KSP2 Hype Train Thread

[Deddly]

I recall that they did say they weren't going to overhaul the aerodynamic model, but that was a long time ago. Who knows... maybe some of the delay was to implement a more realistic system. I'm not counting on it though 

[Vl3d]

I don't really understand that explosion..  was that just a fuel tank?

Edited December 26, 2022 by Vl3d

[Drakenred65]

8 hours ago, GoldForest said:

25? What? 

Also, an average 'month' is 30 days. So when I say 2 months, I mean 60 days.

365 days/12 months=30.417 days

There's also the Lunar Month which is also 30 days. Well actually, it's 29.53 days, but you can round it up to 30. It's based off the Moon and how long it takes to go from New Moon to Full Moon, then back to New Moon, but I digress. 

Well yesterday was the 25 not the 24th. Some people count the date of the month as how to blunt a month, so 24 th to 24 th would have been 2 months.

And ironicaly the entire thing become moot no later than 1-24 lol.

[TLTay]

5 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

Won't it be in alpha until it leaves early access since it's not "feature-complete" until it's "done?"

I built a new top-shelf PC for KSP not long before KSP2 announce (8700K @5.2ghz, 2080ti, etc) and it'll be time to build a new one/upgrade by the time this game goes 1.0... yowch.

[The Aziz]

Yes, probably.

But then alpha now and alpha a day before beta/1.0 can look very different.

[Strawberry]

4 hours ago, Deddly said:

I recall that they did say they weren't going to overhaul the aerodynamic model, but that was a long time ago. Who knows... maybe some of the delay was to implement a more realistic system. I'm not counting on it though 

I think nate simpson said so in the recent pc gamer engine, tbh it wouldnt be ksp if you couldnt make stupid stuff like this fly. 

[TLTay]

8 minutes ago, Strawberry said:

I think nate simpson said so in the recent pc gamer engine, tbh it wouldnt be ksp if you couldnt make stupid stuff like this fly. 

Hopefully the FAR developer will take interest in KSP2...

[Deddly]

25 minutes ago, Strawberry said:

tbh it wouldnt be ksp if you couldnt make stupid stuff like this fly. 

I never tried FAR but there used to be a thread dedicated to proving that this common notion isn't really true.  @tetrydstook craft submissions and usually got the oddest things working with very few tweaks. I think it was this one:

 

Edited December 26, 2022 by Deddly

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

7 hours ago, GoldForest said:

 

 

Two new tweets from the KSP Twitter about KSP 2!

I like how no one is talking about the important stuff, like the clouds, grass or light on the runway 

SMH 

[Superfluous J]

The idea that something not shaped like a plane cannot fly is a very odd one to have in a game where we make long pointy tubes with no wings fly.

EVERYTHING will fly if you put enough thrust behind it in the right place.

Edited December 26, 2022 by Superfluous J

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

(yeah, I know there are trees - but we've already discussed trees) 

[Deddly]

1 minute ago, Superfluous J said:

EVERYTHING will fly

There was even this one crazy guy who strapped some wings and wheels onto an asteroid and glided it down for a perfect touchdown on Kerbin 

[Superfluous J]

Just now, Deddly said:

There was even this one crazy guy who strapped some wings and wheels onto an asteroid and glided it down for a perfect touchdown on Kerbin 

Haha and he didn't even have ANY thrust!

Granted that was pre-1.0 when the atmosphere was ... let's just say even less realistic than it is now.

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, TLTay said:

6 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

Expand  

Won't it be in alpha until it leaves early access since it's not "feature-complete" until it's "done?"

I built a new top-shelf PC for KSP not long before KSP2 announce (8700K @5.2ghz, 2080ti, etc) and it'll be time to build a new one/upgrade by the time this game goes 1.0... yowch.

