What are you going to do the day KSP2 is released?

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Or be patient and wait for public reviews. I'm not touching KSP2 until there's reviews.

Why? I have the refund option, it works, it's better than  trusting random people, and it let me know if I enjoy the game in a safe manner and without having to wait.

Steam reviews are good in the long term, but terrible at launch.

YouTubers are splitted between people knowing nothing about KSP and people that are dedicated to it and hence have an obvious conflict of interest. 

Professional reviewers that work for big gaming sites? They're basically useless outside 3rd person, story rich, eyecandy focused, AAA titles.

I'll buy it, test it at launch for those 2 hours and if it's not a 100% what I want I'll refund it and wait a couple of months, rinse and repeat until it gets good, if it gets good.

[Dientus]

14 minutes ago, Master39 said:

I'll buy it, test it at launch for those 2 hours and if it's not a 100% what I want I'll refund it and wait a couple of months, rinse and repeat until it gets good, if it gets good.

Curious what your definition of 'good' is in this context of KSP2.

 

[micha]

On launch day, probably nothing that I don't do on any other day.

Then I'll wait until there's a native Linux port.

Then I'll see if it's any good based on the prolific YouTube etc content which will be out by then and applying my own metrics of "good" to that. For example, forced multiplayer will be an immediate and definite hard "no" so my emphasis will be on evaluating the single-player content and how much the game has been dumbed down (if at all) or not.  Yes, I agree with making games more accessible, but only as long as it doesn't impact my own enjoyment of the game. Another big factor for me will be the moddability (and how it can be modded) - I've heard they are working on ways to make modding easier. I'm a coder, so I hope it will remain an option to write actual code for mods.

Then I'll see if my HW can run it acceptably.

And then I'll decide whether or not to buy it.

TL;DR: I won't be in any rush..

[Just Jim]

What am I going to do???

Simple:
 

 

[Missingno200]

1 hour ago, micha said:

... For example, forced multiplayer will be an immediate and definite hard "no" so my emphasis will be on evaluating the single-player content ...

... Another big factor for me will be the moddability (and how it can be modded) - I've heard they are working on ways to make modding easier. I'm a coder, so I hope it will remain an option to write actual code for mods.

Then I'll see if my HW can run it acceptably.

1)Single Player is still emphasized over Multiplayer. In 2019, they still didn't know how they were going to do multiplayer, outside of the testing they've been doing. This implies Single Player was priority one and they were working on Multiplayer as an optional coop experience.

2)Its an API specifically, so it'll probably be no different than Risugami's Modloader, but built in.

3)They're targeting low end specs so this shouldn't be a problem. If it is... maybe you have more than just KSP2 to worry about?

Edited July 12, 2021 by Missingno200

[Guest]

My plans are to stream KSP 2 for people who are anxious about it within the first few hours. And make a lets play that compiles those livestreams. After two weeks i'll make my spoiler videos like "all the new parts" and "all the new planets" if I can... I have ACT soon and that's my main priority for now

I do think I could make it work

[Bej Kerman]

9 hours ago, Master39 said:

trusting random people

Correction: trusting 99% of people.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Dientus said:

Curious what your definition of 'good' is in this context of KSP2.

A better KSP1 than KSP1, balance and progression of new features and endgame tech can be fixed later with updates and mods (and it has to be fixed in KSP1 too if you want to play career or science).

 

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Correction: trusting 99% of people.

99% of people don't write reviews.

On the first 6 months to a year and an half on the Steam reviews you're gonna find only single-issue reviews. "I like the capsule 10/10", "T2 0/10", "I dont like the UI, blue is not my favourite colour refunded 2/10".

And even here people enjoying the game won't be writing or reading the forum for quite a while and this place will turn in the whining office for every small pet-peeve overblown out of proportion.

I don't want to wait for almost a year to have trustworthy reviews, why wait if I can try it and then refund it if I don't like it? 

It's not like I run after every new release, in the last year the only game I bought near to D1 is Jerborne Racing and only because I wanted to support the work BahamutoD is putting into it and VTOL VR. I have some thousands of hours on KSP and I think I'm more prepared to review it for myself than the whole gaming press put together.

Edited July 12, 2021 by Master39

[Dientus]

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

99% of people don't write reviews

I wouldn't be surprised if this weren't too far exaggerated.

 

Yeah the only things I use reviews for is to see patterns in what was said for areas of possible issues. If I see 10+ stating that the UI is unusable, I realize that while I may not find it that way, it's something I should pay attention to and test thoroughly for myself.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Dientus said:

Yeah the only things I use reviews for is to see patterns in what was said for areas of possible issues. If I see 10+ stating that the UI is unusable, I realize that while I may not find it that way, it's something I should pay attention to and test thoroughly for myself.

That is useful after some time, during the launch month if 50 people have UI problems due to some weird and edge-case bug and it works perfectly fine for the rest of, let's say, 10k people playing the game at least 30 of those people are going to write it in a review or on the forums and none of the 10k are going to say anything about the UI. 

Very early user review tend to be filled with that, incompatibilities, pet-pevees and edge-case bugs all around. And that's without counting the "boycott KSP, T2 killed ST" crowd that is going to come back and spam the hell out of every platform they can reach, making even more difficult to find any true review.

Why even bother with that? You either decide to wait 6 months or more for the dust to settle or you're going to buy the game blind to see for yourself and the refund process makes that second option free.

[Kerbart]

11 hours ago, Missingno200 said:

3)They're targeting low end specs so this shouldn't be a problem. If it is... maybe you have more than just KSP2 to worry about?

The HW requirements of 2 will still be significantly more than 1 (which, with the 1.12 update, is now making my PC struggle as well).

When you’re not really into gaming there’s not a lot else to worry about.

The way I see it, is that I’ll likely need new hardware to run 2, and until it hits the street it’ll be relatively unclear what is needed. So I’ll wait for it to hit the streets, wait for feedback from forum and youtube, then decide on the hardware and after that get 2. Until then, just like now, 1 will do just fine.

[Missingno200]

6 hours ago, Kerbart said:

The HW requirements of 2 will still be significantly more than 1 (which, with the 1.12 update, is now making my PC struggle as well).

Okay so I went into an unfocused ramble about how KSP 2 should have the specifications of Doom Eternal, so the tl;dr:KSP 1 is severely unoptimized. Doom Eternal's low settings look fantastic and run on hardware 6 years out of date. KSP 1's minimum specifications are a lie, they should be doubled, which makes them on par with Eternal's minimum specifications. KSP 2 has the chance to do the optimizations that would make it run on the same or very similar hardware to KSP 1 with its new minimum specifications, provided that the team actually does optimization right.

 

I don't actually think this is the case myself. KSP 1 lacks a huge metric load of optimization. It even struggles on my beast of a high end computer(5700 XT, Ryzen 5, 32 GB of RAM.)

To give you an idea of what good optimization can do, Doom Eternal at high end settings looks almost as good as the upcoming KSP 2(subjectively speaking.) There's a lot that game is doing, and it's incredibly clear at this. However, you can still run it on hardware that's 6 years out of date just fine, provided you run it at low settings(which still looks fantastic.)

Now we look back to KSP 1. It misses that margin by a lot. Its minimum specifications should be at least doubled, because I've PLAYED on the minimum specifications in the past, and it is like trying to run Half Life 2 on an Atom processor.  However, if we do that, you will realize that much of the minimum specifications will actually match Doom Eternal's! This means that KSP 1 needs to have a lot of optimization, because there is no reason for Doom Eternal to run smoother than this game. (Before you ask about physics, Doom Eternal may have a much simpler physics engine, but it's also doing more physics body calculations a second, which, as someone who has written a ludicrously primitive physics engine in the past, more than makes up for that gap.)

KSP 2 has the chance to optimize where KSP 1 does not. It will not fall into the same technical debt issues that KSP 1 suffers right now. KSP 2 could easily match the minimum specifications of Doom Eternal, provided that they know what they're doing.

Edited July 12, 2021 by Missingno200