What do you expect from the Science Update?

[Piotrr]

I expect a reason to buy KSP2.

Since the day I learned about roadmap, I knew science will be the breaking point of whether I want it or not. Given the circumstances though, I'm very cautious about it. I will look here and in Discord for what people say about it, and then decide.

Speaking about specific features I'd like to see:

• telescopes (like in Tarsier mod for KSP);
• less biome hunting (when in orbit);
• KerbNet & resource scan incorporated into science (with hooks for future roadmap systems);
• science experiments speciffic to landmarks / easter eggs.

[RocketRockington]

2 hours ago, Klapaucius said:

I actually do not want a story. I like the mystery which allows my imagination to fill in the blanks. Many a pleasant debate has been had in these forums about Kerbal origins, how they survive for years in capsules (I believe they are masters at zoning out) etc.  The developers giving us lighthearted tidbits is all I want.  Anything else is proscriptive and limiting in my view.

Same.  Tbh whatever story is in KSP2, I'm going to pretend isn't in any way canon.  

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

4 hours ago, Piotrr said:

I knew science will be the breaking point of whether I want it or not.

Science was the rework I hoped to see done well.

Based on some stuff I've gleaned from reading between the lines of Nate's post, Science will not be what we are hoping to see as a core feature.

Instead, I suspect the gameplay direction they went with is something similar to Satisfactory (lite) - where you have to fly to a new Celestial Body, use Science equipment to scan for and locate nodes, then you land and start construction of a Colony and begin Resource Extraction and shipping of the exotic fuels to space based VABs to get to the next far off destination (read: unlock engines, parts and tech).

[VlonaldKerman]

On 5/10/2023 at 9:47 AM, Scarecrow71 said:

I'd also like to see long-term experimentation be available, to the degree that you discover more about a location the longer you are there.  For example, say you go to Eve and you do a temperature reading.  Then you do a pressure reading.  After some time, you start to realize that certain pressure readings exist at certain temperature readings, which allows you to now do weather experiments.  After doing so many weather experiments, you start to understand weather patterns and can plan for other experiments that may or may not depend on certain conditions.  Again, a very basic progression/example here, but you should be able to take my meaning.

Kerbalism mod gives long-duration science in KSP 1, but is not integrated with gameplay in any way. This is a good idea in my book. I also like that SCANSat gives you maps you can actually use. 

[Wheehaw Kerman]

23 hours ago, Piotrr said:

I expect a reason to buy KSP2.

Since the day I learned about roadmap, I knew science will be the breaking point of whether I want it or not. Given the circumstances though, I'm very cautious about it. I will look here and in Discord for what people say about it, and then decide.

Speaking about specific features I'd like to see:

• telescopes (like in Tarsier mod for KSP);
• less biome hunting (when in orbit);
• KerbNet & resource scan incorporated into science (with hooks for future roadmap systems);
• science experiments speciffic to landmarks / easter eggs.

Agreed re telescopes.  I’d like total fog of exploration - at first, we only know what we can observe from ground based telescopes (Jool is large and green, Eve is purple, Duna has icecaps), with more knowledge coming with probes, landing, and ground based exploration.

I actually didn’t hate the clicky-grindy KSP1 science, didn’t like the labs, and really liked the deployable science stuff.   I thought KerbNet was great, and wished they’d thought of that first: a scan-based aspect to the science system might work nicely.  Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, I’m thinking of you…

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

59 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Agreed re telescopes.  I’d like total fog of exploration - at first, we only know what we can observe from ground based telescopes (Jool is large and green, Eve is purple, Duna has icecaps), with more knowledge coming with probes, landing, and ground based exploration.

I actually didn’t hate the clicky-grindy KSP1 science, didn’t like the labs, and really liked the deployable science stuff.   I thought KerbNet was great, and wished they’d thought of that first: a scan-based aspect to the science system might work nicely.  Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, I’m thinking of you…

Were you part of the Long-running conversations about what we hoped for from Science last year? 

Many of us had the same hopes you write about. 

Limited initial knowledge of the CBs that grows incrementally via orbital telescopes, visits, scansats, rovers and placeable science among others.  Absolute 'fog of discovery' for each play-through. 

