Some ideas for KSP 2

[RocketBlam]

I realize that KSP 2 hasn't been announced, and maybe they're not even thinking of doing one, although I suspect they are. They're not going to just stop doing KSP, it's been a great product for them. So with that in mind, here are some ideas I've come up with, to either improve on things or to make a better game.

1. The graphics. I don't know exactly what they can do to improve the graphics. It may be that they just don't have the game engine just can't manage better graphics, given the way KSP works. However, if possible, I think this is an area that definitely could use some work. I'd like to see the planetary textures at higher resolution, clouds and atmospheric effects, and a better use of more advanced graphics acceleration methods. Not to improve performance, but just to make everything more realistic.

2. Greater detail in science modules. I'd like to see something like a probe core, but one that has various slots in it for experiments, rather than the modules we have now that can be stuck anywhere. Also, I think the science modules should be physically smaller.

3. More "on the go" science. By this I mean, more science where you don't just have to enter orbit around a planet, or land on the planet, but where you actually have to look around and do science in several nearby locations. Kind of like rovers do now on Mars. One of the reasons I like this idea is that rovers are kind of pointless now. They're fun to build and drive, but there's really no point to it. You can technically drive a rover to a new biome and get more science that way now, but generally the distances are prohibitive. I've never really wanted to spend several hours driving a rover to a new biome. So I just don't get what rovers are good for now. It would be better if you had to search around a little and find things on the surface. This would make rovers more meaningful and also make the science game more interesting.

I'm sure I'll have more, but that's a good place to start.

 

[Wjolcz]

Why do you want to pay for a new game that is just KSP + more/better stuff? I really don't get that. You can mod the current game. The fact that they didn't do all this to the current game only makes me think they won't do it for a new game about the same space flight.

I don't mean to attack you or anything, but how does paying for things that can be/are already available as mods makes the game better?

I'd much rather see a new kerbal flight sim sequel instead of this "KSP remastered" version.

[worir4]

If they do make KSP2 i hope they make it on a new engine. Maybe they can design their own. Imagine the possibilities.

I do hope to see some improvements that you have said in the current version though like more interactive science. 

[NSEP]

KSP 2? I cant see that happending.

If you want a better game, just mod it!

 

[Enceos]

I believe KSP 2 is possible only if it will be a separate game, which we will have to buy for another $40. That's how business works.

[Frozen_Heart]

Not a fan of the idea of KSP 2, when there is still so much which can be added to KSP 1.

 

It would just be the same with better graphics and half the features gone.

[Catullus]

4 hours ago, RocketBlam said:

I'd like to see something like a probe core, but one that has various slots in it for experiments, rather than the modules we have now that can be stuck anywhere. Also, I think the science modules should be physically smaller.

The Universal Storage mod is exactly this.

[RocketBlam]

4 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Why do you want to pay for a new game that is just KSP + more/better stuff? I really don't get that. You can mod the current game. The fact that they didn't do all this to the current game only makes me think they won't do it for a new game about the same space flight.

I don't mean to attack you or anything, but how does paying for things that can be/are already available as mods makes the game better?

I'd much rather see a new kerbal flight sim sequel instead of this "KSP remastered" version.

Because these things aren't really available as mods, from what I have seen. You can get clouds and atmospherics, but they seem to be kind of buggy, and it sucks waiting for them to be updated after patches. "Just mod it" isn't a good answer, especially when there are no mods for most of these things.

And I would buy KSP 2 for the same reason I bought Civilization 6, and 5, and 4, or any other game sequel. I mean, why not just play Civilization I? They can change the game and make it better by rebuilding it from the ground up.

[MitchS]

Actually, I think OP brings up a good point. Unity is really limiting to KSP--no multithreading, inefficient RAM management--I think that building a new "KSP 2" on a new, more capable engine is an idea worth considering. From there, the ceiling would be raised and the doors would be open to much more satisfying and less restricted graphics and texture mods (and maybe toggled stock clouds, dare I say) and so many other memory-limited changes that a lot of players regularly express an interest in.

 I'd pay $40 for it. Heck, I might even pay $45.

[ZooNamedGames]

Honestly, KSP 2 would be the worst idea for Squad as a whole. There would be many issues with the idea.

