Forget the hype: in a bubble, the KSP 2 cinematic is one of the best game trailers in half a decade

[GeneCash]

You guys should watch the "Build Fly Dream" video that inspired it.

 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

There is no clear target, no story, no constraints, so it's up to the player to set the focus of their game.

Sure, but we're talking here about the devs setting their focus. He can play the way he wants, but the devs can't do everything. One of the biggest problems of KSP1 just before T2 sellout was complete and utter lack of direction. The devs have to focus on something, and exploration is the choice that offers the most value, and most ways to expand. 

Every change breaks someone's workflow. There were people who hated the improved atmosphere model, reentry heating, jet engine changes... Some of those things became difficulty options, but you can't turn the souposphere back on, and tweaking the jets requires modding knowledge. Would you seriously argue that Squad shouldn't have gone ahead with any of those changes? I've been here for a long time, and seen a lot of that, and with every such change, the game has improved.

[Delay]

The Gamescom showcase of the trailer is  more telling. Lots of silence, a bit of laughter (when things went awry) and big applause at the end.

I doubt a lot of people knew what KSP even is, having been confronted with the game for the first time. Even the guy holding the camera didn't get it right away.

[klgraham1013]

I'm just here to leave my support for the anti lolsokerbal side.  I feel we are the minority.  Everything has been said before, so I'll leave it there.  Otherwise, I have to agree, one of the best game trailer I have seen.

[sh1pman]

Am I the only one here who can simultaneously set up colonies with life support and supply chains throughout the Kerbol system, spend DAYS optimizing SSTO drag and ascent profile for maximum fuel efficiency, and at the same time thoroughly enjoy lolsplosions and rapid unplanned disassembly?..

[SolarAdmiral]

The trailer showed what? Two major failures? Three if you count the half second clip of the ship smashing a solar panel. Out of how many successful and fully functioning craft?

 

 

If you're demanding a removal of the lolkerbals aspect, you may be overlooking how lolkerbal the real spacerace got.

 

 

The whole Atlas development

Everything about the Gemini Launch Ejection System

Neil and Buzz nearly being stranded on the moon because one of them kicked and broke the LEM ascent motor ignition fuse on entering the pod and needing to replace it with a metal pen cap. 

Apollo 12 needing to be hacked to convince the computer it was in abort mode so it would ignore abort triggers caused by faulty wiring.

Apollo 13

The Mars lander missing the planet because JPL provided a figure in Imperial and NASA assumed it was metric.

Skylab breaking up over Australia and scattering debris over a national park.

 

 

And on the Soviet side.

All of Voskhod 2. The concept. The design. The multiple failures. The harrowing return of the crew.

The N1 launch failures including the one that destroyed the whole launch facility in one of the largest non nuclear explosions ever.

The Energia launch that failed because it pointed the wrong way due to an accelerometer being mounted upside down. 

Kosmos 954 blowing up with an RTG onboard scattering radioactive debris over hundreds of kilometers of northern Canada. 

 

 

And even recently.

 

The asteroid space probe that failed because no one thought to check if it's harpoon rocket motor's fuel would evaporate in vacuum.

And the Mars lander that failed because one Solar panel failed to open leaving the comm antenna covered.

Space X losing the Booster off the side of their barge. Suspiciously like the trailer even maybe?

And the Russian rocket that blew up with a big nuclear bang.

 

And I left out of course all the failures that ceased to be all lulz because of the tragic loss of life. Less fun when the rockets contain real people and not cute green aliens with no regard for their own mortality.

 

If you think we were any better than total kerbal lols during our own space race you're giving us way to much credit. Name a year that didn't have a kerbal worthy failure in the name of space exploration.

 

The trailer showed three large scale failures out of several dozen competently built and flown ships. If anything, I'd say that's about accurate to our real life track record. 

Edited September 2, 2019 by SolarAdmiral

[Superfluous J]

I find it funny that the only people who I ever see saying any combination of "lol" and "so kerbal" are those saying they hate it. I really think that I'd not encounter the phrase were it not for them.

[Chilkoot]

18 hours ago, Goody1981 said:

Have you seen the original?

Yes I've watched Esau's vid, and to try and be delicate, they are really not much alike at all other than the soundtrack and some atmospheric elements carried forward.  I don't think its fair at all to the director, DP, artists and animators of this trailer to call Esau's work anything other than an inspiration.

Not trying to diminish the 2013 vid, but the two works really are lightyears apart.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Chilkoot

[Goody1981]

27 minutes ago, Chilkoot said:

Yes I've watched Esau's vid, and to try and be delicate, they are really not much alike at all other than the soundtrack and some atmospheric elements carried forward.  I don't think its fair at all to the director, DP, artists and animators of this trailer to call Esau's work anything other than an inspiration.

Not trying to diminish the 2013 vid, but the two works really are lightyears apart.

Blasphemy!!

Haha yeah “inspiration” is probably a better word than “original”. But for one guy, cobbling together bits of game footage, editing it themselves, compared to a team from a big studio with thousands of $$$ of funding - it’s impressive. But as you said you’re not taking away from the vid.

Except...

