KSP and Orbiter 2010: Pros and Cons

[Dusty926]

I posted this thread because I\'m just bored and would like to see what people think of both games.

Here are my pros and cons. Oh and one last thing: Keep it civil.

KSP Pros:

Spore-level customization

Great physics

Cartoony style (Coming from a guy who loved Legend of Zelda: Windwaker)

Bill

Bob

Jebediah

Freedom

Good Graphics

KSP Cons:

Graphics could be better. Specifically the atmosphere. But this is a very very minor con.

Not too much to do. (There is abit but not alot.)

Only 1 planet and 2 moons. (This con will be gone after 0.17)

Orbiter 2010 Pros:

Atmospheres look amazing.

Entire solar system to work with.

VERY Accurate physics.

Endless amount of mods.

Alot to do. With mods.

Orbiter 2010 Cons:

More stuff to do than KSP, but not much more. (Without mods)

Graphics look like they are from 2004. (Minus the atmospheres)

Close to no customization. (Minus mods)

Not alot of space ships included. (Without mods)

[RayneCloud]

I\'m not going to like this, but just a fair warning that threads like these tend to start flame wars. So keep it civil, on topic and mature people. You\'re free to discuss at your leisure, but again, keep it civil.

[LaydeeDem]

Apples to oranges.

KSP is a game.

Orbiter is a simulator.

Only thing similar is the fact it\'s in space.

You do realize HarvesteR is an Orbinaut, right?

Look!

http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=22998

EDIT:

This game is not meant to compete with Orbiter, mind... that wouldn\'t be a good idea anyway, to compete with a freeware simulator with 12 years of development on it... This is meant to be a different take on space games, it\'s not a full blown space sim, but it\'s not your average space shooter either. At best, I hope this can be a stepping stone for people to get into Orbiter. At worst, I hope it\'s at least somewhat entertaining.

[Vanamonde]

KSP pro: It\'s in alpha-level development. This is like comparing a finished car to one that\'s still half-put together on the assembly line.

[Accelerando]

Does it even matter?

[Dusty926]

Does it even matter?

No. And I just asked what you guys think of both games. Not which one is the all-out best.

[Inquisition]

I didn\'t care for orbiter, couldn\'t get into how many controls there were.When you sit on the launchpad for 15minutes trying to just lite the main engines, its too complex for anyone but your diehard simfan. It reminded me of older sim games with the 85 page manual on how to operate the craft. Silent hunter 4 was button heavy and complex for a sim but yet wasn\'t overly complicated either.

This game is great cause anyone could walk up to a rocket on the launch pad and ask 'how do I fly this?' One spacebar press later they are driving whatever creative impulse they just built.

[samstarman5]

This kind of argument is silly, as you are more trying to compare Lego Star Wars to Jedi Knight. If you are familiar with both games, then you get the point. If not, then where have you been?

Anyway, I am quite happy with KSP.

KSP pro: It\'s in alpha-level development. This is like comparing a finished car to one that\'s still half-put together on the assembly line.

From what I hear and have seen about Orbiter, is that it got thrown out of the factory long before it was finished.

[nibula]

I personally love both games

[Bogusheadbox]

I don\' think this topic is silly at all. In fact if you boil it down to the right facts, its a very useful discussuion

Orbiter for me is a great tool to use maths and science to complete space missions. Its a very hard game and too indepth to pick up and play as a casual gaming experience.

KSP on the other hand has exactly the same orbital mechanics (in a fictional system) but is easy to pick up and highly intuitive. You don\'t have to crunch physics theories,nor bash a calculator, everything you need is displayed simply enabling this to be picked up and played by inexperienced people on a casual basis.

Orbiter, I want my missions to run perfect and get enjoyment after hours playing and getting somewhere near my goal

KSP, I get the same enjoyment completing a mission as I do with a catastophic outcome. With the game feel of KSP, I am not so pressured into that perfect flight

Orbiter, is best for me when I want to recreate a semi realsitic mission based on our cultures past ort future events

KSP, is best when I want fictional environment with real world physics

And same orbital mechanics

----------------------

KSP allows me to construct my own designs easily. I can\'t do that in orbitet

KSP has a wonderful level of terain detail in comparison to the flat surfaces of orbiter

So to sum it all up.

KSP is better for those not knowing a lot about space mechanics and its easiier to install, learn and play than orbiter whilst you still get realistc orbital mechanics.

Orbiter is better for those wanting an experience based on real world simulated solarsystem with more detailed ship systems based on todays technology.

[Khrissetti]

As a sim Orbiter can\'t be beat, but that has the disadvantage of being prohibitively complicated. I remember finding just launching the Space Shuttle to be bewilderingly complex (How do I release the booster rockets, how do I change the throttle of this thing? how do I get the engines working? How do I change the angle of this ship? Oh dear god, we\'re tipping over! How do we change the angle of this thing?!) I suppose there\'s a very good reason why real astronauts need years of training, re-watching hour-long tutorials is not my idea of fun.

KSP has the advantage of being far more pick-up-and-play. Strap a rocket together and fly. It\'s still complicated, spaceflight always will be, but when the game gets closer to release a lot of the complicated bits should be dealt with by a relatively quick tutorial campaign.

[borzwazie]

KSP is 'pick-me-up' fun, and Orbiter is 'I\'m-a-real-astronaut-fun'. Totally different games.

There may have been a time when I would have gotten into Orbiter, but I just don\'t have the time now. KSP is perfect for people like me.

