Search the Community

We can all still imagine what a great successor to Kerbal Space Program would look like. Take-Two has now spent ~7 years and ~40 million dollars learning how not to make a sequel to a green space frog explody simulator. I still fully believe in not only Nate Simpson's ambitions; unification with all the hopes of the average KSP-enjoyer; and a publisher can get the Minecraft-competitor franchise of cute lil' minions that teach kids STEM and sell spinoff products. Everyone could be happy. It's still possible. What we need is not exactly a lessons-learned document. More like, a comprehensive list of the features that are wanted in sequel, cross-examined by which ones are most important gameplay-wise and engine-mechanics-wise. I agree with, for example, in ShadowZone's assessment that KSP2 had too much visual polish and not enough work under the hood, or Scott Manley's expectation that the engine would make it easy to customize planets (and this feature was regrettably not approached.) Since I and no-one I know has 50 million dollars lying around, the best thing I think we can do is make such a document for a future developer, publisher, or whoever. The deliverable of such a discussion would be an easy-to-read paper, a game design document, that compiles: Things most enjoyed in KSP games as a whole, which are critical to the core gameplay loop Features most desired to be changed Features semi-solved by mods (that is, things that should should be knitted into the engine so its ambivalent if modders or devs make the end effect) Features already solved in the KSP1 engine (or knowhow from KSP1 that should be grafted in the future) Features requiring ground-up design We can hope and envision that a new developer would do a better job of KSP3; or we could actually pound the pavement and just do their homework for them. At least for me, writing something like that would give a sense of catharsis, after a decade of anticipation being let down by such trivial and pedantic circumstances as those which did-in KSP2. Kerbal Space Program core gameplay loop Build-Test-Fly Easy-to-use vehicle editors for spacecraft, aircraft, groundcraft Analysis tools, such as center of lift Gravity simulation(?) UI should be very well built and understandable. Take notes from what KSP1 and KSP2 did well and poorly. Communications & Deep space network Science collection and technology unlocking Crew resource management Extravehicular Activity in orbit and on planet surfaces Planting flags and grabbing samples Navigation nodes GUI, ease and stability and functionality of maneuvering for at least 5 nodes, maybe n-many One or maybe two major mechanic additions, but leave the path open to either official development or modders; such as Colonies Resource Networks and ISRU Variety of planets that each have a unique complication related to astrodynamics (gravity, atmospheric composition, size, etc) which makes navigation to each into something of a puzzle to be solved. Engaging in this design practice should still encourage a variety of approaches, not bottleneck players from the ability access a given planet unless they have X-gimmick part in their vehicle. Players should be rewarded by each place they visit with unique surface details and things to see or do. KSP2 started on the right track with this; though it doesn't always need to be alien precursors or bones. Desired changes--meaning the backend should make Mods possible, but not required for the developers to build themselves: Planetary editability Including real-world scale interplanetary distances and planetary sizes Including axial tilt Parts library ease of editing Aerodynamics systems Space center and building editability Ploppable buildings and launchpads relatively easy to customize GUI in Vehicle Editor, Part-Action Window and In-Flight interface. Weather Don't bother with precursor lore, ARGs or a complex backstory for the in-game universe. Strongly consider gameplay impact and difficulty for crew perishables, life support, and maximum mission duration per weight for crewed flights. Gameplay features that should be lifted from KSP1 (don't reinvent the wheel, improve the existing) Orbital transfer calculations Planetary and personal scale, position and speed systems Interactions with the ground, surface friction and wheels. Aerodynamics systems, including facing side occlusion Buoyancy systems Heat and radiation systems Robotics modules Gameplay features that need rebuild from the ground-up (they need integration and considerations from day-1) Strongly reconsider game engine, not necessarily Unity [several posters suggested] Multi-language support and localization Handicap UI design and controls customization Emphasis on variety of control input methods and device support Multiplayer, including maximum number of players in a world Interstellar travel and communication Timewarp with continuous acceleration Brachistochrone trajectories capable in maneuver nodes Support for including multiple star systems Relativistic effects not required(?) Optimization of vehicle editing and flight performance so that big vessels do not cause lag Things hat should be excluded or be avoided. They are not value-added development. Do not re-release KSP with a graphical update. Ignoring veteran players or community input. Do not add too much handholding. Part of the draw of KSP1 is its steeper learning curve, which encourages exploring and diversity of method, rather than railroading all players onto the same experience and leading them to think the game is shallower than it is. Chill out on the tech trees. Many players never even use them and go down the Sandbox route from the start. Buildings do not need physics simulation other than "destructed by high impact force". Can easily be assumed to be rigid and sufficiently strong for the world where they are.

This is a list of QoL features / plain features / improvements/ whatever at this point, that I'd personally like to see in KSP 2. Be it today or months from now. There is no particular hierarchy. Feel free to add your own! Adding more to this as I read replies because I'm just one person and have limited thinking prowess! That is to say, I wish to add ideas to this list as I read them because I didn't think about it. Not even going to try and keep this ordered by-effect/change. Will try and keep duplicates out If an idea is from another, I will put their name in parathesis and italicized. "Many" will refer to just that; more than one (including myself) Manuveur Node Window / fine controls, just like we had in KSP 1 More minimized Delta-V readout in VAB / flight. There's a lot of unused black space thats not neccessary sometimes. Another toggle for just Delta-V and not fuel tracker is this wish Option to reduce entering / exiting gravity well "pulse" effect. I love this feature, but its quite huge sometimes for me. Mouse Sensitivity options Mouse direction options (inverse, etc) Seperate VAB / Flight Camera Pan options (sensitivity, inverses, etc) "Warp to Day" / "Warp to Night" "Warp to Encounter" (So as to warp to a few seconds before entering or exiting sphere's of influence) Transfer Window Warp Timers Manuveur Node Editing while Paused (unsure if this is a bug, or a feature, to not be able to do this while paused) Rocket Plumes follow the rockets path opposes to statically locked. More specifically related to effect smoke, to have the sight of your smoke trail as you launch "Do Science" button only flashes when there is truly a new science to do (Unsure if this is bug or not) Make Re-entry effect more flashy (I like the current effect , but it feels almost too static and needs more particles or variation.) Thermal bars less out-of-place feeling (Feels duck-taped on. Which I like, but a more visually in-line one later would be a nice thing) Symmetry automatically goes to correct option when trying to apply new parts to something (example, add struts to a quad-symmetry booster automatically sets symmetry to quad.) (Unsure if this is a bug) Scream bloody murder at the player if they forget to put even a single parachute. Do seperatrons seem weaker? Icon Improvement (WiS3) Darkness settings (WiS3) Easier map movement / less clunky (targetting, manuveur node stuff, etc) (WiS3 & Gluckez) VAB camera/movement fixes/improvements/options (Gluckez) Better Exhaust (Jeq) Better Docking / Structure for them (Gluckez) Better plant-dust for wheels, landing, landing gears, etc (Jeq) Exploding parts cause more explosions (difficulty setting maybe) (Jeq) Improved parts manager (inflight + VAB) (WiS3) Robotics (Many) More intituative action group setting Fuel Flow Priority Correcting Delta-V readouts (Many) Entering/Exiting SOI sphere of influence color or effect difference (perhaps a pulsing in as well for entering, pulsing out for exiting) (WiS3) EVA Construction (Gluckez) Snap rotation to world (Jeq) "Ore" equipment (I'd have to imagine this will be a thing in some way for Colonies?) (Gluckez) Waypoints/Map Markers on surface (Steveman0) A mechanic to make precise sub-15meter target landings? (It's kind of a pain to do it perfectly first try. Seems like a thing that would be really nice for Colonies)

On the following thread: I decided to challenge the KSP2 definition from being a de jure et de facto sucessor of KSP¹, or a Fantasy RPG with space fare thematics and spells and powerups disguised as technology. The discussion, unsurprisingly, risked degenerating into an exchange about what's a RPG and what's a Simulator, derailing the host thread. So I decided to transfer the discussion to this one. Original post (edited on the host thread)

I did not really see or hear anything about a KerbNet mechanism which would allow real-time and on-rails scanning of CB surfaces. Also is there any information about telescopes and if the Exploration mode will start with undiscovered celestial bodies in the Kerbol system? Nothing about the buoyancy system? Do we have any clarification if probe exploration before manned has been set as a priority? What else did you expect to be included in the For Science! update and was not announced or mentioned?