Please add the Option to switch to a Real Solar System without mods in KSP 2

[DStaal]

13 hours ago, kerbalk said:

I didn't mean in KSP 1 i meant like in KSP 2 or a DLC.

I mean I think it'd be a good DLC for KSP2, but shouldn't be in the base game.

[Kerbart]

On 11/5/2019 at 11:25 PM, Incarnation of Chaos said:

I think people are really overblowing the difficulty of balancing these larger systems, the easiest brute-force option is to have a set of config files that are loaded via whatever module manager analogue they've implemented depending on the save settings. You just patch the same set of parts to bring their performance and mass ratios in line with the selected settings, this is what we already do in KSP1 for the most part.

And I think that the wisest words my late father spoke were “Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn’t have to do it himself.”

I’ve seen similar “easiest problem to solve” claims before and they turned out to be not as trivial as claimed. Given the specs of various parts going up and down over the different releases I don’t think the exercise is that easy. 

[Incarnation of Chaos]

2 hours ago, Kerbart said:

And I think that the wisest words my late father spoke were “Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn’t have to do it himself.”

I’ve seen similar “easiest problem to solve” claims before and they turned out to be not as trivial as claimed. Given the specs of various parts going up and down over the different releases I don’t think the exercise is that easy. 

It's not trivial, they would still need to find the balance points for each scale (10X, 3X, RSS) and then implement them as patches. Then make sure any bugs or anomiles are ironed out in QA, while also assuring that the only patches loaded would be the proper ones for a given save.

But i doubt it would be months of development.

[Guest]

I would like KSP2 to have a real solar system option and real astronauts instead of Kerbals, but this could also be mods. Either way I hope there is rss option soon after KSP2 comes out since I just like sandboxing rss. To each their own. 

[Guest]

It would be nice if RSS could be implemented without extra mods, though. Planet and KSC modding should be as easy as adding new parts to the game. RSS would be easy to do then.

[PsychoMuffin]

I would love an option for RSS. It could be like a meanu option when you are starting a new game. Just like how you have Career /Science / Sandbox, you could have a option for Kerbol System or Real Solar System. I want to use this game for education as well, and it would be great if it were a lesson not just on physics, but on our solar system too. As far as balance, this doesn't need to all thought up from thin air. We already have them, because we (humans) have already built them. Just have F-1s and raptors and J-2s and others, per the real world specs. Then it can also be a lesson on our space program. (now, if only reclaiming rockets with helicopters mid-air could be an option...)

And for everyone complaining about mods and switching things out; yeah it's a hassle, which is why KSP really needs to do something like what Factorio did, where all the mods are managed through the game interface, and it logs which mods belong with which saves, and can automatically reload the requisite mods given whatever save you want to load.

[mcwaffles2003]

I think so long as we didnt depend on mods like kopernicus to keep it working, having RSS as a mod still wouldn't be bad

[Guest]

Aside from stock planet modding, a basic mod manager would go a long way towards making it less of a chore. KSP is extremely mod friendly, so it seems like a built in manager would be one of the most basic accommodations for this kind of thing, and not having one is a serious omission (CKAN, while functional for that purpose, is far from perfect and can be troublesome). 

[linuxgurugamer]

Forget a mod manager, I'd  like some standards set for what a mod has to adhere to.  For example, directory structure, standardized way to save configs, etc.

CKAN has gotten a lot better over the years

[LittleBitMore]

KSP2 doesn't need RSS. Mods can handle that. Due to supposed performance increases and moddability increases, this should be super easy to mod into KSP2 in comparison to how RSS modding was for KSP1.

Just think: not very many people are going to want RSS as just some switch to flip. They probably think they want it, especially people who've never tried RSS or even KSP (those people will immediately regret their decision of drastially increasing difficulty, boring tasks, and timewarping), and then say "StarTheory, why did you think it was a good idea to add this stupid switch!?" And then StarTheory will have worked so hard, likely for an extra month, for so little gain.

In this scenario (which, in my mind, is a lot more likely than any other scenario), nobody wins, except for maybe the people who truly like Realism Overhaul. The people who thought RSS was a good idea get bamboozled and never flip the switch or use the DLC again, StarTheory gets yelled at, and the players who weren't involved get one month of KSP2 postponing and therefore less KSP2 time in their lifetime.