I quoted it because it's not spelled correctly lol

5 hours ago, Deddly said:

I recall that they did say they weren't going to overhaul the aerodynamic model, but that was a long time ago. Who knows... maybe some of the delay was to implement a more realistic system. I'm not counting on it though 

It'd be weird to skip an aero overhaul. Who am I kidding? Why overhaul aero? It's not like aircraft and mid-launch rockets have to travel through a substance that exerts aerodynamic forces...  /s

Point is that not overhauling the aerodynamics to use a system that reacts to the actual shape of the craft, even though KSP modders did it back when KSP was in its alpha stage, would be a very silly and perhaps even embarrassing mistake when designing a game based on the physics of crafts that have to be optimized for atmospheric travel. With a new codebase and a team of experts building a game like this, having blatantly broken systems in place like KSP 1 would be a turnoff when it's clear they're going to the effort of optimizing the rest of the game.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

weird to skip an aero overhaul

I find it hard to believe that with a whole new engine that the aero is copypasta.  It may not be significantly more complex than KSP was but it does not have to be super complicated (cross winds, vortices, etc) to be improved over the original. 

I doubt it very much that many players want an aero redux so complete that they often have to deal with weather as a go-no go criterion for launches. 

[Bej Kerman]

10 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I doubt it very much that many players want an aero redux so complete that they often have to deal with weather as a go-no go criterion for launches.

Did I say that, though?

If a new game where aerodynamics is half of what's keeping you on the ground doesn't improve its aerodynamics to be at least on the same level as a mod that's nearly as old as KSP itself, then that's just embarrassing. I find it hard to believe that "just a tiny bit more complex than KSP 1" is really a bar that's being set.

[Deddly]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

It'd be weird to skip an aero overhaul.

I don't disagree. I  would love to be forced to learn about trans-sonic, supersonic  and hypersonic aerodynamics. I think it would be fascinating. But indications so far is that we won't be getting it. Sorry to pour water on the hype train boiler

[Bej Kerman]

5 minutes ago, Deddly said:

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

It'd be weird to skip an aero overhaul.

I don't disagree. I  would love to be forced to learn about trans-sonic, supersonic  and hypersonic aerodynamics. I think it would be fascinating. But indications so far is that we won't be getting it. Sorry to pour water on the hype train boiler

I know

Doesn't mean I can't keep telling Nate et al that it's ridiculous in aerospace simulation to treat aerodynamic forces like stuff to throw on the backburner.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

23 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Did I say that, though

Nope 

 

5 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Doesn't mean I can't keep telling Nate et al that it's ridiculous in aerospace simulation to treat aerodynamic forces like stuff to throw on the backburner

Yup

[TLTay]

59 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I know

Doesn't mean I can't keep telling Nate et al that it's ridiculous in aerospace simulation to treat aerodynamic forces like stuff to throw on the backburner.

I'm gathering that a LOT of players never even go orbital, but just plug around on the ground or with planes. They do not want to make it hard for little Timmy to build some comically unrealistic aircraft. They don't want little Timmy's parents refunding the game "cause it's too hard." I get it, but at least give us a more challenging option? A multi-billion dollar publisher should be able to give us better aero than one guy on his free time can...

[Minmus Taster]

I'm either Johnwin or Mitbles depending on how destructive I'm feeling.

[Rutabaga22]

I would, but twitter image compression is AAAAAAAAAAAa

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

'They' is getting annoying. 

 

Would be less annoying if some were not 'they'.  It is okay to have a 'he' like Jeb and a 'she' like Val.  If Mitbles Kerman really prefers to be a 'they' I will respect that. 

Please stop with the over use of 'they'. 

 

It smacks of corporate dishonesty and pandering. 

Edit (please see my follow up response below for clarity)  

Edited December 27, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[MechBFP]

Just now, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

'They' is getting annoying. 

 

Would be less annoying if some were not 'they'.  It is okay to have a 'he' like Jeb and a 'she' like Val. 

Please stop with the over use of 'they'. 

 

It smacks of corporate dishonesty and pandering. 

It's okay to have all 3. If you find being polite as being dishonest and pandering, well that is unfortunate.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

15 minutes ago, MechBFP said:

It's okay to have all 3. If you find being polite as being dishonest and pandering, well that is unfortunate.

You misread me.  I agree with all 3.  All 3 should be used as to not leave anyone out.  However - every pronoun that has been used in the last month is 'they'.  'They' is not inclusive to those who don't identify as 'they'. 

(Excluding 2 of 3 is neither polite nor honest) 

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli