums once again for some more information, and I realized I misremembered some of the stuff relating to KSP 2’s development, specifically they didn’t restart development in 2020 but kept on using the old work they had, but started refactoring it. However, given the way people talk about how this decision cost them time, I think it’s fair to assume they could have restarted from scratch code-wise and still gotten to the point they did, or even further perhaps, in 3 years with their team of 70 people, so my estimates still seem reasonable. Also, apparently the KSP 2 devs were really close to having colonies and interstellar in the game for the initial EA release, and the fact they’re still not out even now was mostly due to them getting tied down fixing things and optimizing and whatnot, along with a lot of mismanagement. So it’s possible we could aim to have those in the base game for the initial release of this hypothetical reboot, though I still think it would be a better idea to build the game’s code ready to accept that, but not actually include it until a future update. Also, I must have been really tired yesterday because it seems I missed this, but there are actually already a couple of threads on here talking about pretty much exactly this. Sorry about that, if the mods deem that this one is redundant and close it I fully understand. Now, the key question. What do people actually want from a KSP game? There’s been some talk of a colony-designer game where you start out with something akin to cities skylines or something like that, and then start launching rockets later. I don’t agree with this idea personally, while I do like the idea of something city-builder style for the colonies I think that should be a late-game thing. However, one thing I am thinking about would be for the KSC upgrade system in career to be replaced with a city-builder style system where you get to actually build the KSC. So you start out with just, I don’t know, a small airfield and tiny pad for sounding rockets, and you get to, using a cities-skylines style system and interface perhaps, redesign and expand it over time until eventually you have an entire space center. Of course, unless you just want to be placing down upgraded versions of the same 8 buildings over and over, we would have to find new buildings to add and things for them to do. Maybe have it so that placing multiple launch pads could have an actual benefit, such as introducing a system like kerbal construction time where refurbishing pads take time? You could have that be togglable in settings as well - I know adding togglable stuff like that massively increases development costs but for stuff like construction time etc it doesn't seem like it would be a massive issue compared to some other ideas. And maybe we should make the players put a lot of thought into how they lay out their space center, with the way buildings are connected to each other and the distances involved all being important. For example, make your crawlerways too long, and it takes a while for the rockets to get to the pads. Make them too short, and if a rocket explodes not only does your pad get destroyed but your VAB might as well. While we’re talking about this, I may as well brainstorm other ideas for career mode as well. Instead of contracts, maybe we could have programs, which each contain several goals and milestones, and give you research benefits. And instead of like it is in KSP 1, we could lay the programs out on a tree. Selecting a program to do could give you research benefits to the parts that would be involved with it, like a lunar landing program reducing the unlock cost of the LM-style lander pod. And to stop the game from becoming linear, we could make it so that you can skip further down the tree and initiate a later program if you want to without doing the ones leading into it, but that would incur penalties like lower rewards or less research benefits. And we could make it so that if you landed on the moon without ever actually selecting the lunar landing program, it would autocomplete it but not give you any rewards for doing so. I think a good way of doing this would be for each program to have a set end goal, or maybe multiple, and also have several milestones along the way. For example, if you take the lunar landing program, it will give you individual missions for a crewed lunar flyby, orbital mission, and the landing, each with their own rewards and research benefits, on top of the rewards and benefits from the overall program, which could be set so that the more of the individual missions you complete in a program the higher the total bonus reward you get will be from the entire program itself when you complete it. I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts on this though, given I’m pretty much just spitballing here. I’m also not sure if this would completely replace the contract system, or if we should still have some conventional one-off contracts as well to supplement it. In any case, to round all of this off, I think there should be three main difficulty settings for career mode. In easy mode, the city-builder elements of the KSC are disabled, and it just expands automatically over time or maybe it starts out really big. The core gameplay loop here would be similar to KSP 1. There would also be no life support, no commnet, and no construction time. On regular default difficulty, life support and commnet is enabled, as are the city-builder elements for the KSC, but construction time is still turned off. On hard difficulty, not only is construction time turned on, but life support now takes into account not just the resources you have, but also how much livable space there is, and also radiation becomes a factor. When starting a new game, after picking career mode large buttons would appear for these three difficulties, with description below them fully explaining all of this to avoid confusion, and of course there would still be the option to go into the advanced settings and mix and match all of this. Next, changes outside the space center part of the game. Going over to spacedock and looking at the most popular mods can give us an idea of what the community seems to want most, and so let’s go over that real quick. Firstly, visual improvements. Given we’re switching to a new engine and rewriting everything from scratch, building these into the base game to a level that even surpasses KSP 1 should be possible. I would prioritize getting the underlying systems needed for the visuals to work done first, and then actually adding all the visual stuff later though. Next, stockalike parts mods, especially the near future series along with some others. Adding a much larger selection of parts in a stockalike style should be possible, hell it’s probably one of the easiest parts of the entire development process, though if we’re redoing everything from scratch I think we should take the opportunity to completely redo the stock parts as well rather than just copy them. However, after doing some thinking I do believe the stock 1.25m, 2.5m, etc scales should stay, but with additions like 0.9375m, 1.5m, 2.1875m, 3.125m, 4.25m, and 6m, along with maybe even larger scales than that. We would need a new parts sorting system to deal with all that without it getting confusing, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near impossible to come up with one that would still be easy to use and beginner-friendly. I considered upscaling everything by 1.5 to 2 to be more or less actual scale (in terms of the spacecraft), but I think part of the kerbal charm as it were is that they’re slighter smaller than humans are. This decision may come back to bite us later with RO/RSS DLCs and mods though. Oh, and more spaceplane parts sizes would be nice, right now we just really have three. If we’re really clever with how we choose them and model the adapter pieces for them, we could even allow people to make unusually shaped vehicles like an X-33 by stacking various adapter pieces in front of each other. After that, we have interstellar extended, which again should be easy to implement compared to everything else. There are also a lot of quality-of-life things, better burn time and docking port alignment indicator for example, which again should be relatively easy. Kerbal attachment system, kerbal inventory system, and ground construction as well, we’re already close to that with the braking ground stuff anyway for the former and the latter would come with colonies. You have to keep going a while before finding any planet mods, even kerbalism seems to come before that, but nonetheless I think an overhaul and expansion to the stock kerbal system, along with more star systems for interstellar, would be nice. Actual asteroid belts, way more asteroids and comets, rings that have actual particles in them, all sound like amazing ideas if they could be properly implemented. Another gas giant as a Saturn analoge, and an ice giant or two, would also be really nice, and completely revamping all of their moons to be more realistic would be awesome. Jupiter has almost a hundred moons and thousands of smaller objects orbiting it, and Saturn has even more. Most of them would be very small, but even then, it would add a lot of interest to those systems I think, and I can’t imagine it would be hard to implement compared to all the other stuff we’re talking about. It would also be nice to see some more interesting features on the planetary bodies themselves, especially ones that require specially designed equipment, and effort and skill, to get to, like deep ravines that require kerbals to bring climbing equipment or winches to get to the bottom of. Also, stuff like FreeIVA and through the eyes of a kerbal are really cool, and it would be neat if we could get those fully implemented at some point, maybe even with VR support, though for all I know that might be as difficult as multiplayer would be. But in any case, fully modeling the interiors of spacecraft and having them be visible through windows also seems like an awesome idea, and since KSP 2 did it it probably is possible, though we might want it to be togglable for low-end computers. Also, I really like the idea of having kerbals go on EVA properly, by getting in an airlock, depressurizing it, and opening the hatch to step outside, all fully animated. We could have it so that kerbals can’t just exit from any random hatch, thus making having actual airlocks important on larger ships. Some smaller pods, Apollo-style ones for example, obviously could just have the entire thing depressurize as they did IRL. And once on EVA, it would be cool if we could have fully modeled tethers, and redo the climbing system from scratch so the kerbals have to clamber across the sides of the spacecraft until you unlock EVA jetpacks. I’m not sure whether the EVA packs should be modeled like they are in stock, or if they should be large, clunky things that have to be stored externally and entered like an external command seat, like the real ones are, I’d love to hear your thoughts on that. Of course, we could still give the kerbals smaller and less powerful SAFER-like packs that they can carry on them. Alright, that’s about all I can think of for now. I’m sure I’ll come up with more ideas in the future, and I might keep on posting them, but for now I’d love to hear some feedback on all this. I’m trying to figure out what the community wants most from a KSP sequel, not just what I do personally, so it’s important I don’t just ramble on about my own thoughts unchecked.