32 minutes ago, Chilkoot said:

other than the soundtrack

...the music IS the video (:p love that track)

[The Aziz]

What @SolarAdmiral said

Some people here: space exploration is serious, no place to laughs

SpaceX: https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ

there is a place for booms and laughs, and always will be.

No, seriously, if you want serious, get Orbiter Sim or Spaceengine (it had spaceships to control I think)

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

And if gratitious explosions are central to your "Kerbal" experience, something tells me you haven't gotten very far in the game, or learned much from it.

I've built spaceports on Laythe and Duna, done crewed return missions to Eve, sent probes to Moho, and made a non-ISRU fully reusable crewed mission to the surface of Tylo. I've built SSTOs capable of lofting up to 100 ton payloads to orbit. I've set up commsat constellations using resonant orbits to support probe missions. I've also written tutorials on design of VTOL craft (before Breaking Ground) and helicopters (after Breaking Ground). Don't you dare make assumptions on how far I've gotten or what I have or haven't learned. 

[kerbiloid]

"Kerbal Space Program: Unexplode Your Base!"

[Technical Ben]

On 9/1/2019 at 9:15 AM, The Aziz said:

There were only few trailers that gave me goosebumps, this is one of them.

Goosebumps? Even the indestructible Scott Manley said it brought tears to his eyes!

[kerbiloid]

"Kerbal Space Program: Stop exploding! Start exploring!"

[Chilkoot]

On 9/1/2019 at 5:56 AM, Dragon01 said:

It would be perfect, had it not been for the "lolsokerbal" moments with everything collapsing and exploding. Would have worked much better with a pure "triumphant explorers" theme.

Been thinking about this element of the cinematic quite a bit.

Many of the more recent KSP cinematics have turned me off due to the way they portray Kerbals as blundering, happenstance explorers, where in the game they are a relentless, intrepid race constantly pushing their boundaries with "just one more booster", frequently at the expense of reasonable judgement - but the mission goes on.

I think this video captures both sides of Kerbal mentality, without over-blowing the failure aspects too much.  Any gripping cinematic needs *some* element of comic relief for emotional contrast, and the director leveraged some decidedly Kerbal moments to do just that - the crashes are kind of on double duty as both a narrative mechanic and lending 'Kerbalesque' familiarity at the same time.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Chilkoot

[Concodroid]

On 9/1/2019 at 8:25 AM, Dragon01 said:

Yes, exactly. Get rid of stupidity and replace it with more sensible stats.

This is Kerbal space program, not Human Space Simulator. The only reason Kerbal is still around is because of the Kerbals, the cute guys screaming in the corner of your screen. If we remove them, the game is just a glitchy space simulator, and if you crash a rocket, who cares?

 

Scott even said so. 

I mean if you wanted a genuine space simulator and found the Kerbals annoying and stuff, I don't blame you. There'll be mods for that (or mod, as with KSP, there was like only one mod that removed the Kerbals), but you represent a very small percent of Kerbal players. For this game to sell and even exist we need the fun part of it.

 

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I do danny2462 stuff all the time too. It's just that I understand what dragon01's trying to say.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Concodroid

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, Concodroid said:

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I do danny2462 stuff all the time too. It's just that I understand what dragon01's trying to say.

You do not. I didn't say to get rid of Kerbals. I want to give them proper credit as brave space explorers that they are. That means cutting down on the "stupidity" and junkyard references, and replacing it with something more fitting. In the actual gameplay, Kerbals are very good engineers, pilots and scientists. They're more cavalier about space exploration than humans, but that's about it. It's bravery, not recklessness. Another thing, which everyone seems to have missed, is that the stat and experience system needs an overhaul anyway, if it is to have an actual impact on the game instead of just being a silly joke and a hassle, respectively. I clearly implied stupidity should be removed and replaced with multiple stats. 

Besides, they may be a bit goofy, and the cute design certainly helps draw in young players, but Kerbals are not what the game is about. Rockets are. If you got rid of Kerbals, you'd still have a rather unique, highly moddable rocket simulator. Simple Rockets 2 is a moderate success, despite not having any sort of Kerbals. The little green guys helped with marketing, but their actual in-game role is somewhat marginal (hopefully KSP2 will correct that).

BTW, a mod to completely change the Kerbals to humans is not forthcoming, despite RSS community having wanted that for a long time. So no, there isn't a mod for that, and the modding community is unlikely to fix it unless KSP2 makes it a lot easier to mod Kerbals. Making character models, with all the animations and so on, is a lot of work.

[Concodroid]

28 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

If you got rid of Kerbals, you'd still have a rather unique, highly moddable rocket simulator. Simple Rockets 2 is a moderate success, despite not having any sort of Kerbals.

Then play Simple Rockets 2, not KSP. KSP is a rocket simulation, yes, but one reason it is far more popular than Simple Rockets is the Kerbals. And the explosions. And rescuing them. If the Kerbals played an important role in marketing, then why complain when the thing that made the popular is used in marketing?

