How will you enjoy KSP2?

[danby]

Ksp 2 will be avalible next week!

I think all day what im about to do first. I like the progression of Carrier mode: Start with few parts and progress in the game to unlock new stuff. I was hoping that will be included at lunch. :( 

With all part unlock at the begining, some of you have think to create your own "tech tree" or do you use all parts at first even the most advanced one. 

Happy lunch everyone! 

[Angelo Kerman]

Moved to KSP 2 Discussion.

[Director_Valle]

To me - at first - is about making sure that the core mechanics work. That being said, I plan on continue playing KSP1 until KSP2 matures a little bit (science is early on the roadmap), once enough features get released I’ll fully move to KSP2. In the mean time we are beta testers.

Also, the game‘s system requirements  haven’t been released yet, so I have restrained myself from buying new hardware… might not even run in my current rig.  

[obney kerman]

I'm probably first just going to scroll through everything in the VAB and look at all the new parts, trying out the new building system and reading new descriptions. For a first mission, I'll probably go visit Duna using some of the new nuclear and/or electric engines, or maybe do a Constellation Program stye Mun mission, with a somewhat-accurate replica Orion and Altair. Never did get around to doing the latter in KSP1, so why not now?

[regex]

There's nothing really all that new in the game to change the gameplay up or give  a new experience. I'm still burnt out on somewhere around 2000 hours of modding and playing KSP1, new graphics, UI, and some QOL stuff isn't really that enticing. Even if I buy it I have no idea if I'd actually play it and then there's the whole question of sight-unseen features, and who knows how that's going to play. Shelling out $50 USD for an updated version of what I already have? Still making up my mind.

[WelshSteW]

 

I'm really looking forward to giving rovers a go. Driving looks like it's going to be much better, so I hope it actually is. I'll be dropping rovers around Kerbin, seeing bits of it I haven't bothered looking at before. Same with all the other moons / planets too I guess.

I'm also keen to see what kind of stuff we can build now. A lot of the ships we've seen in the screenshots and videos have looked pretty cool. Also the new painting stuff. How detailed can we get with that?

 

[Royalswissarmyknife]

Going to Dres

[Bej Kerman]

11 hours ago, regex said:

There's nothing really all that new in the game to change the gameplay up or give  a new experience. I'm still burnt out on somewhere around 2000 hours of modding and playing KSP1, new graphics, UI, and some QOL stuff isn't really that enticing. Even if I buy it I have no idea if I'd actually play it and then there's the whole question of sight-unseen features, and who knows how that's going to play. Shelling out $50 USD for an updated version of what I already have? Still making up my mind.

  I'll just drop this here, I've made my point once and don't need to rephrase it

50 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

"Modded KSP does the same thing!"

VAB Workspaces? Physics LOD? Background resource flow? Orbital speed collisions? 

I'm not judging people who won't be getting KSP 2 and will try to make do with what they can cobble KSP 1 into, I'm just saying it's fallacious to say KSP 2 isn't going to be much more than what modded KSP 1 can do. Sorta undermining the half-decade Intercept has spent analysing KSP 1 to figure out what can be done to improve KSP 2. Not directed at you Solar, just something to add onto what you said

Even if KSP 2 runs at 20fps by default and drops to 15fps with massive vessels, it'll be a better start-fps:lag-fps ratio than KSP 1 dropping from 60fps to 10fps because you switched to a massive (not even that massive, just big) vessel once.

 

43 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

Yes! KSP1 evolved into what it was out of a 2D model and a "let's see how far we can take this" approach. For all intends and purposes, what we see next week can be regarded a finished product. Yes, it's early access, and not the final release, yadda, yadda. But also: in about every occasion since the EA announcement, Intercept has stated that it's about gathering feedback, not about rushing an unfinished product to market. There's a lot of claims I think are baseless (see below) but that I will expect. Features are missing, but in its core the game should be close to final potential (barring bugs to fix). Framerate, partcount: what we get is it, I doubt there will be significant improvements in the future. But also: Intercept had the ability to learn from KSP1, so I do expect things to be a whole lot better than what we currently have.