And with the KSP2 performance and moddability upgrades, the only thing stopping true realism going onto KSP2 is our laziness to get onto the forums, click a GitHub link, and hit "install" on GitHub. It'd be a lot easier than spending 15 dollars on a DLC, and a lot easier for StarTheory in comparison to a month of extra work, only to be yelled at for postponing the game for a switch not very many people actually like.

I'm pretty sure my stance on this is clear: whatever StarTheory adds, it shouldn't be an RSS option, for their sake and for our sake.

[shdwlrd]

7 hours ago, LittleBitMore said:

KSP2 doesn't need RSS. Mods can handle that. Due to supposed performance increases and moddability increases, this should be super easy to mod into KSP2 in comparison to how RSS modding was for KSP1.

Just think: not very many people are going to want RSS as just some switch to flip. They probably think they want it, especially people who've never tried RSS or even KSP (those people will immediately regret their decision of drastially increasing difficulty, boring tasks, and timewarping), and then say "StarTheory, why did you think it was a good idea to add this stupid switch!?" And then StarTheory will have worked so hard, likely for an extra month, for so little gain.

In this scenario (which, in my mind, is a lot more likely than any other scenario), nobody wins, except for maybe the people who truly like Realism Overhaul. The people who thought RSS was a good idea get bamboozled and never flip the switch or use the DLC again, StarTheory gets yelled at, and the players who weren't involved get one month of KSP2 postponing and therefore less KSP2 time in their lifetime.

And with the KSP2 performance and moddability upgrades, the only thing stopping true realism going onto KSP2 is our laziness to get onto the forums, click a GitHub link, and hit "install" on GitHub. It'd be a lot easier than spending 15 dollars on a DLC, and a lot easier for StarTheory in comparison to a month of extra work, only to be yelled at for postponing the game for a switch not very many people actually like.

I'm pretty sure my stance on this is clear: whatever StarTheory adds, it shouldn't be an RSS option, for their sake and for our sake.

Hear, hear... RSS was out of scope for KSP1, why would it be on the radar for star theory as something for KSP2? Maybe an addon system in the future, that the Kerbals can visit? I can see that. But something to add to the base game as the base system, even as an option. It's so far out of the scope for KSP, it's something that shouldn't be considered before the launch of the game.

If star theory wants to add some of the missing realism gripes, so be it. But RSS has nothing to do with the design scope KSP.

RSS should be a mod only, it shouldn't be an option that few people will try, and even less will continue using. 

[OOM]

RSS is the same eggs, but more. Do you need it ???

 

[Wallygator]

Do it. 

the implementation mechanism can be debated, obviously.

I disagree regarding to reliance of mods on this subject. I think KSP should provide a “base” RSS that can support a wide range of part mods.

you all will likely oppose me, but that’s ok. 

[mcwaffles2003]

7 hours ago, Wallygator said:

Do it. 

the implementation mechanism can be debated, obviously.

I disagree regarding to reliance of mods on this subject. I think KSP should provide a “base” RSS that can support a wide range of part mods.

you all will likely oppose me, but that’s ok. 

If theres no more problems like relying on kopernicus what would be bad about having it made via mod?

If its base game I think it would scare off so many newcomers

[AVaughan]

Well since the base game will supposedly ship with multiple star systems, they could add a stock (or quarter/semi-stock) version of rss to the base game.  That won't satisfy RO/RSS players, but as long as it is easily rescaled (and easy to on move the starting space center), that would do.  But as I said earlier, as long as it is easy to add/change solar systems (including changing the starting planet) then I think that is good enough.  The modders can take it from there.

[Wallygator]

8 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

If theres no more problems like relying on kopernicus what would be bad about having it made via mod?

If its base game I think it would scare off so many newcomers

Fo clarification, my perspective would be that any RSS option conceived fro the base game would entirely optional and perhaps a difficulty setting prior to starting a new game.

It would NOT be a barrier to new players

[Guest]

Let me guess, you're a sandbox player? Because RSS is not just planets. If added to a game otherwise balanced for stock Kerbin, it'll be unplayable. Antenna ranges too short, parts too heavy, contracts expiring too fast, and you can't get enough Science to actually go anywhere. You can't have stock and RSS games play by the same rules. They would have to develop a whole new set of rules for RSS, otherwise it'd feel tacked on, and would require modding to get it playable anyway. Not to mention the sheer amount of work involved in making the artwork for all those planets and moons. 

Star Theory should spend their time developing core systems. Having them implement RSS would be a colossal waste of time and effort. They should make it easy for the community to do so, but stay away from it themselves.

[LittleBitMore]

17 hours ago, Wallygator said:

Fo clarification, my perspective would be that any RSS option conceived fro the base game would entirely optional and perhaps a difficulty setting prior to starting a new game.

It would NOT be a barrier to new players

Not only is the problem player barriers (which I think it wouldn't be if it was a switch, but it would never be used), but Star Theory might delay KSP2 further to accommodate for this entirely different gameplay style: RSS. Bigger, badder parts, huge solar system, better contracts and science.... Even if player barriers wasn't a thing, which it could be, then Star theory would delay KSP2 further. Which I'm 100% sure you really don't want.

[DStaal]

On 1/1/2020 at 5:52 AM, Wallygator said:

Fo clarification, my perspective would be that any RSS option conceived fro the base game would entirely optional and perhaps a difficulty setting prior to starting a new game.

It would NOT be a barrier to new players

Sounds like a DLC setup to me.    If you want it, just install the DLC...

[Wallygator]

On 1/2/2020 at 4:54 AM, LittleBitMore said:

Not only is the problem player barriers (which I think it wouldn't be if it was a switch, but it would never be used), but Star Theory might delay KSP2 further to accommodate for this entirely different gameplay style: RSS. Bigger, badder parts, huge solar system, better contracts and science.... Even if player barriers wasn't a thing, which it could be, then Star theory would delay KSP2 further. Which I'm 100% sure you really don't want.

Cool! So, it's a switch (Or a DLC - thank you @DStaal) so there is no player barrier in this hypothetical scenario

We should likely assume that the switch/DLC includes the necessary parameter changes to parts/contracts/science.

Oh and BTW, your "100% Sure-ness Prediction Capability" is not functioning correctly - see last paragraph...

Now, just for clarity - when you say that the problem is player barriers, and then you say that if it is a switch then it wouldn't be a barrier, but the switch would never be used - are you saying that this solution is actually a barrier if a player chooses not to use it?  This is not a criticism, it's just that I am not following your line of logic.

And also just for clarity - then you state that because of parts, ST would have to delay KSP2 "further". Have any delays been announced? Just curious, because I haven't read anything about that (But I'm not on the forum nearly as much as most, so it might be my fault for not being up to date)

And lastly, for the record, I personally don't care when KSP2 is delivered.  The concept looks great, the gameplay is not defined enough for me to have an opinion and frankly, It looks like the player engagement model is exactly the same as KSP.  In my opinion, ST really need to come up with something that is extra special and therefore my expectation is that they would take the necessary time.

Thank for taking the time to respond my previous post - much appreciated!

[Guest]

I think most of the people against options/features like this are just of the mindset that any additional features that they aren’t personally interested in will mean they will have to wait longer for the game to come out. Which is dumb. The developer should take as long as they want to make the game the best that they can. If that means taking all the most popular mods and making them options/features of KSP2 then great! The more features the better. Take ALLLL the time in the world. 

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, Wallygator said:

And also just for clarity - then you state that because of parts, ST would have to delay KSP2 "further". Have any delays been announced? Just curious, because I haven't read anything about that (But I'm not on the forum nearly as much as most, so it might be my fault for not being up to date)

Yes, there have been. Likely a short one, from the last two weeks of March to sometime in April. There's a thread about it.

28 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said:

I think most of the people against options/features like this are just of the mindset that any additional features that they aren’t personally interested in will mean they will have to wait longer for the game to come out. Which is dumb. The developer should take as long as they want to make the game the best that they can. If that means taking all the most popular mods and making them options/features of KSP2 then great! The more features the better. Take ALLLL the time in the world. 