P. S. I did understand what you meant about a more serious space simulator, I just didn't word it correctly. Sorry!

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Concodroid said:

Then play Simple Rockets 2, not KSP. KSP is a rocket simulation, yes, but one reason it is far more popular than Simple Rockets is the Kerbals. And the explosions. And rescuing them. If the Kerbals played an important role in marketing, then why complain when the thing that made the popular is used in marketing?

You once again miss the point. The "lol explosions" marketing does not represent how Kerbals are in the game itself. KSP had moved away from junkyards and gratitious explosions, but nobody told the people who make marketing videos. KSP is a basically serious, but light-hearted science and exploration game, not a silly explosion simulator.

SR2 has less features, and besides, it came after KSP, so it's kind of given it wouldn't be as popular. Kerbals are not the only reason, though just having such a mascot tends to help. 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

You once again miss the point. The "lol explosions" marketing does not represent how Kerbals are in the game itself. KSP had moved away from junkyards and gratitious explosions, but nobody told the people who make marketing videos. KSP is a basically serious, but light-hearted science and exploration game, not a silly explosion simulator.

Is this really the hill you want to die on @Dragon01?

Lots of us, including Star Theory, like the explosions and the occasional silliness. Wouldn't it be more constructive just to let it drop and mod it out if you really hate it?

[MechBFP]

@SolarAdmiral

If there was a “reply of the month” that would have won it. Absolutely on point. 

[Technical Ben]

3 minutes ago, Brikoleur said:

Is this really the hill you want to die on @Dragon01?

Lots of us, including Star Theory, like the explosions and the occasional silliness. Wouldn't it be more constructive just to let it drop and mod it out if you really hate it?

They are aiming for realistic explosions. *Realistic* and dynamic explosions. Who complains of that?! XD

[Kerbart]

On 9/1/2019 at 6:47 AM, Dragon01 said:

The problem is not failures, but gratitious comedy and things falling apart for no reason. No, things constantly blowing up has no place in a KSP trailer, because it's not the point of the game. KSP is about exploration, not explosions. KSP should really ditch the "LOL explosions" image once and for all. 

Don't forget the audacity to charge $60 for it, instead of handing it out for free.

Yes, that is relevant.

You see, in the end, KSP(2) is a commercial venture. That 30+ head team on Star Helix, that has been working on the project for two years? They all get paid. Because if they don't, they're no showing up and there will not be a game. So in the end, Private Division needs to sell the game. And advertising and marketing are part of that. Marketing software is all about managing expectations. So we're selling "space." Customers will blast the game in the reviews if it's not what they think it is. Or will not buy it if they don't think it is what it is. You will buy, because you're familiar with it. So really, painting the character of the game (which is what the video does) is not that important to you, and Private Division will care less about how you feel about lolsplotions. Those are not for you. Who it is important to, are the people that have not seen KSP yet. So what is space not?

• Is it Wing Commander, or EVE Online? No, it is not.
• Is it Roller Coaster Tycoon or SimCiyt in space? No, it is not.
• Is it No Mans Sky? Absolutely not
• Is it you-need-a-math-degree space? Nope.

The video makes very clear that this is not about shooting aliens. It's not about racing. What it is about is fun. Humor evokes "fun." You don't need a degree in rocket engineering for this game, look at those bumbling fools! If they can do it, so can you! The message of "lolsplosions" is not that the game is about that. There's enough footage in the clip to show that. The message of it, is that the kind of fun the game pursues is family friendly; not too serious. This is a fun game!

Kerbal Space Program is inspiring and can set directions for older children/young adults. But only if they play the game. Will a "this is a serious simulation about aerospace" message make them interested? Absolutely not. Will this video make them interested in picking up the game? Will they go on a journey of exploration, learn a lot about physics, and spend their time creating and exploring instead of playing a shooting gallery? I can tell you that it's 100% more likely that they do that, then when they never pick up the game.

Yeah, keep the "lolsplotions" in the video.

[Kerbart]

On 9/1/2019 at 5:35 PM, Delay said:

The Gamescom showcase of the trailer is  more telling. Lots of silence, a bit of laughter (when things went awry) and big applause at the end.

I doubt a lot of people knew what KSP even is, having been confronted with the game for the first time. Even the guy holding the camera didn't get it right away.

Excellent find. "please don't let this be another No Mans Sky clone." Who has the illusion that the camera operator (or whoever spoke) was the only one in the audience thinking that?

And then, at 1:10, it was perfectly clear to the audience, that this game isn't that. A bit of humor at the right moment, emphasizes what this game should not be mistaken for (boring, heavy handed, not inspiring).

[Guest]

My problem is that this attitude seems to bring out a crows which tends to resist introducing things into the game that actually try to teach you something, because it makes it less "Kerbal". I was there for 1.0, and remember how much stink was raised over Squad finally fixing the atmosphere model, as well as adding reentry heat. You can't really "mod out" those people, only hope they don't get listened to.

Awesome vistas, space colonies, lego-like rocket building and sci-fi drives should suffice, really. NMS (despite the trainwreck the actual game was) and Space Engineers did not need cartoony sillyness to succeed in the latter case, and make a lot of hype in the former. Neither does KSP. Kerbals, I think, are humorous enough on their own.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Guest