As to the complaints over framerate, pixels and other "I'm concerned" posts: I just have a hard time taking those serious. We haven't seen a lot of the game in its final form, and I don't see value in drawing conclusions from publicity shots (intended for hype) without knowing what their context is. In a week we'll know, and if the embargo lifts indeed on the 20th, we'll know after the weekend.

  

38 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

Without wanting to open that can of worms, but it's similar to the DLC discussion. Knowing that the game runs this out of the box without spending 15 minutes on loading mods, one mod showing weird behavior because another mod clashes with it is worth something too. Not to mention the traditional complaining of Version 1.x has been out for three weeks, why is mod XYZ not updated yet? (or mods being abandoned all together, although The modfather will likely adopt them if they were popular enough).

Aside from what you mentioned — tons of features mods can't all provide — the ability to have all that without mods is something to look forward to.

All this should be considered - the vast list of fundamental changes to the game, the UX, the background processes - not just how the gameplay looks on the surface and all the roadmap features you hoped to be using 3 years ago 

[regex]

2 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

  I'll just drop this here, I've made my point once and don't need to rephrase it

Sure, there's a lot of neat stuff, but where is the new gameplay? Down the road, sight-unseen. So yeah, in terms of gameplay I don't see anything interesting beyond what I already have.

[KSACheese]

I'm going to build my fleet in a sort of "technological" order. I want to start with some subsonic jets and sounding rockets and work my way up to manned missions to the planets. I'm most excited to build some craft based on the X-Plane program :))

[Jarin]

Buying the game now really needs to have the mindset that you're testing an early-access game, with the intent to give feedback - because even more than many EA examples, that's what's happening here. At release, it's not likely to have much at all that isn't already in KSP1. You're not getting new gameplay here, yet (in fact there's significantly less). At best you get to play with a few stock procedural parts and a shinier VAB. I'm right there with anyone not wanting to effectively pay to be part of a QA team. Especially at that price-point.

Long-term? Sure, I expect there will be tons of good reason for people to pick up KSP2. I expect the roadmap will take 10 years, but it is what it is.

Me? Assuming the whole thing doesn't implode on launch day, I'll probably pick it up the week after release to see how the new physics feel, play with the new VAB, then put the game on the shelf 'till the next update.

[Bej Kerman]

20 minutes ago, regex said:

Sure, there's a lot of neat stuff, but where is the new gameplay? Down the road, sight-unseen. So yeah, in terms of gameplay I don't see anything interesting beyond what I already have.

I believe you are really underestimating how important the UX is for gameplay, like really underestimating it (again, Intercept didn't spend 5 years modding KSP 1 - they've rebuilt it, and then some). "where is the new gameplay?" is a secondary issue to "is the existing gameplay held down by an endless array of issues, oversights and poorly designed UX/UI?" KSP 2 is special because you can no longer site malfunctioning mods, a lack of persistent thrust, performance, etc. as a reason you're not using NERVs and ion drives for manned exploration - that's just one instance of something that's considered unimportant but actually has a major impact on gameplay. I'm not judging you for holding out on KSP 2, I'm saying your judgement of KSP 2 could be considered flawed and is focusing on less important things to, say, backend improvements so that resources don't stop existing in the background, or so that the fps you experience while focused on a large vessel isn't that far off from the fps you started with.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Bej Kerman

[Jarin]

6 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I believe you are really underestimating how important the UX is for gameplay, like really underestimating it (again, Intercept didn't spend 5 years modding KSP 1 - they've rebuilt it, and then some). "where is the new gameplay?" is a secondary issue to "is the existing gameplay held down by an endless array of issues, oversights and poorly designed UX/UI?" KSP 2 is special because you can no longer site malfunctioning mods, a lack of persistent thrust, performance, etc. as a reason you're not using NERVs and ion drives for manned exploration - that's just one instance of something that's considered unimportant but actually has a major impact on gameplay. I'm not judging you for holding out on KSP 2, I'm saying your judgement of KSP 2 could be considered flawed and is focusing on less important things to, say, backend improvements so that resources don't stop existing in the background, or so that the fps you experience while focused on a large vessel isn't that far off from the fps you started with.

Bej, your point is taken, but I think you're reaching the point of nitpicking here. The fact is, yeah, there's some new bits, but there's also a lot missing. Time-warp thrust is big, sure, but mods do have that in KSP1. "It's not modded" is useful for stability - I'm all for it! - but if you already put in the work to use those mods, there's nothing new there. No new ships to build, no new missions to plan. Buying KSP2 at EA launch is for two things: feedback-testing, and sightseeing. Nothing game-changing yet that would let someone who played KSP1 into the ground find new things to do. Nobody's saying that KSP2 shouldn't exist, or that the last five years were wasted on nothing (at least, nobody in this thread, there's jerks out there in the interwebs saying all sorts of dumb stuff), but for someone who just wants to play a game? Well, there's probably an hour or two here of looking at it and going "huh, that's neat I guess", at the differences from KSP1, and then nothing. Judging whether that's worth the buy-in right now is going to be a conundrum for lots of folks I suspect.

[Kerbart]

3 minutes ago, Jarin said:

Bej, your point is taken, but I think you're reaching the point of nitpicking here. The fact is, yeah, there's some new bits, but there's also a lot missing.  (...)

There's a couple viewpoints to that, and I guess it's more a matter of opinion and less of who–is–right. Playing style might influence it. If you're the type who likes to tinker with designs and has built everything from giant Antonovs to flapping ornithopthers, this release is huge, and it's likely opening whole new worlds.

But if you're the type who has planted flags on every surface in Career (hard mode, no quicksaves, reverses) and looking for a new challenge then this release will be lacking.

[Profugo Barbatus]

Gonna land on the mun, play around with the new UI, maneuver planner (depends if we have the new burn controls yet or if we gotta wait to interstellar) and build a space station. Or twelve. I doubt I'll leave the Kerbin SOI, its tempting but I'd rather make that a colony mission. And once I've done all that, I'll probably go back to playing Sons of the Forest, since it comes out right before

[Jarin]

5 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

There's a couple viewpoints to that, and I guess it's more a matter of opinion and less of who–is–right. Playing style might influence it. If you're the type who likes to tinker with designs and has built everything from giant Antonovs to flapping ornithopthers, this release is huge, and it's likely opening whole new worlds.

But if you're the type who has planted flags on every surface in Career (hard mode, no quicksaves, reverses) and looking for a new challenge then this release will be lacking.

I will admit, that I did not consider the Kerbal Ornithopter Program market. Finding the edges of the new physics system will undoubtedly provide a lot of content for those folks and I look forward to the youtube videos.

You know, I may just find motivation to re-do my 'maximum speed possible on airbreathing engines' testing...

Edited February 17, 2023 by Jarin

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Jarin said:

Buying the game now really needs to have the mindset that you're testing an early-access game, with the intent to give feedback - because even more than many EA examples, that's what's happening here. At release, it's not likely to have much at all that isn't already in KSP1. You're not getting new gameplay here, yet (in fact there's significantly less). At best you get to play with a few stock procedural parts and a shinier VAB. I'm right there with anyone not wanting to effectively pay to be part of a QA team. Especially at that price-point.

1. If you're not actually spending all your time in game testing possible edge cases and writing multi-page reports with reproduction steps and recording and uploading clear footage of the bugs you found, you're not doing any QA work or valuable testing at all.
   At best you can marginally contribute by leaving on telemetry and automatic crash reports, but you would be still playing. Playing around with prototypes and pre-production software or hardware is not "Beta testing", is just normal playing.
2. You don't need that mindset at all, I've played KSP sandbox long enough to have hit the "Kraken ceiling" years ago, now I want a new sandbox that allows me to go past that, I'm willing to pay 50€ for it, it's nothing compared to the hundreds, if not thousands, hours of gameplay I'm going to get from it, even if all the other features on the roadmap are never delivered.

In, my last big serious save, this one, I did 2 Duna missions, and then used the mother-ship of the second one, refueled in Kerbin's orbit, to move around Eve and Gilly. Recover Valentina coming back from Eve's surface, going to Gilly, while a new, bigger mother-ship was on its test run as the main transfer vessel between Kerbin and Eve. The larger ship was supposed to be used multiple times, and the Duna one certainly more than two. (Quite advanced for an Ornithopter Program, isn't it?)