My idea was an ever-growing Kerbilopedia that filled itself out as you gained knowledge - complete with simulated charts and graphs, and data sets.  Something like that would be a cool resource for planning missions (knowledge of gravity / atmospheric content & density added incrementally).  That would be - from a 'introduce new gamers to the wonder of spaceflight and exploration' perspective a fantastic feature for KSP2. 

They never responded to any of it. 

In fact I don't remember any of the 'hype' videos ever being enthusiastic about the Science milestone. 

It's one of the reasons why I suspect the game direction will be Satisfactory-like once Colonies and Resources are implemented.  Science will just give us a few extra payloads and maybe some things to do - but the purpose has to be related to Colony gameplay, which seems to be Resource location. 

How they will tie a Science that looks like this with a progression system remains to be seen. 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Just for an example: they could have fudged up some reports kind of like what you see here from Mercury, as imaged from Messenger.

The player would have built a probe with a spectrometer, the tool tip would have told the player what it was and what it did - and then with the spectrometer in action above a CB - we'd get an image added to the Kerbilopedia page on the CB that looked like this:

If your probe had a magnetometer on board, you'd also get this:

or this

(cribbed from the video, above)

...

 

While I think that would have made for an excellent SP experience and continued the tradition of KSP getting people excited about space and science... it probably did not fit into the whole 'make it multiplayer' thing - which rockets, planes and Colonies likely will.

[Dew169]

As far as science goes, I was hoping that the emphasis would be on exploration.  KSP1 always seemed like the use of landers and rovers in science gathering was lacking clear objectives.  Plus I was hoping to that the deployable science would be expanded to have more experiments, core samples, seismic detectors etc..  Not really thinking that now adding a story with those new anomalies is quite the way to go either..  would rather discover new solar systems with a Kerbalized version of the Hubble or the Webb telescopes.. 

[Wheehaw Kerman]

6 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Were you part of the Long-running conversations about what we hoped for from Science last year? 

Many of us had the same hopes you write about. 

Limited initial knowledge of the CBs that grows incrementally via orbital telescopes, visits, scansats, rovers and placeable science among others.  Absolute 'fog of discovery' for each play-through. 

My idea was an ever-growing Kerbilopedia that filled itself out as you gained knowledge - complete with simulated charts and graphs, and data sets.  Something like that would be a cool resource for planning missions (knowledge of gravity / atmospheric content & density added incrementally).  That would be - from a 'introduce new gamers to the wonder of spaceflight and exploration' perspective a fantastic feature for KSP2. 

They never responded to any of it. 

In fact I don't remember any of the 'hype' videos ever being enthusiastic about the Science milestone. 

It's one of the reasons why I suspect the game direction will be Satisfactory-like once Colonies and Resources are implemented.  Science will just give us a few extra payloads and maybe some things to do - but the purpose has to be related to Colony gameplay, which seems to be Resource location. 

How they will tie a Science that looks like this with a progression system remains to be seen. 

I wasn’t actively involved (I’ve been lurking for years, but only began posting in the leadup to EA), but I did read them with great interest, and remember your Kerbilopedia idea, which I totally stole with my “fog of exploration” idea :).  I love the idea of having no idea of the conditions or geography of the other planets until you yeet a Mariner or Venera past it.  Not knowing what I’m going to find until I get there and what there looks like up close is a big part of why I’m looking forwards to Interstellar.

I’m not a game designer, and I haven’t played Satisfactory, but perhaps, if the game is moving away from a “unlock parts with points model”, it might move to a “parts will unlock depending on what you’ve done and want to do” model - early sounding rockets unlock the next set of parts needed for satellites and Kerbed capsules - much like early Space Race PMs you would pick research direction and over time, with lessons learned with earlier tier parts, next tier parts unlock, at a rate driven by missions accomplished and science collected.   Milestones and mileage could drive progress on the parts of the tech tree instead of gathering and spending  science points on the part packages you want, IOW.  This would involve parts packaged by “what you need to do [type of mission, such as small Duna/Eve flyby]” as opposed to KSP’s “theme pack” approach.  

[Pat20999]

I think it’s going to be like: I guess this is science but I’m here to speedrun the tech tree.

[Superpluto126]

More in Depth Reports from Science done, not just 'You Observe the goo' but what the Goo is doing while we observe it.

