KSP 2.0 - What would you expect (or wish) for a sequel?

[Znath]

Part damage instead of parts exploding would be neat also.  Like canisters and structure bending or being smashed. 

[DaMachinator]

For a Version 2.0, full N-body physics ala Principia, FAR implemented, Deadly Reentry implemented, and RealChutes implemented in some form or another.

[EBOSHI]

I feel a great variety of possibility in the large world of KSP.

1.Player-hosted multiplayer. It is not for war; for cooperation.

2.The facilities which players can build all over the world. Of course the space center is included.

3.As well as a space trip, space stay and the planet emigration of Kermans.

4.A variety of economy, the facilities for it. Agriculture, stock raising, fishery, manufacturing industry, commerce.

5.The open world action that Kermans plays an active part in the third person viewpoint…

…I want at least 1 and 2. After that it is a delusion. But I want it.
How about you?

[AmpsterMan]

If anyone has ever heard of Outer Wilds, my wish for KSP 2 (which was actually my wish for KSP 1) will sound familiar to you.

 

I would like something similar to what we have now; Lego meets Orbiter meets Buzz Aldrin's Race Into Space. I love that aspect of the game. I would, however, radically change Career mode, to the point that it might turn off a lot of people. Please bare with me. I like me some Sandbox gaming, but honestly, a scripted story with set goals can be very fun too. I wish for a KSP "Story" mode would actually give missions that need to be accomplished to progress an overarching story... that is the discovery of a Stargate like thing at the edge of space!

 

The campaign should be roughly aligned with the discovery of new technology. At first, you are doing simple things like reaching orbit, putting satelites, etc. But, as you start exploring the planets, you can really unlock the secrets of those planets. This is where the idea of Outer Wilds comes in. It's sandbox, but there is still obviously something behind the scenes going on. As the career progresses you might find, say, a cave in Minmus. To enter the cave, you have to build a rover that allows you to move into the cave and explore it. Within it, you discover some ancient artifact or whatever that's a map to something on Duna. Doesn't have to be something like that, but it should lead you in that way. Obviously, at no point should you be stopped from diverging from the "story mode"; you can do as you please. In some ways, I want there to be soft "broken bridges" of sorts to encourage the players to continue the story mode... I mean, that's why you are playing story mode as opposed to the other modes, but it should in no way lock you into it. Kinda like what The Long Dark wants to do with it's story mode eventually. 

 

I've never really developed the idea too much, but it's always been of interest to me.

[Defenestrator47]

So okay.  Its page 8 and this is not likely to be read by a lot of folks, but after putting in a few hundred hours, what I'd want out of KSP 2.0 is:   A complete refactoring and reimagining of how rockets are built, using a list of parts from the build menus. It's late and I'm up on Insomnia and I don't have pictures to illustrate what I mean, but I'll do my best.

So what we have now is a list of predefined shapes.  Fuel tanks, structural elements, braces, pylons, wings, etc.  Each comes from a different menu, and has predefined roles in building rockets and SSTOs and rovers and aaaaaall the other stuff we can build.  And it is great.  But it is also limited.

In my vision of KSP 2.0, shapes would not be tied to function - for instance, you'd have cylinders, cubes, pyramids, cones...lots of different shapes.  Theyd be empty, allowing you to come up with whatever shape of craft you desire, using a snap and tweak sytem much like the current one.  Once the desired form is created, an 'outer skin' would be created, which you could then fill with fuel tanks, machinery, electrics, gyros, science (SCIENCE!), crew spaces and command center, and all the other googahs and gizmos and widgets that make a mission happen.  A center of mass/lift indicator would help with placement.  Varying tech levels would give more variety and late-game increasing capability.  Engines would still be placed in much the same way as now, or if someone thinks up a better way for them, do that instead.

This came about from reading the back and forth on the forums from the 'clipping/no-clipping' camps about balance vs. 'but it looks so cool like this!'.  If the form is not tied to the function, we could create cool looking AND balanced vehicles (only so much internal volume to play with).  Add in some form of procedural texturing, to make a unified look for each vessel, with varied texture sets and even community-mod texture sets.  Add in the ability to say 'this is an SSTO, put re-entry ablation plating on surfaces that will face into the descent/aerobraking.'  Have what direction that is be user-defined, even.  Put a 'in-hangar flight simulator' to help define this.

The game would also feature a wider range of parts of all types.  More cockpits, more wings, or something like a procedural wing generator, because the way wings are built of structural wings and slants right now is awkward, frustrating, and requires lots of strut-bracing to really work.  More lights.  A functional in-atmosphere autopilot that can hold consistant altitude and course and speed.  More arrangements of landing gear, including side-drop, front and rear drop, more fixed gear types, skids...

That's basically it.  Mostly the 'build a vehicle shape, then fill it with useful components' design goal is what I want.  The rest is icing.

 

 

[Wjolcz]

Why is everyone trying to come up with an idea for a new game based on "KSP + some other game + multuplayer sequel"?

Wouldn't it be cool to have something that would be more of a prequel to the current game? I would love to play a game where you build aircraft, test them and it tells the story of how the Kerbal Space Program emerged from something like Kerbal Aircraft Program? I think that would be way more interesting than having the same game, except with more space stuff. You can do that with mods and/or by simply buying some other game that already has the features (Elite, EVE Online and other space games like that). I haven't seen a game with a whole planet to explore and an advanced editor to create your own flying contraptions. Would totally buy that thing in an instant.

OK, I guess what I want is "KSP + IL-2 + DCS + multiplayer sequel". But I haven't seen a game that would incorporate all of these features yet.

[THX1138]

On 17/06/2015 at 5:31 PM, Tank Buddy said:

I don't think KSP is sequel-able.

I mean, really, anything that you would put in a sequel could be either updated or modded into the game, so what's the point? (besides making more money for SQUAD.)

If they started to work on KSP 2, it would be safe to assume that would be unfinished when they start on KSP 3.

[Kar]

Less lag and be able to play at (least) 40 fps without the need of spending 5000 bucks on a new PC to play KSP.

 

Sarcastic...yea I know.... sorry....

[NSEP]

On 17-6-2015 at 5:40 PM, worir4 said:

Better graphics and better looking atmospheres!

I dont want my FPS make it look like a slideshow @worir4

But i would like 5x more parts and 5x bodies and 5x more fun!

[AlextheBodacious]

Huh geez remember this guys?

Nostalgia back when people had no idea of the road ahead.

[StarStreak2109]

Awww come on guys, please stop whining and filling the next thread with this stuff... Isn't it enough already???

[Sharpy]

n-body system with proper physics and seamless universe - no more SOIs, physics bubbles, on-rail areas, threshold altitudes, scenes, and so on.

Proper mechanics - a smooth implementation of what Infernal Robotic tries to do.

In particular, VAB being more of 'decorative element', with construction possible everywhere, anytime, as long as you have stuff to build with, and the right tools. VAB being just an end-of-the-line tool.

Live Ecosystems.

Story.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Sharpy

[Hannu2]

I think that if there will ever be KSP 2 it will try to be high level commercial product from beginning. I am quite sure, that it can not be better than KSP for me. If it seems good I buy it, but if it is too easy or unrealistic, no thanks. In my opinion KSP have developed years to wrong direction while it have grown in the commercial success.

But I hope that the success of KSP encourages game developers to make many space flight games which are specialized to different things. And there will be also a nerdy micromanagement game for professional engineers and students. A game which try to be as realistic simulation as practically possible and not to become famous or be easy for all. There should be procedurally generated 3D planets, N-body trajectories for crafts, challenging aerodynamics and hundreds of micromanagement things to be taken into account. And lots of exploration to do.

Orbital like flight mechanics combined with possibility to build physically well modeled crafts and some progression in resources and exploration would be nice. I do not need to eye candy graphics, cartoonish characters or such stuff.

[Navy2k]

A work environment for the devs, so that not a bunch of people as a whole have to leave at once...

[Mjarf]

It's a long shot, but a custom 64 bit game engine with multicore support made from the ground up. It would take a lot of work, but it would truly take KSP to the next level.

[Provisional Name 4]

Defense contracts and weapons, maybe as a separate expansion; "Kerbal Defense Contractor"

[LittleBitMore]

I'm very sorry for necroposting but guess what was announced in August?