KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.

[dr.phees]

Additionally: How on Earth did they not start the game in a new stellar / planetary system? Why re-create Kerbol system? Why not use the chance to create a new, unknown system from scratch?

Finding a setting is easy, too: A couple of Kerbals, slung out of Kerbin system by the Kraken, crash landed on a planet, having to develop technology from near-scratch again.

This setting would solve so much:

A new parts catalog, near future tech, because they are starting with full knowledge, just lacking production facilities, having a fresh, unexplored system, having motivation and a first goal for interstellar travel (going home to Kerbin) etc.

Not much creativity needed for this.

[shdwlrd]

5 hours ago, dr.phees said:

Additionally: How on Earth did they not start the game in a new stellar / planetary system? Why re-create Kerbol system? Why not use the chance to create a new, unknown system from scratch?

KSP2 was to start you in the Kerbin system from the beginning. The rational for that was to have something familiar for the veteran players and an "easier" starting place for new players.

It was a conscious choice by the developers. Not because they were lazy or unimaginative, they wanted a familiar starting point for the game.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

52 minutes ago, shdwlrd said:

KSP2 was to start you in the Kerbin system from the beginning

This.  Let me just add that it was to be a mix of old and new - familiar places with known problems to solve (aids in teaching new players) but new things to find... And supposedly improved mechanics to keep the veterans interested / hit all the nostalgia tics. 

Colonies and the Resource management mini game will add new stuff for everyone, but Interstellar may be end game content only the most skilled /dedicated ever see. 

I support this direction... I just wish implementation had been on par with expectations.  Base game mechanics - accurately modeled air and space flight with user created craft should have been way more functional back in February. 

[Scarecrow71]

8 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Interstellar may be end game content only the most skilled /dedicated ever see

Agreed.  Even as a supposed "veteran" of KSP1, there are still things I haven't done.  Like landed on AND taken off from Eve.  Or done a Jool-5.  Or even seen the Mun arch.  Yeah, I know - laugh at me for that last one.  I don't know where it is, and I've asked everyone to not spoil it so I will find it organically.

My point, however, is that there are things in KSP1 some of us vets haven't done.  So interstellar?  Yeah, it might be a while before I hit that one.

[shdwlrd]

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

My point, however, is that there are things in KSP1 some of us vets haven't done.  So interstellar?  Yeah, it might be a while before I hit that one.

Interstellar is going to take awhile for me too. I don't have time I use to. I hope that the game will be stable enough from update to update. I'm tired of having to start a large mission over again because of things breaking.

[Alexoff]

I don't really understand the big point of interstellar travel. It could be new gas giants with a bunch of satellites, the costs for the delta would be about the same. It just takes a lot longer to fly. It would be much better if the planets had something other than a couple of static anomalies. But I have not heard anything like this from the devs.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

Has anybody else noticed that the beach scatter includes some orange starfish, and if so, is it new and when did it come in?

[The Aziz]

I never got anywhere near the beach so..

[Alexoff]

 

[Jimbodiah]

The wobbly joints are actually sold as a feature by this company. Either they are inept at fixing the issue that modders have fixed for years, or they are giving the middle finger to all their customers (who spent money on this big pile of excrement?). You basically got what you deserved if you bought this thing.

[The Aziz]

Yep, I bought what I wanted, an incomplete product.

[Alexoff]

 

[RaBDawG]

I have never been so disappointed in anything in my life.

[PDCWolf]

I wouldn't say unplayable, patch 2 and 3 brought some performance to the table, though sadly by mostly removing visual effects and meshes from the screen instead of proper performance work (there was some, but minimal).

I am, however, of the opinion that they're very slow, and have once again committed the same sin SQUAD did back in the day: trying to hide slow updates under the guise of including and testing more, which has totally been not the case, with obvious regression bugs and barely any new content. Whilst the science update could turn all of that around (depending on time wasted vs how much new content actually comes in), they've certainly eroded any trust of them being able to pull it off.

 

[RocketRockington]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

I am, however, of the opinion that they're very slow, and have once again committed the same sin SQUAD did back in the day: trying to hide slow updates under the guise of including and testing more, which has totally been not the case, with obvious regression bugs and barely any new content.

Squad had 1/4 of the QA team and 5x more working features to test however, with multiple combinations of installed DLC as well.  And they developed new systems for most 4 month update  vs Intercept that hasn't added a single new system to the game (and barely any content).

I don't think comparing the two even comes close.

[stephensmat]

Also, there's a list of over a hundred or so fixes, many of which came from direct player feedback. if they hadn't released it, they'd have a hundred less players on various systems. Just sayin'.

[shdwlrd]

I don't get how some people are saying that KSP2 is completely unplayable. It plays fine, even with a sub spec PC. (The system was built in 2018.) I don't know if some people are so spoiled that anything less than 120fps, 4K is unplayable or some people are so computer illiterate that they don't know how to sterilize and optimize a PC for gaming. Or can it be that I'm from the age of PC gaming where you were lucky to get 30fps on all games. (Both 2d and 3d)

But saying that KSP2 is completely unplayable is a massive lie. The game is completely playable. It may not run the way you like it. Or not have the features that will drive you to play. That's fine. For me, both apply reasons apply. But I wouldn't say the game is unplayable.