Better example: If we use the Thermometer we get the Temperature back, and other Science parts to do the same.

Also for Boat parts in some shape and form, with a proper Buoyancy system.

[herbal space program]

I'd be perfectly fine with a barely implemented placeholder for the first update that rolls out science, so long as they tackle some of the really egregious bugs in the process. Support for a bleepin' game controller and/or joystick would be nice too! Having to fly/drive/EVA with just the keyboard takes a  lot of the fun out of it for me, and I'm kind of shocked that they would release anything that didn't include that kind of basic functionality right off the bat.

[Pat20999]

I just hope that they can have this feature where you can just do all experiments at once and can bring one in or out the list.

[Kerbart]

Based on what is promised and what we got, Science will be exactly the same, with shinier parts. It will still involve grinding away biome after biome to rack up points, and that miraculous ground sample will still unlock that pinnacle of innovation, the ladder.

I had high hopes that things would be radically different, but the initial rlease and the first two patches have taught me to lower my expectations to ground level.

[Pat20999]

The better look of the parts is what I was hoping for, and the idea of sacrifice for the sake of  science.

[stephensmat]

Science Mode was my first serious game in KSP1. I was lost in Sandbox mode, and my first attempt at Story mode failed. Ran out of money too early. Rookie mistakes, I know.

Science mode was a big help, because as I unlocked things, I learned to 'level up', and take greater steps out into space.

Science Mode, if revamped well, *is* the story mode we need. We send probes, find a landing site, send ships. Take samples, run tests, do some prospecting, locate resources, find a good spot for a colony.

The make-or-break point for me is 'Colonies'. It's something I've wanted since I started playing KSP1. If Science mode fills in a dozen steps between first launch and Colony Builders, then Science mode is absolutely worth it.

I still play KSP1 too, and I make my money by farming science points. Since currency isn't a part of this game, my fear is that when we unlock the Tech Tree, there'll be no reason for Science to exist. All those 'steps' that I listed? We may not see them until the Colonies update is implemented.

I have patience, and I know this game is being crafted by megafans. Really, who else would you want running development?

[Stephensan]

for me, its going to be a mess depending on how much of "research" items get implemented tbh

 

due to having resource gathering rather late in the development, with who knows HOW long before it gets added, having science for right now is going to be..

 

Blatantly pretty useless and just more parts for ksp 2 to drop frame rates imho i see no reason to use it, or play it when there is no "benefit" for the progression, like better parts, fuel, colonies, resource gather etc .. I will probably use the parts to make my miniature satellites look more realistic but thats about it..

 

having a about a 100-150 total as of right now is just a killer for fps.. simple rockets, or those missions they want us to do for whatever, i counted the cheapest in parts would be at least 100~ parts in total.

THEN on top of this, having more than like 1 spacecraft PER save just completely kills fps... idk how you can actually play after a while..

 

i had about 400~ parts in total in a save on different planets and, yeah the frame rate is just horrible its almost like EACH vehicle you want to make or test needs to be in there own "little world" to work completely fine.. and that is before anything related to terrain performance issues.. its quite frustrating.

 

12fps with few machines in the world in the hanger vs brand new save that has with the same exact machine in view 70+fps.. and this "scales" to the actual gameplay.. So i really don't know nor understand how we will really be able to test anything in large scales when the game comes to a halt when attempting to..

 

example

 

and this large size, small part count rover is 69 *nice* parts in size, with about 4 parts being considered "extra" in my mind (lights), and you need at least in current game standards about 30-50 parts more to just get into orbit and in kerbins "sphere of influence", now to do the same mission, i expect about 10-20 more parts additional to do science, with some in the interstages getting sciences, and most (majority) being on the rover... and this is a "small" rover in my mind overall. i have one that i had to replicate due to my smooth brain actions, and without colonies or ANYTHING like that, just trying to be semi realistic or make it look good/functional, just kills with parts.. is easily 300+ parts for a SINGLE rover..

 

 

there really isn't much there, but with struts due to ksp 2 needing it for absolutely everything so the kraken doesn't appear, the parts just increase easily by 180 parts extra.. and this is before any science mods or anything, its 45 fps in the building, but it tanks to 15-18 fps in gameplay.. and this is just for the rover itself, who knows how many parts you need to get to just get into a stable kerbin orbit, or landing it safely.

