KSP2 Social Posts

[Profugo Barbatus]

5 minutes ago, Astr0Guy5 said:

I fully expect there to be a launch sequence where the tower is moved away from the rocket before a countdown begins, etc.  I think it's reasonable to think this will be the case.

Nah, that'd slow down the pace of gameplay for no real gain. Rocket go boom when you press space bar, that'll never not make you smile, and no reason to put anything between you and it.

[Astr0Guy5]

Just now, Profugo Barbatus said:

Nah, that'd slow down the pace of gameplay for no real gain. Rocket go boom when you press space bar, that'll never not make you smile, and no reason to put anything between you and it.

Nate said they're making launches more interesting so there's no doubt going to be a launch sequence (he might of even used "launch sequence" I just can't find the quote).  I agree with you though and wonder how they'll do a launch sequence for a doomed rocket (if one at all).

[The Aziz]

29 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

The tower may have had cables and stuff connected to whatever ship was there, which detach on launch? Hard to say given we haven't seen a launch.

We have, episode 6.

22 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

If you can attach things to it, it would still be acceptable. But then, to my knowledge, Robotics will not be including (making arms sliding/swinging out of the way a challenge) and if the tower is not accessible in the VAB it will be impossible to do that.

Nothing is impossible if it moves fast enough. And yes I know Saturn V had clamps at the bottom, but those on the tower provided additional stability.

People have been talking about procedural lightning tower, I'm talking about arms that change their length accordingly to the distance from the rocket. No robotics needed, just animation.

Edited February 13, 2023 by The Aziz

[whatsEJstandfor]

Anyone else relieved the Kerbal isn't a translucent lime-Jello green in this screenshot?

[Astr0Guy5]

5 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

We have, episode 6.

Hm.  After watching that launch again, maybe the "launch sequence" will only be a roll-out cinematic and then normal KSP1-style launch.  I guess it'll be fun to find out in 11 days! Hype!

[Profugo Barbatus]

51 minutes ago, Astr0Guy5 said:

Nate said they're making launches more interesting so there's no doubt going to be a launch sequence

I think "Orbital and Extraplanetary Launches" could just as easily qualify as 'More interesting'. There's more to them than flare and show, interesting comes from gameplay too. I would imagine you don't want to take a ship out of the shipyard on full 100% torch drives, unless you consider the colony a consumable launch asset.

[Astr0Guy5]

2 hours ago, Profugo Barbatus said:

I think "Orbital and Extraplanetary Launches" could just as easily qualify as 'More interesting'. There's more to them than flare and show, interesting comes from gameplay too. I would imagine you don't want to take a ship out of the shipyard on full 100% torch drives, unless you consider the colony a consumable launch asset.

For sure, but I was referencing launch cinematics as opposed to gameplay involved in the launch of a craft.  My original point was that there is going to be a launch cinematic that adds significance to the launch (confirmed by Nate).  I was commenting on how the launch tower might be integrated into the cinematic (if at all).

[Superluminal Gremlin]

4 hours ago, Astr0Guy5 said:

where the tower is moved away from the rocket before a countdown begins

Im not so sure. In KSP 1, you could launch whenever you wanted to, admittedly, there was no tower to hinder you. Maybe there might be a button or something, but it might just sit there, maybe with some fuel lines swinging away as soon as you press Z. 

Good idea, but probably not.

[Bej Kerman]

KSP 2 has colonies, and there's no reason the KSC can't just be handled internally as another colony. The launch tower could just be a decorative item you can place and move to your liking.

[Domonian]

Looks fantastic. We got a higher quality version in the discord. Sounds are incredible, Mk2 nose cone (my beloved) makes another scene. Cannot wait to get my hands on those shiny parts and the paint tool. VERY EXCITED!

[Astr0Guy5]

2 posts in one day?!  Man, we are being spoiled around here.

The Vector sound tho! *chef's kiss*

[MARL_Mk1]

I want to point out a small detail that triggered me a tiny little bit: 

When the "bow" separates, the camera focus makes an instant snap to the new CoM of the vehicle, instead of a smooth transition like KSP1 does.

That's a relatively easy thing to fix, but I'd hate to see it on EA release build.

Other than that, this game looks GORGEOUS.

Edited February 14, 2023 by MARL_Mk1

[whatsEJstandfor]

4 minutes ago, MARL_Mk1 said:

When te "bow" separates, the camera focus makes an instant snap to the new CoM of the vehicle, instead of a smooth transition like KSP1 does.

This bugged me too, but tbh I thought it was a cut, meant to hide maybe a stutter when the staging was activated, like happens in KSP1. Maybe that's too cynical, though, and it really is just a camera issue.

[Vl3d]

43 minutes ago, Domonian said:

Looks fantastic. We got a higher quality version in the discord. Sounds are incredible, Mk2 nose cone (my beloved) makes another scene. Cannot wait to get my hands on those shiny parts and the paint tool. VERY EXCITED!

Is that a procedural length tank?!

And I love that the hold-down clamps finally fully retract out of the way.

[Minmus Taster]

1 minute ago, Vl3d said:

Is that a procedural length tank?!

It's probably just 3 or 4 tanks slapped together. You can even see where the textures repeat 

[Domonian]

3 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Is that a procedural length tank?!

It looks like 4 stacked tanks rather than a single one. You can see 4 equally lengthed rails/grab bars(?)  and repeating textures/features.

[Bej Kerman]

3 minutes ago, Domonian said:

It looks like 4 stacked tanks rather than a single one. You can see 4 equally lengthed rails/grab bars(?)  and repeating textures/features.

It's likely it's 4 tanks, but then again repeating model details could just be a preferable alternative to stretching models or easier than stretching parts of the model but keeping others at the same scale so it doesn't warp.

[Stephensan]

also all of them still are avoiding any showing of going past sonic+ plasma etc.

 

still

[Grandhobbit]

I think I’m in love

[The Aziz]

2 minutes ago, Stephensan said:

also all of them still are avoiding any showing of going past sonic+ plasma etc.

 

still

So you can discover it for yourself! Exploration! The whole point of the game!

[Stephensan]

Just now, The Aziz said:

So you can discover it for yourself! Exploration! The whole point of the game!

and i thought it was to have fun smh

[Datau03]

1 hour ago, Domonian said:

Looks fantastic. We got a higher quality version in the discord. Sounds are incredible, Mk2 nose cone (my beloved) makes another scene. Cannot wait to get my hands on those shiny parts and the paint tool. VERY EXCITED!

Also look at these framerates!

[RealKerbal3x]

2 minutes ago, Stephensan said:

also all of them still are avoiding any showing of going past sonic+ plasma etc.

It is worth noting here that KSP1's visual effect rule of 'above ~1000m/s = plasma' isn't technically correct. The plasma you get during re-entry of IRL spacecraft is a result of compression heating, essentially the air in front of the vehicle being unable to move out of the way fast enough and so heating up and ionising through various thermodynamic processes.

During launch a vehicle moves out of the lower atmosphere rather quickly, so by the time it's moving fast enough for serious heating to occur, it's high enough that there's practically no air. Launch vehicles do get some heating, but it's all direct frictional heating between the air and the vehicle's skin, so no plasma is produced. In contrast, a re-entry vehicle continues to accelerate as it falls toward the planet, meaning that by the time the air is dense enough to cause compression heating, it's moving extremely fast.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk  Really though, we get our hands on KSP2 in under 2 weeks now and if they don't show us anything before then, there'll be nothing stopping you from discovering it for yourself on launch day, as Aziz has already said.

[TROPtastic]

On 2/8/2023 at 5:12 PM, xXIndestructibleEVAXx said:

I can't think of a single video game, ever, that has actually volumetric explosions. I'm sure some exist, but I genuinely can't think of any.

I'm pretty sure you're right as far as AAA games are concerned (there may be glorified tech demos out there somewhere with 3D explosions). Even JC3, a game which is built around massive explosions, uses well-blended 2D animations rather than 3D volumetrics. The effects look quite good in motion, so they are appropriately cool and spectacular when you're actually playing the game.

I think there's a temptation to think "2D < 3D, therefore 2D explosions < 3D explosions!" However, we're not living in a post-scarcity world, so ordinary gaming PCs don't have the processing power to simulate 3D explosions in the detail that people expect (to borrow wording from another cool developer). Clever lighting tricks like increasing the brightness and light in a scene for a few frames of an explosion will hide any clipping through the ground while it occurs, while allowing artists to create lots of variation and complexity in a performant way.

As others have said, long-lasting, visually impressive explosions are what's important, and I trust the devs at Intercept to take the best approach for this  

Edited February 15, 2023 by TROPtastic

[xXIndestructibleEVAXx]

7 minutes ago, TROPtastic said:

I'm pretty sure you're right as far as AAA games are concerned (there may be glorified tech demos out there somewhere with 3D explosions). Even JC3, a game which is built around massive explosions, uses well-blended 2D animations rather than 3D volumetrics. The effects look quite good in motion, so they are appropriately cool and spectacular when you're actually playing the game.

I think there's a temptation to think "2D < 3D, therefore 2D explosions < 3D explosions!" However, we're not living in a post-scarcity world, so ordinary gaming PCs don't have the processing power to simulate 3D explosions in the detail that people expect (to borrow wording from another cool developer). Clever lighting tricks like increasing the brightness and light in a scene for a few frames of an explosion will hide any clipping through the ground while it occurs, while allowing artists to create lots of variation and complexity in a performant way.

As others have said, long-lasting, visually impressive explosions are what's important, and I trust the devs at Intercept to take the best approach for this  

I agree with everything you said, except that the explosion video you linked just looks silly, why is it totally overexposed and blinking like a strobe light lol