It all fell apart when everything started to bug out, several times, separate instances, backups and replays of portions of my missions were constantly needed. The challenge wasn't the actual mission, was fighting against KSP's inherent instability. At some point it reminded me of that time I tried to get into Aurora 4x and realized most of the difficulties came from dealing with the"'90s Excel" style of the UI and not from the actual gameplay.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Master39

[Jarin]

Just now, Master39 said:

It all fell apart when everything started to bug out, several times, separate instances, backups and replays of portions of my missions were constantly needed. The challenge wasn't the actual mission, was fighting against KSP's inherent instability.

My hopes wouldn't be sky-high about a first-release early access title having amazing stability, but I'm hoping to be surprised!

[Bej Kerman]

1 minute ago, Master39 said:

Kraken ceiling

Thanks for inventing this bit of terminology. I've wanted a word to describe the thing that keeps players stuck to such unambitious missions like "go plant a flag there and come right back" even when they're capable of such larger missions. KSP's Kraken Ceiling is too low for a game whose free advertisement comes from Mile-Long Ships!

Just now, Jarin said:

My hopes wouldn't be sky-high about a first-release early access title having amazing stability, but I'm hoping to be surprised!

Then again, most EA titles (especially KSP 2) will be more stable than a full space simulator built on a codebase only intended for a 2.5D time killer.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Jarin said:

My hopes wouldn't be sky-high about a first-release early access title having amazing stability, but I'm hoping to be surprised!

It's not about the hopes for KSP2 being sky high, it's more about the different kind of talent and standards employed while writing the base of the  new game.

Where KSP1 had royalty free music, KSP2 has an in-team composer.

Where KSP1 had an inconsistent art style touched by dozens of people with no central direction, KSP2 has a Nertea.

Where KSP1 had "That's youtube, good luck searching for tutorials", KSP2 has actually useful in-game explanation and tutorials.

Bigger budget, a clear plan from the get go (clearer than a single guy messing around with fireworks in 2D and no plan for any orbital mechanic at all to be involved anyway).

Where KSP1 was made by inexperienced people at their first experience at all with game development...

 

Bonus: KSP1 development ended, if KSP2 had bugs I can still hope they'll be fixed, and I'm willing to bet that the "Kraken Ceiling" is going to be a tad higher than KSP1.

[regex]

4 hours ago, Kerbart said:

There's a couple viewpoints to that, and I guess it's more a matter of opinion and less of who–is–right.

Absolutely true. Vanilla KSP doesn't have enough detail to keep me in the VAB fiddling with numbers and playing with exact tank sizes to make the best replica, there's not a lot of depth there for me (compare to RO). Instead I look for gameplay outside the VAB, which includes a lot of stuff I've already done. In sandbox KSP2, just from announced features, I'd say there's maybe twenty hours of gameplay and scenery tops before I'm bored silly. That's not an indictment of the game or team, or me telling anyone not to jump in feet first, it's just the brutal fact that I've sunk so many hours into the previous game and I don't see anything exciting here.

[PakledHostage]

I too worry that KSP2 won't be much more than KSP1 with a bit of eye candy thrown in to encourage people to buy it, but I don't care. I will buy it. I started playing KSP at version 0.9 in 2011 and I stuck with it until the addition of manoeuvre nodes in about version 0.16 several years later took the challenge out of it for me. I had a lot of fun with it during that time, even though it was far from "finished". Now I've got kids and I look forward to playing KSP2 with them. They will enjoy it, even if it's just KSP1 with a bit of eye candy thrown on top.

[SSTO Crasher]

I’m going to wait until in meets my specs and accumulate funds to make modifications to my pc, at the point where colonies are released, I am going to INVADE the entire system, starting with the kerbal system, to mine everything, discover every Easter egg, and find the mystery planet, so by the time interstellar is released, I can instantly get to interstellar travel

[Onoya]

the 24 february, it will be my last day of work before a 1 week long holiday/paid leave, so i'll work the day. On the way back to home, i'll buy some nice food, maybe a beer or too ( a good one, not a crappy bad industrial ), and i'll be back home, to play the game.

I'll play as "normal" i would say, go to orbit, then to Mun and such

[GaussFlux]

Assuming my PC is up to the task I really want to try making some nice stations/fuel depots in LKO and munar orbit,  then I'll probably build a couple spaceplanes and some nuclear electric probes.