 

and this is a rather bare bones one, there isn't lights everywhere, nor extra fuel tanks besides the "core build"... 8 batterys extra due to not having modular batterys, oh, best part, testing it out to see how much FPS i would get in the game, all the struts are now disconnected..

 

i really don't know or how much science mode will be useful when building anything more than a single build, or a one single larger build put the game at a snails pace, i lose my pactience when it start going below 40fps with high frame times, not only due to motion sickness of not seeing a fluid image, due to the game running slower than "normal speed"..

 

extra time wasted on nothing, and at that point i can just play another game...

 

playing on a low part brand new save, is like having mental fog disappear when playing this game, its like "oh its working at a high fps" and stuff actually happens quickly and feels like a game. For me thats why im saying it will be useless or just not really possible to do "deep into science mode" unless there is jumps and bounds of performance upgrade to frame rate AND frame times, (you can have 100fps but really bad frame times) its going to be pretty useless due to needing to do Min part builds, unless you are a complete masochist and like wasting time due to poor optimization on  100-150 part builds including launch assembly. 

i can deal with bugs, day in and day out, but slower than native gameplay, low frame rates frame time issues, and anything of long term playing making the save unplayable, on a high end system, is just a flat out no.. 

[Pat20999]

I expect ksp2 being fixed before the colonies update.

[stephensmat]

Just now, Pat20999 said:

I expect ksp2 being fixed before the colonies update.

I'd say most/all of the bugs and gamebreakers would be gone. In that event, the Roadmap updates would come a lot faster.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

On 5/4/2023 at 3:59 AM, GGG-GoodGuyGreg said:

My heart and wallet expects a lot, but my brain says it most likely will be a placeholder of things to come, I think one or few parts of science gathering from all tiers, and some very early science related mechanics that might wear off fast and won’t immediately bring a lot of players back and keep them playing.

Therefore I think it’s too early in a couple of months for the game to have a miraculous recovery, so we’re still in for some suspense.

I expect things to be the basics of something a bit different from KSP1 science.  We’ll mess around with it, give feedback, the devs will fine tune it, and by 1.0 it’ll be better developed, deeper, and more fun than KSP1 science.

[Pat20999]

I just want us to not have to understand the science but just say it’s for science even do we have no idea of what it is.

[asmi]

On 5/11/2023 at 4:11 AM, Lyneira said:

Rather, to make you think about what reasons humans had to send them, and implore Intercept to apply those reasons to the Kerbals for doing the same.

Do you want to introduce (geo-)politics into KSP2? 

[Periple]

I expect three things basically

One, something that doesn't become irrelevant a third of the way through the tech tree, instead, retaining its challenge and throwing new curve balls at you until much deeper into the game

Two, something that's a lot less rote and grindy than "stick on all the instruments, fly to new biome, click on buttons, transmit/return, rinse and repeat with the new instruments you just unlocked"

Three, something that presents design challenges both for craft and missions in order to accomplish the science goals.

I haven't been playing KSP2 lately because I really need a progression mode -- just putting things together and flying places for its own sake doesn't do it for me. I'll get back into it when the science update drops!

[Lyneira]

13 hours ago, asmi said:

Do you want to introduce (geo-)politics into KSP2? 

A nod to political prestige in the backstory of the game (however it is told) couldn't hurt. We'll have multiplayer, and the different launch sites that will exist would presumably also be used by other space agencies. Prestige was definitely a big driver for the push towards the first human in orbit and the first moon landing.  Which is not to say the game must have AI space agencies to compete against in single player. But acknowledging it as one of the drivers, I see no problem with.

[asmi]

3 hours ago, Lyneira said:

A nod to political prestige in the backstory of the game (however it is told) couldn't hurt. We'll have multiplayer, and the different launch sites that will exist would presumably also be used by other space agencies. Prestige was definitely a big driver for the push towards the first human in orbit and the first moon landing.  Which is not to say the game must have AI space agencies to compete against in single player. But acknowledging it as one of the drivers, I see no problem with.

I think our petty earthly political squabbles have absolutely no place in the game about science.