Jump to content

Kerbal Space Program 2: Master Post


sh1pman

Recommended Posts

On 8/22/2019 at 3:11 PM, 5thHorseman said:

Nobody's talking about the really big story, here.

In KSP2 the sun will officially be named Kerbol.

That's enough for me to want to not buy it right there.

MWAHAHAHAHA ITS KERBOL NOW WHO'S GOING TO STOP ME, THE SUN?

8 hours ago, gary85 said:

#NOUNITY

Guys you are big boys now, you learned how to program by now since 2011. Use proper engine please.

 

#NOUNITY

 

bruh, its already declared they're using unity. Unity is also a proper engine, and this time they won't be hacking on solutions onto it, and they will be using one of newer versions. 

Also, the team developing KSP 2 is completely seperate from KSP 1, much less the people who made this in the first place. They clearly decided that using Unity for round 2 would be for the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 4:41 AM, 5thHorseman said:

Nobody's talking about the really big story, here.

In KSP2 the sun will officially be named Kerbol.

That's enough for me to want to not buy it right there.

Have been meaning to ask, and I personally have no opinion either way, but why the resistance to the name Kerbol?

Not trolling, genuinely curious.

Did I miss a discussion or conflict somewhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Arugela said:

If it's based on a real ship, it could be from one of the early Apollo design concepts. Some of them involved a single stage that would land on and take off from the Moon. Check out "NASA Direct" here:
http://www.astronautix.com/a/apollolunarlanding.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Arugela said:

I thought the sun was called kerbol in this version also?! Why would anyone care?

For some reason in 1.3, it was changed from kerbol to "the sun". Kerbol is only a name made by the KSP fanbase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm excited! but that being said, the gaming community has been burned one to many times. It scares me that it's pre-rendered and coming out on console. Is it pre-rendered because of how early the development is? will ksp2 be designed PC first console second or vice versa? I just hope that KSP2 pc wont be neutered to accommodate consoles performance . Hope to hear back and hopefully see progress pictures of where its at in development. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, razark said:

They also didn't say "KSP2 will not involve FPS, a fishing mini-game, international poker tournaments, MMORPG style play, or a thousand different ways to peel potatoes".  Therefore, we cannot absolutely rule those out, either.

KSP1 already has a fishing mini-game mod.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 11:24 PM, DigDirt said:

Will there be a Switch version in the future?

Let's hope so I would really love it. Switch sadly probably can't handle it BAUT the rumored Switch Pro probably can

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DunaManiac said:

For some reason in 1.3, it was changed from kerbol to "the sun". Kerbol is only a name made by the KSP fanbase.

I have to disagree

eeloo-ice-scan-results-from-fett.png?w=1200&h=

This may not be on topic :/

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ratwerke_Actual said:

Have been meaning to ask, and I personally have no opinion either way, but why the resistance to the name Kerbol?

Not trolling, genuinely curious.

Did I miss a discussion or conflict somewhere?

I just think it sounds stupid. Like really really stupid.

I can't really explain it better than this: it triggers the same guttural reaction in me that someone typing "alot" instead of "a lot" triggers. Only it's worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

I just think it sounds stupid. Like really really stupid.

I can't really explain it better than this: it triggers the same guttural reaction in me that someone typing "alot" instead of "a lot" triggers. Only it's worse.

I have a feeling you just dislike portmanteaus alot subconsciously. 

Edited by MechBFP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microtranactions etc...

Personally I don't think they will, or want to, include them, and doubt that they have even seriously considered putting them in.

But, if asked the question 'Will it ever happen?' of course they can't/won't give a definite answer.  It is just not good sense to rule out any options for the future, however sure you may be that you won't do it, especially if you may not be the one to decide such things in a few years time.

Asking for reassurance is all well and good, but the best you will get in response is...  'No plans to', 'Do not intend to' etc etc.  We have no realistic choice, but to accept that at face value and trying to squeeze a definitive, permanently binding, answer on this, is frankly pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

I just think it sounds stupid. Like really really stupid.

I can't really explain it better than this: it triggers the same guttural reaction in me that someone typing "alot" instead of "a lot" triggers. Only it's worse.

I can respect that answer.

The phrases " railroad spike" and "right-of-ways" strike me the same.

It's actually " rail spike" and "rights-of-way".

 

edit: apologies for getting away from topic.

Edited by Ratwerke_Actual
added thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, pandaman said:

But, if asked the question 'Will it ever happen?' of course they can't/won't give a definite answer.  It is just not good sense to rule out any options for the future, however sure you may be that you won't do it, especially if you may not be the one to decide such things in a few years time.

It was a straight and direct question: "Will KSP 2 have micro-transactions?", not a vague one.

Spoiler

Fel_KnaozasbtycbFJSygG_Nq0fla9ia_dLj-xa9

source: Hello There post.