(PC specs: AMD Ryzen 2 2700X (moderate OC through Ryzen Master); 16 Gb stock timings (not stable with XMP or modified timings), AsRock B450 Mini ITX main board, Nvidia GTX 1060 6gb, WD black HDD. Running the game at 1080 full screen. (1080p is more CPU intensive than running a game at 1440 or 4k.) Frames looking at the surface is 9-20. Frames looking at anything without a planet in view is 30-75. (Lower side in atmo, higher side in space.) Average craft size of 50 to 150 parts.)

[razark]

If KSP2 is the worst disappointment you've ever faced, you've lived a blessed life.

[razark]

That's awesome.

 

What's it got to do with KSP2, though?

 

Edit:
In response to :

Clarifying due to thread merge.

Edited July 10, 2023 by razark

[RocketRockington]

3 hours ago, stephensmat said:

Also, there's a list of over a hundred or so fixes, many of which came from direct player feedback. if they hadn't released it, they'd have a hundred less players on various systems. Just sayin'.

Counterpoint: Most of those fixes should not have needed player feedback to identify.  They're not matters of preference, 1 in a million occurrences nor a matter of rare, specific machine configurations. 

One reason is that these are bugs thier QA had already identified and are attributes to the community as a form of hype/excuse for launching a shoddy EA years after a full release was meant to be released.

Eg: Oh look how helpful you've been!  We definitely needed to EA this to get this super valuable feedback!  You want working orbits and maneuver nodes?  You want a game that saves properly 100% of the time?  We never would have thought of that, so glad we got you to pay $50 to tell us that!

Or the QA team is ridiculously inefficient.  I think it's the former though.

[Alexoff]

Well, we were promised early access last fall. What do we have here? Compact flight displays, a better system of maneuvers, easier game modding, more interesting planets, bringing in a fairly high quality game core, and much more. Guys, we've got it all, haven't we? But even patches are coming out for the game! Wow!

[Scarecrow71]

8 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

some people are so computer illiterate that they don't know how to sterilize and optimize a PC for gaming.

That is a rather unfair statement.  You are making the assumption that if someone is a computer gamer that they must be a hardware specialist and know the ins and outs of how to overclock their PC to get the best performance, and if they don't know they are computer illiterate.  I'm a software developer by day and am far from computer illiterate.  But I don't know the first thing about fine tuning hardware to get the optimum performance out of it.  I took hardware classes in college, but I have neither the desire nor energy to figure it out.  Not my wheelhouse.  Doesn't make me computer illiterate.

8 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

I don't get how some people are saying that KSP2 is completely unplayable.

Playability isn't just a function of performance.  I won't go into detail on the bugs still in force in the game, but two of them make the game unplayable from my perspective.  Throw in the wobble issue, and I simply don't wish to fight the game just to do core functions that can be done in KSP1.  I shouldn't have to fight the game to play it.  I play games to relax, not try to solve for bugs the devs haven't been able to fix months after release AND that QA somehow let slip through.

[Kerbart]

8 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

But saying that KSP2 is completely unplayable is a massive lie. The game is completely playable. It may not run the way you like it. Or not have the features that will drive you to play. That's fine. For me, both apply reasons apply. But I wouldn't say the game is unplayable.

Performance-wise the game is playable for most. And while some of the most egregious bugs have been addressed, there's still a lot of issues left that make the game quite a challenge. Not deactivating engines before returning to the KSC shouldn't be punished with empty fuel tanks. Engine plates should be useable. Rendez-vous shouldn't be a challenge from both interface and game-playing perspective. I can't rename vessels, the list goes on.

After five months there's a ton of very basic functionality missing that makes it an unpleasant experience. I was ok with the bugs at introduction. Experience from KSP1 taught me that those would be dealt with swiftly. The glacial pace in which a handful of bugs at a time get addressed is absolutely rage inducing.

It's good to see that IG is now recognizing that, while probably good for the mental health and stress-levels for their staff, the "all is well and yay gridfins" style of communicating  is not going over very well with a majority of the customers. We're seeing some more candid updates. But they can't possibly expect their customers to be thrilled about the game right now.

[Scarecrow71]

22 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

The glacial pace in which a handful of bugs at a time get addressed is absolutely rage inducing.

What is especially rage-inducing is that @HarvesteR, and then Squad, were actually quick to deal with bugs, while TT/PD/IG - a far larger entity, by the way - is taking their sweet time as if it's no big deal.  Small guy = fast, while large company = snail's pace.

[OrbitalManeuvers]

For me it's not the quantity of bugs or the release schedule or the appearance of progress/lack of progress ... for me the worrisome part is the nature of the defects that the community has run into just moments after each release. Two examples:

- it took me 15 minutes to build a rocket that would get to orbit, then deorbit, and splashdown. In that time I discovered that the capsule won't hit the ground. 15 minutes.

- it took me 6 seconds to realize that IG or Steam or someone had included a DRM feature in the build.

So what I can conclude from this is:

- IG doesn't (or didn't) test their builds. They upload to Steam and walk away. How hard is it to download the Steam update onto a pristine machine then do a quick binary compare against what you're expecting to be on the player's machine? This is part of software engineering 101.  If you're not gonna do this you might as well just send us builds from developer's machines.

- IG doesn't test the functionality of the game using basic, simple, player-centric testing scenarios. I don't know what they ARE testing, but I now know what they're NOT testing. I realize we will never know the absolute truth about this, but I really wonder if they knew about this  undocked capsule thing before release. It doesn't really matter, as both "yes" and "no" lead to unpleasant enough conclusions.

The fact that both of these had to be found and reported by the community says more than any dev update spin post.