Actually, that would be really, really idiotic. KSP2 is not Star Citizen, it has neither its funding, its fanbase, or its creator. In fact, were the developers actually foolish enough to implement what you're proposing, the result would, more likely than not, would be a disaster. It's not even any sort of news: http://catb.org/jargon/html/M/Mars.html

It worked that way in the 80s, and it works that way now. Especially for non-indie projects, where the publisher will, at one point, either axe the project or rush a release if you give them too many delays. It's a long established truth in the software world that if you try to implement everything, you'll end up implementing nothing. They should toss anything that gives them trouble, but could be modded in by the community. What KSP2 should be is a stable, efficient, high-performance platform. Artwork is part of it, because it sets the bar for modders to work towards, but it also means it's better to have fewer high quality things than a lot of crappy ones.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

48 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

Yes, there have been. Likely a short one, from the last two weeks of March to sometime in April. There's a thread about it.

Actually, that would be really, really idiotic. KSP2 is not Star Citizen, it has neither its funding, its fanbase, or its creator. In fact, were the developers actually foolish enough to implement what you're proposing, the result would, more likely than not, would be a disaster. It's not even any sort of news: http://catb.org/jargon/html/M/Mars.html

It worked that way in the 80s, and it works that way now. Especially for non-indie projects, where the publisher will, at one point, either axe the project or rush a release if you give them too many delays. It's a long established truth in the software world that if you try to implement everything, you'll end up implementing nothing. They should toss anything that gives them trouble, but could be modded in by the community. What KSP2 should be is a stable, efficient, high-performance platform. Artwork is part of it, because it sets the bar for modders to work towards, but it also means it's better to have fewer high quality things than a lot of crappy ones.

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1JTQBa5QxZCpXrFSkMxmPw

Even the best games run into snags, setbacks and unforeseen complications, and it's rather unlikely Star Theory is in the process of finding additional content to add at the moment. Optimistically they've had about 2 years to work on KSP2; which involves creating the entire game from the ground up on a modern version of unity, completely rewriting the KSP binaries, porting over KSP assets to use in testing. Then once they finished that they likely started working on Planets, Systems and their Physics LOD system. All while implementing a new API for plugins in Lua, consulting with experts and the community for feedback on various topics. This is a marathon run of development, and it likely resembles Bioware during DAI's 18 months of hell.  And unlike Bioware at this time; they have far less staff and cash.

All of this was done in a mad dash to meet the expected deadline, and the rumored delay likely isn't 2K being generous. It's far more likely that Star Theory took a look at their production schedules and realized very quickly that they would need a few months minimum to finish everything, and went to 2K and asked for the needed time. They got weeks instead of months, and that means that anything we've seen that isn't a key feature or pillar of gameplay either hit the cutting room floor already or is close to finalized.

So while i don't doubt that KSP2 will be a fantastic game; i'm not going to mince words here. KSP2 will be the bare minimum product upon release, and will have massive teething issues alongside potentially severe bugs. If KSP2 releases and eventually becomes a fantastic game; it will be BECAUSE of their willingness to pursue deadlines and cut content. Not because they actively sought to add more and more.

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

So while i don't doubt that KSP2 will be a fantastic game...

I’ve seen enough game sequels/successors/ been involved in enough beta tests to know it’s far from guaranteed. It could fail miserably. Deadlines mean nothing if it fails the KSP legacy. It could even turn out to be a cheaply knocked together cash grab like has plagued so many other IPs o_o 

Edited January 4, 2020 by Guest

[Incarnation of Chaos]

3 minutes ago, Dale Christopher said:

I’ve seen enough game sequels/successors/ been involved in enough beta tests to know it’s far from guaranteed. It could fail miserably. Deadlines mean nothing if fails the KSP legacy. It could even turn out to be a cheaply knocked together cash grab like has plagued so many other IPs o_o 

It could; hell i'm downright expecting the community to rip it a new set of crew hatches because of the state it'll be in upon release. And that's me being optimistic mind you; my best case is a barely-functional KSP2 that'll take a minimum of 6 months of patches and likely a major DLC before it actually begins to show it's strengths vs KSP1.

The only reason i feel like though is that we have seen glimpses of their development; we do have some idea that they have a rough game already built and running. They have engaged the community, and tried to be somewhat open. Could that all just be a smokescreen? Totally, but it's more than what previous flops have done at this point in development.

It's also why i don't believe them working on anything but the core game is a good move; deadlines don't mean anything if you spend literal years working on prototypes that get scrapped once management comes around the corner and asks "Where's the game". Once they get it released, and have a decent idea of what the community wants. Then they can decide if pursuing something like this is viable; before that all it'll do is distract from the actual foundational work that needs to be done.