The dark side: the wording is not straight. A "No, as well we will not do in-game currency and loot boxes" would be enough. But they choose to say "a multitude of micro-transactions", not only 'micro-transactions". Of course, this can be the result of a marketing guy doing what they were trained to, so I took it with a grain of salt.

The bright side: they answered it at all. I may not had liked the answer, but they did answer it. And upfront answered two another concerns (loot boxes and in-game currency). And these ones, were done straight to the point.

I think we can be cautiously optimistic on the matter. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

The dark side: the wording is not straight. A "No, as well we will not do in-game currency and loot boxes" would be enough. But they choose to say "a multitude of micro-transactions", not only 'micro-transactions". Of course, this can be the result of a marketing guy doing what they were trained to, so I took it with a grain of salt.

The bright side: they answered it at all. I may not had liked the answer, but they did answer it. And upfront answered two another concerns (loot boxes and in-game currency). And these ones, were done straight to the point.

I think we can be cautiously optimistic on the matter. :)

My guess is that they plan to have cosmetic, straight-buy MTX for sorts of texture packs.  Like 'beaking ground' style EVA suits for 4,99.  Or 'dark' textures for all parts; 12,98.  Stuff like that.  Mandated by T2.  

13 hours ago, PunkRockZoologist said:

I just had a thought. Yes this is another "what I'd like to see in KSP2" post, which I understand is completely pointless, but I thought it would be fun to get other people's opinions on this.

It's pretty clear they're expanding the resource model for the game. I'd really like to see the new resources to be as ambiguous as "Ore" in KSP1. Maybe the new ones could be things like Metal, Water, Air and Gas, where you can form your own conclusions/headcanon about what they actually represent. I feel like that would fit nicely into that Kerbal niche between realistic and cartoony. So you can harvest different resources from different planets/biomes, and even harvest things like "Air" or "Gas" from atmospheres, and then bring it to a refinery where you can refine them into different usable resources. A bit like the Community Resource Pack, but maybe slightly simplified/streamlined.

Yeah, not that the enjoyment of going isn't reason enough most of the time, but you're right, it would still be nice to have more in-game incentive for late-game exploration, even after you max out the tech tree.

Since colonization is gonna be a thing, I hope "snacks" will be one of the only few resources they add.  Basically a catchall term for everything a kerbal needs to survive, including food, water, breathable air and waste management.  Otherwise it could quickly get WAY too micro-managy for the majority of players.
-> Can always mod in more complex systems for life support.

Edited by Atlessa
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Atlessa said:

My guess is that they plan to have cosmetic, straight-buy MTX for sorts of texture packs.  Like 'beaking ground' style EVA suits for 4,99.  Or 'dark' textures for all parts; 12,98.  Stuff like that.  Mandated by T2.  

Since colonization is gonna be a thing, I hope "snacks" will be one of the only few resources they add.  Basically a catchall term for everything a kerbal needs to survive, including food, water, breathable air and waste management.  Otherwise it could quickly get WAY too micro-managy for the majority of players.
-> Can always mod in more complex systems for life support.

Yes, I tend to agree with you here.  Expansion packs (extra planet / solar system packs etc) are prime fodder for paid DLC, as would be small 'cosmetic' upgrades (new suit styles, or part skins etc) at a lower price point that have no effect on gameplay other than making it look different.  What I wouldn't want to see is pop-up ads in game, a splash screen on start up suggesting you go look in the store at all the cool goodies is one thing, but adverts appearing during play would be a real turn off for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am of two minds on this....

One is filled with excitement, and optimism.....it pleases me to hear that a sequel is being developed.

The other Is filled with doubt, concern, and worry. My concerns are as follows..

 - Star Theory is a dev team made up of people we've never heard of, and some people from Uber, who's only games of note were Monday Night Combat, and Planetary Annihilation. I don't see a whole lot under their belt, that tells me they can do this well enough to stack up to the absolutely legendary work that SQUAD has done with this game.

 - To what extent is SQUAD involved with the development process? I've read that some SQUAD employees will be serving in an advisory capacity..but what exactly does that mean?

- Why isn't SQUAD doing this game themselves?

 - I know they're saying NOW that there aren't going to be any microtransactions, or in-game currency or purchases....but this is 2K we're talking about. Can we really be expected to believe that they're not going to demand the developers shoehorn this garbage in later?

 - Their trailer looks like a visually upgraded version of the current game, with a ton of community mods implemented as base-level features.

 

I'm worried about a lot of this... i'm honestly not sure i trust anyone but SQUAD to do this right. When you hand an IP over to someone else for development, you ALWAYS lose something in the translation from the original IP holder's vision, to the new holder's vision.. I mean, i hope the new guys don't screw this up, but i can't shake the feeling that this isn't going to be everything the flashy videos are promising. I still think SQUAD made a mistake selling to Take-two/2K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...