One, they have minimal development staff to design a brand new game, when they did this before, they had the interest of a couple thousand people, not several million watching and demanding.

Two, KSP 2 would be overshadowed by the original KSP in everything it does. Critics will not praise it and the community outside our own will look down on it. There would be little Squad could do to make KSP 2 unique enough to stand beyond it's original which was praised well by many many people.

Three, KSP2, like any update for KSP, will get updated and eventually the epic change brought by KSP2 will be forgotten by the next major update as people are more interesting in the content and bug fixes than it as a whole. If you don't believe me, then, answer this; how excited were you for beta? for the 1.0 release? for 1.1? You may have been hyped, but if Squad said "If you pay us $40 for this update" you'd be outraged.

That's all KSP2 would be, just a big update for KSP that's permanently overshadowed by the original with minimal staff to design and build it. Everyone who made the original KSP versions are gone and everyone you liked making the new KSP content, such as Porkjet and Nathankell, are also gone.

I love KSP. That said I don't want them doing stupid publicity stunts. If they want to remake KSP fine. But don't slap a '2' on there and make me pay for it.

If you want more content or something new to KSP, then add it to KSP. Don't force players to buy a new KSP update.

[DrLicor]

Hmm interesting. I agree that at this moment, I don't want a KSP-2 but that's because we don't know what's in it. 
You can think about whole new sort of gameplay etc. etc.
Maybe sometime, they want to begin a game from scratch, let it run on total different engine, improve things, add a new story to it.

But when this is going to happen? Far from now I think, it isn't that long officially released etc.

But when they do, I think they will do it because it's for them easier to begin from scratch than continue with the current ksp to realize their new goals.  

[adsii1970]

The question is: Can Squad last or will it become another Maxis? Unfortunately, and I may be wrong, I do not think Squad will be around long enough for a KSP 2 with the way it currently is focused. There was a lot of damage done to its reputation with the botched 1.0 release and the console release. If one stops and thinks objectively about it, there has been a lot of pressure put on Squad to fix the bugs and while they have been fixed, it did have a great cost to Squad. We all noticed the high turnover rate, the shifting focus, promised featured that did not materialize as promised.

Squad has a lot of potential to become a great indy game publisher, but it must rebuild its reputation. I hate to say it, but maybe after it stabilizes KSP, and after they are able to correct the bugs that still lingers, maybe Squad needs to focus in creating downloadable content that will generate additional revenue.

I would easily pay $5 U.S. to have more planets...

But once KSP reached that point, I would not do a KSP 2, but a completely new (without Kerbal) game... Maxis sank all of its ducks in creating SimCity 4 and The Sims 3 - and it killed the company. I'm hoping Squad learns from those mistakes.

[Wjolcz]

5 hours ago, RocketBlam said:

Because these things aren't really available as mods, from what I have seen. You can get clouds and atmospherics, but they seem to be kind of buggy, and it sucks waiting for them to be updated after patches. "Just mod it" isn't a good answer, especially when there are no mods for most of these things.

And I would buy KSP 2 for the same reason I bought Civilization 6, and 5, and 4, or any other game sequel. I mean, why not just play Civilization I? They can change the game and make it better by rebuilding it from the ground up.

The only problem with this logic is it wouldn't be "KSP 2" but "KSP Remastered". Same thing with more eye candy.

On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if there was some sort of "Kerbal Pack" with KSP Remastered and an actual kerbal flight sim sequel (or rather prequel) game. Just like it was with Homeworld (iirc).

Otherwise it's just reselling the same product after a facelift.

[adsii1970]

12 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

The only problem with this logic is it wouldn't be "KSP 2" but "KSP Remastered". Same thing with more eye candy.

On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if there was some sort of "Kerbal Pack" with KSP Remastered and an actual kerbal flight sim sequel (or rather prequel) game. Just like it was with Homeworld (iirc).

Otherwise it's just reselling the same product after a facelift.

This is exactly what Maxis did with the SimCity franchise. Sid Meyer/Fraxis is doing the same thing with Civilization franchise (I have every edition from I to V in my collection and will NOT buy VI). Sure, each one adds a little different aspect of game play, but it has become repetitive. In fact, I believe Civilization IV was probably the best version of the game.

Why not have a whole new game called "Kerbal Space Program 2.0 "Beyond Kerbol" and make it a stand-alone game. Your goal is to leave the Kerbol system and find out what else is out there...

 

[Vanamonde]

These suggestions for the game's development have been moved to Suggestions & Development discussions. 

[adsii1970]

What magical powers the yellow banana @Vanamonde has! He can move entire threads with the click of a mouse! Sorcery, I tell you! Sorcery!

[Spacetraindriver]

Personally I think the only games that should get "2s"should be games with stories.

5 hours ago, Veeltch said:

The only problem with this logic is it wouldn't be "KSP 2" but "KSP Remastered".

Though a KSP with the "Original" story would be nice.

[Kosmonaut]

More focus on surface ops- Now you land, grab samples, plant a flag and done. It needs to be better.

[StupidAndy]

not something I want, but multiplayer not having to be post programed in, I have an idea for it though

something like civilization, where its turn based, but not turn based, so you have a month, and after each month, you stop, then the next day (real time) you have another month, so it goes you don't have to have complete dedication to the server, but you can still play, which is a problem I have with multiplayer games, you have to set out half a day to play a game with no stopping, it just makes multiplayer stupid and unnecessary, so with this setup, people can do things, like launch rockets to land on the mun, do probe contracts, yada yada yada, and for the contract system, you can have it where if you find a contract that is really good, say build a station around minmus, but you cant do it by yourself, you can ask another person if they want to do the contract with them, and during the acception phase, you can say "well, I'm going to do most of the bulk of this contract, I'm going to take 70% of it, he can have 30%, so it helps with the balancing of the funds, and also people have a reason to work together

I have tons of ideas, this is only one, I'll be back tomorrow with twice the ideas! two big ideas!

Edited January 17, 2017 by StupidAndy

[TheEpicSquared]

On 16/01/2017 at 0:13 PM, NSEP said:

KSP 2? I cant see that happending.

If you want a better game, just mod it!

 

As they say...

 

[Hannu2]

19 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Honestly, KSP 2 would be the worst idea for Squad as a whole. There would be many issues with the idea.

One, they have minimal development staff to design a brand new game, when they did this before, they had the interest of a couple thousand people, not several million watching and demanding.

Two, KSP 2 would be overshadowed by the original KSP in everything it does. Critics will not praise it and the community outside our own will look down on it. There would be little Squad could do to make KSP 2 unique enough to stand beyond it's original which was praised well by many many people.

Three, KSP2, like any update for KSP, will get updated and eventually the epic change brought by KSP2 will be forgotten by the next major update as people are more interesting in the content and bug fixes than it as a whole. If you don't believe me, then, answer this; how excited were you for beta? for the 1.0 release? for 1.1? You may have been hyped, but if Squad said "If you pay us $40 for this update" you'd be outraged.

That's all KSP2 would be, just a big update for KSP that's permanently overshadowed by the original with minimal staff to design and build it. Everyone who made the original KSP versions are gone and everyone you liked making the new KSP content, such as Porkjet and Nathankell, are also gone.

I love KSP. That said I don't want them doing stupid publicity stunts. If they want to remake KSP fine. But don't slap a '2' on there and make me pay for it.

If you want more content or something new to KSP, then add it to KSP. Don't force players to buy a new KSP update.

Time for KSP2 is not yet but KSP is soon "ready". It will be ready as a programming project and also as a business because most of interested have already bought it. Squad may continue their sells a year or two by releasing some paid content, but it is not ever lasting business.

There are also other aspects in your statements.

One: Squad knows that they have now massive number of customers. They can expect much more sells and can hire much larger development team to make KSP 2 or sell rights to some large game company, if they decide to make a sequel. KSP2 would not be a strange indie game but much more severe project with higher economic expectations.

Two: Only reasonable way to make a sequel would be to use modern gaming engine. It would be much more pretentious.

Three: KSP 2 would not be an update to KSP. It would be a totally new game. It would probably weight other areas of space program than KSP.

There would be good and bad sides if they begin to develop KSP2. I think that I would not like it. I want to mod my game to something which is extremely nerdy micromanagement hell to 99 % of players (for which I have to program my own mathematical tools) and probably KSP2 would develop to absolutely reverse direction. I hope that they give some nice DLC before beginning of KSP2. But KSP2 would certainly be eye candy for millions and now they could develop also better game mechanics from beginning (for average player).

 

 

[ZooNamedGames]

2 minutes ago, Hannu2 said:

Time for KSP2 is not yet but KSP is soon "ready". It will be ready as a programming project and also as a business because most of interested have already bought it. Squad may continue their sells a year or two by releasing some paid content, but it is not ever lasting business.

There are also other aspects in your statements.

One: Squad knows that they have now massive number of customers. They can expect much more sells and can hire much larger development team to make KSP 2 or sell rights to some large game company, if they decide to make a sequel. KSP2 would not be a strange indie game but much more severe project with higher economic expectations.

Two: Only reasonable way to make a sequel would be to use modern gaming engine. It would be much more pretentious.

Three: KSP 2 would not be an update to KSP. It would be a totally new game. It would probably weight other areas of space program than KSP.

There would be good and bad sides if they begin to develop KSP2. I think that I would not like it. I want to mod my game to something which is extremely nerdy micromanagement hell to 99 % of players (for which I have to program my own mathematical tools) and probably KSP2 would develop to absolutely reverse direction. I hope that they give some nice DLC before beginning of KSP2. But KSP2 would certainly be eye candy for millions and now they could develop also better game mechanics from beginning (for average player).

 

 

Might want to take a look at the front page of the forum; their in dire need of new hands. Moreover if they sold their product to the lowest bidder like they did for the console port, then Kerbal Space Program will go down as being a game as despised as Call of Duty.

There's nothing to 'sequel'. The definition of 'sequel' is to continue the story. What story? There isn't one. As such whatever changes should be done in the current KSP. If Squad wants to overhaul it fine. However slapping a new label on it won't sell well and will be overshadowed by the original.

Yes it would be an update. There's nothing new on a level sufficient to warrant calling itself a brand new game. Long time players like myself have seen the game change drastically. More so than what a 'sequel' would bring. So no, it wouldn't be a new game. Just an update.

For the most part KSP2 would be bad. Critically it would remain in it's original's shadow, and technically the game is functional. There's little that would warrant adding the name '2'.

My final point being- if all KSP2 is going to be just a rebuild of KSP1, fine. But don't make me and other's pay $40 for it as that's not a new game. That's just another update with a large price tag applied.

[Hannu2]

1 minute ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Might want to take a look at the front page of the forum; their in dire need of new hands. Moreover if they sold their product to the lowest bidder like they did for the console port, then Kerbal Space Program will go down as being a game as despised as Call of Duty.

It is certainly possible to make in wrong and be unsuccesful. As you wrote, there are examples in game industry.

But it is completely unrealistic to demand KSP with better engine as an update. It will never happen due to economic facts. Of course it would not be enough to just port current game to a new engine and add loads of eye candy. That would be wrong decision. They have to invent some new ideas to game and combine them to latest gaming technology. It has to be a sequel (as it is understood in world of video games) and not just an update with new name and price tag.

[ZooNamedGames]

Just now, Hannu2 said:

It is certainly possible to make in wrong and be unsuccesful. As you wrote, there are examples in game industry.

But it is completely unrealistic to demand KSP with better engine as an update. It will never happen due to economic facts. Of course it would not be enough to just port current game to a new engine and add loads of eye candy. That would be wrong decision. They have to invent some new ideas to game and combine them to latest gaming technology. It has to be a sequel (as it is understood in world of video games) and not just an update with new name and price tag.

That's the problem I'm seeing, everyone wants just new this and that. If you just want a better graphics then fine, but someone of us don't have your 6.0GHz 2000GB of RAM setups. KSP graphically is fine. You have alternatives if it doesn't look good enough through modding.

Kerbal Space Program is a game that until something significant changes in the gaming industry (something that changes gaming forever), doesn't require a sequel, or any sort of change.

Put it this way, would you pay for Minecraft2 that only provided new shaders? No. You wouldn't.

[klesh]

1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

 KSP graphically is fine. You have alternatives if it doesn't look good enough through modding.

 

To you.  You already know KSP can be great despite its graphics.  I have friends who refuse to play it because it "looks like its from 2002", and they're not interested in modding a game right out of the box for it to look modern.

I don't agree with them, but you have to consider the perspective of someone who has yet to be bitten by the KSP bug.