Even my wife, a total non-gamer, thinks Kerbals are cute. My kids were cracking up watching Jeb bounce around the Mun, while we sang 'I\'m jumping on the Muuuuuuu-uun! I\'m jumping on the Muuuuuuu-uun!'

My 8-year-old son and I build rockets to see if they can get into orbit, land on Minmus and the Mun, and have a ball. *THAT* is how you know KSP has succeeded even before it\'s done. KSP team, you guys have really knocked this one out of the park, and it\'s only the second inning!

[Dizzle]

The cool thing about KSP is that it\'s miles above casual, but not too much of a realistic sim. That\'s the ticket, when you start off thinking 'OH GOD WHAT AM I DOING', and feel like a genius a few weeks later when you\'re landing on Minmus. You watch your skills develop over time, and it\'s hard enough to feel like an achievement, but not so hard that you give up before you\'ve seen anything.

[nerfboy621]

I didn\'t care for orbiter, couldn\'t get into how many controls there were.When you sit on the launchpad for 15minutes trying to just lite the main engines, its too complex for anyone but your diehard simfan. It reminded me of older sim games with the 85 page manual on how to operate the craft. Silent hunter 4 was button heavy and complex for a sim but yet wasn\'t overly complicated either.

This game is great cause anyone could walk up to a rocket on the launch pad and ask 'how do I fly this?' One spacebar press later they are driving whatever creative impulse they just built.

Yeah me too. I was like, WTFBBQ HOW U LAUNCH in orbiter and in ksp i thought of the most logical key for launch and pressed space bar and exploded!

[Artlav]

Orbiter takes discipline, KSP just lets you have fun learning.

Game-wise, KSP have most of what Orbiter misses - terrain, collision detection, ability to easily build your own ships, etc.

Sim-wise, Orbiter have most of what KSP misses - precise physics, wide extendability, docking/space stations/whatnot, real solar system, etc.

Both are fun, but it's a different kind of fun.

[PakledHostage]

I agree that both have their advantages but I enjoy KSP more. Some people diminish KSP as a "lite" alternative to Orbiter, but the two are really quite different. Orbiter is a space simulator while KSP is really a physics sandbox.

In KSP, we can number crunch to our heart's content. We are given enough information about the performance of our engines and the aerodynamic drag of our spacecraft that we can predict a lot of things very accurately if we want to. Add to that what we are able to figure out about Kerbin's atmosphere (and the Kerbalverse in general) through experiment, and we can do some pretty cool things.

Further, the limited instruments in KSP require us to be creative if we want to navigate accurately. Unless you're using an addon tool such as MechJeb, you need to hand-fly your missions. Doing that accurately requires you to either be a pretty good "seat of the pants" pilot, or good at doing calculations.

I get more satisfaction from playing KSP because it doesn't have all of the instrumentation and autopilots that are available in Orbiter. I know I am not alone.

[HarvesteR]

One of the best comparison analogies I've ever seen about KSP and Orbiter was this:

"If Orbiter is like building a miniature model of a spaceship, with painstaking care and attention to detail, KSP is like playing with LEGOs."

I'm a big Orbiter fan myself, and I don't want KSP to ever compete with Orbiter. Both might share a common theme, but they are very different projects, with very different goals. Orbiter, like any proper simulation, strives to be as realistic as possible, no compromises. KSP on the other hand, isn't meant to be fully realistic. It's meant to be an above-average realism space game.

Anyhow, the way I see it, there will always be room for both games.

Hail Probe!

Cheers

[Kosmo-not]

I get more satisfaction from playing KSP because it doesn't have all of the instrumentation and autopilots that are available in Orbiter. I know I am not alone.

I'm in the same boat on that one. KSP made me want to learn orbital mechanics. Now that I have all this knowledge, it has made me a much better pilot in Orbiter.

The biggest selling point for me in KSP is the rocket building. No other game has really brought out the engineer in me like KSP has done.

[AlternNocturn]

Two absolutely different games, with two absolutely different goals. Both are very fun when you know what you're doing.

[witeken]

I'm not sure what Orbiter is. I installed it, but I didn't know what to do >.<.

One of the best comparison analogies I've ever seen about KSP and Orbiter was this:

"If Orbiter is like building a miniature model of a spaceship, with painstaking care and attention to detail, KSP is like playing with LEGOs."

Cheers

Nice! Yeah, there should be a LEGO edition of KSP . But instead of those cubes, it are fuel thanks, boosters, decouplers, etc. The plush edition iswas in my signature ;p. But it's pretty god damn outdated xd.

Even my wife, a total non-gamer, thinks Kerbals are cute. My kids were cracking up watching Jeb bounce around the Mun, while we sang 'I\'m jumping on the Muuuuuuu-uun! I\'m jumping on the Muuuuuuu-uun!'

My 8-year-old son and I build rockets to see if they can get into orbit, land on Minmus and the Mun, and have a ball. *THAT* is how you know KSP has succeeded even before it\'s done. KSP team, you guys have really knocked this one out of the park, and it\'s only the second inning!

Nice!

Edit: What the ****, my signature.

Edited August 17, 2012 by witeken

[einsteiner]

I see KSP as a spiritual successor to Orbiter. It takes all the stuff that was science-fun from Oribter and repackages it in a way that is also regular-fun. I would love to see what they could do by collaborating with Martin and combining the best of both games.

Edited June 19, 2013 by einsteiner