I am not in the gaming industry, just normal software dev. And I don't know much about how it works in the gaming industry. But let's say I have a company A which is interested in a contract from B. I pitch the stuff and get the project. And afterwards I am like: "I have no idea how to do any of this, can I talk to the people who did this before?". That is so braindead mismanagement I am unable to comprehend this. Maybe for some weird reason this is normal in gaming but they should have clarified that before. And then I go like "Hey, we will be doing the stuff you wanted and much more, like multiplayer. We don't even want more money". And after all of that stuff hits the fan I am like "booo, they didn't help us and didn't give us more money". How on earth does that work? Is gaming industry some magical place with other rules?

I've been out of the loop for a little bit. Thanks for the pages, @Mister Dilsby! It is deeply satisfying to see 'Evil' Bob coming to talk to Kerbfleet. It just seems so right somehow. Happy landings!

Felipe wanted to make something other than KSP, to grow his career as a game developer rather than being stuck on one project forever. Squad wasn't interested, so he left to make what is now KitHack. I don't think he ever made much off of KSP. We know now that the KSP2 team was forbidden to talk to anyone on the KSP1 team, so yeah, your points are entirely irrelephant. And yet new planes are still designed using many of the basic engineering principles the Wrights worked out. Wind tunnel testing to confirm engineering assumptions. Independent 3-axis controls. Lift/drag ratio, and optimizing wing shape for it. Their work still matters. And Kerbals are still central to KSP2. Felipe's childhood personification of little bits of tinfoil as Kerbals remains the reason the franchise works. He knows a thing or two about the ever-elusive "fun" part of games. I'm sure the team would have reached out to him had the Take2 corpos not lost their damn minds.

At least all the KSP players will know which was the original and which was the knockoff... *** "Radio silence" is a term I hate to describe KSP2's dev team, but there's really no other way to explain what's going on. As of when I'm writing this, it is May 24th, 2024. The last time Nate Simpson logged on the forums was April 26th. The last time Nerdy_Mike posted was April 25th. The last post by KSP2's Twitter was on May 1st. That tweet said "We're still hard at work on KSP2. We'll talk more when we can." The last Discord update from a dev was on May 1st as well, promising the Discord and Forums would remain active. The last post by any developer (as far as I know) was CM Dakota who said: "Creating that human connection has always been one of the biggest goals of mine as a CM. Fans of the game only become fans of the studio by developing that sort of connection with the team. In my opinion, too many CMs act as some kind of wizard behind the curtain, when really a CM should just feel like another community member. Glad to hear I left an impression and kept you engaged with the community. Thanks for playing our game" Nothing more since then. Take-Two is claiming to not have shuttered Intercept Games, but seeing as Take-Two has some much bigger games under its belt that are also much more profitable from a "big-shot corporation" standpoint, it's not unlikely that KSP2's devs took a big hit at best. Just look at the numbers comparing some of T2's games to KSP2: Per Steam Charts for April, GTA V had an average of 95,401 players. Read Dead Redemption 2 had an average of 17,732 players. And KSP2 had a peak count of 903. I'm not really sure where I'm going with this. If Intercept Games is shuttered, there's not much chance T2's going to make a new studio, because that would be Studio #3 after Star Theory and Intercept. Not to mention that KSP2 is not even close to their more successful games. Even if Intercept Games wasn't shuttered, they had to have been hit hard by the layoffs. Hell, so of the Day 1 devs may even be gone now. KSP2 may never be what it would have. I feel like I've come off as one of the more optimistic about KSP2, but this is probably the darkest time of KSP2's development ever. It pains me, but KSP2 is probably over. This is backed up partially by speculation though, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt.