KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.

[Bej Kerman]

On 11/3/2023 at 3:08 PM, PDCWolf said:

So far, KSP2 has failed to evolve on any aspect, other than the atmospheric graphics.

That's objectively wrong. The game handles its assets much differently which is evidenced by the fact that loading times aren't long enough that your resolve to play the game can fizzle out between telling the game to open and seeing the space center (and to some extent, the way parts are coloured and respond to lighting). Engines can burn in warp which is an immediate advantage given that in KSP 1, Better Timewarp and/or Persistent Thrust are prerequisites for ion engines and the NERVA unless you have all the patience of a stray atom in intergalactic space. The UI also doesn't suffer the problem the KSP 1 UI had in terms of layout, that is some jobsworth working at Squad refusing to have the altitude and speed moved closer together from where HarvesteR put them back when KSP 1 had effectively no features (either that, or they seriously didn't see a problem with the layout of the UI for the many years people had to look at it when doing QA). A landing can be done without diverting ones' eyeballs from the navball which would have been impossible if the navball, input gauges and altitude were still scattered haphazardly across the screen. The style might be debatable and the way the UI is rendered is suboptimal, but those are frankly nitpicks compared to the overall layout, which is no longer, to put simply, stupid.

People can keep panicking about the features, but when it comes basic QOL features that Squad deprived us of like persistent thrust, a UI that isn't ridiculous, load times that aren't idiotic and acceptable RAM usage, I'd say it improved a great deal on KSP 1 and delivered the more solid foundation we were waiting for.

[PDCWolf]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

That's objectively wrong. The game handles its assets much differently which is evidenced by the fact that loading times aren't long enough that your resolve to play the game can fizzle out between telling the game to open and seeing the space center (and to some extent, the way parts are coloured and respond to lighting). Engines can burn in warp which is an immediate advantage given that in KSP 1, Better Timewarp and/or Persistent Thrust are prerequisites for ion engines and the NERVA unless you have all the patience of a stray atom in intergalactic space. The UI also doesn't suffer the problem the KSP 1 UI had in terms of layout, that is some jobsworth working at Squad refusing to have the altitude and speed moved closer together from where HarvesteR put them back when KSP 1 had effectively no features (either that, or they seriously didn't see a problem with the layout of the UI for the many years people had to look at it when doing QA). A landing can be done without diverting ones' eyeballs from the navball which would have been impossible if the navball, input gauges and altitude were still scattered haphazardly across the screen. The style might be debatable and the way the UI is rendered is suboptimal, but those are frankly nitpicks compared to the overall layout, which is no longer, to put simply, stupid.

People can keep panicking about the features, but when it comes basic QOL features that Squad deprived us of like persistent thrust, a UI that isn't ridiculous, load times that aren't idiotic and acceptable RAM usage, I'd say it improved a great deal on KSP 1 and delivered the more solid foundation we were waiting for.

Loading times are only barely true if you keep your save clean. As part numbers and saved craft build up, KSP1 manages it so much better (on account of keeping track of less stuff, but still). Engines burning in warp is so far irrelevant, and comes at the cost of save game bloat, and a very hard limit on total parts per save before the game outright stops wanting to load, which is also why we constantly get teased "all in one" parts, like the ones on the science system. Just on that front alone, the game has shot itself in its foot, and it took the registry debacle for them to realize their "design decision" was actually a pretty firm nail on the coffin for the longevity of the game.

Whilst I dislike the altitude at the top in KSP1, just moving that over would mean KSP1 has a better UI than 2 (bar the design language itself). Further than that, since before release, the complaints that the UI is bloated and over-exploded have been almost ubiquitous. Love how they listened to that, as a year later the UI is still filled with useless instrument tapes, and feels more like a 90s website with funny noises than a professional product.

KSP2 is still using the same "load everything in at the start" method that KSP1 used, the only thing missing here is 80% of the game and mods. The "acceptable RAM usage" is just because of that.

[Superfluous J]

12 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's a little obtuse to use "several games" as a description of a game, singular, especially when all these systems are meant to tie into each other.

Nah. Atari was doing it over 40 years ago.

[Vl3d]

6 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

a year later the UI is still filled with useless instrument tapes, and feels more like a 90s website with funny noises than a professional product

I like the UI. The dark NavBall needs better contrast to feel more cheerful, we need a mach meter, a TWR throttle indicator and fine controls for maneuver nodes. Other than this it's good for me.

[EugenPru]

On 11/8/2023 at 6:50 PM, PDCWolf said:

Loading times are only barely true if you keep your save clean. As part numbers and saved craft build up, KSP1 manages it so much better (on account of keeping track of less stuff, but still). Engines burning in warp is so far irrelevant, and comes at the cost of save game bloat, and a very hard limit on total parts per save before the game outright stops wanting to load, which is also why we constantly get teased "all in one" parts, like the ones on the science system. Just on that front alone, the game has shot itself in its foot, and it took the registry debacle for them to realize their "design decision" was actually a pretty firm nail on the coffin for the longevity of the game.

Whilst I dislike the altitude at the top in KSP1, just moving that over would mean KSP1 has a better UI than 2 (bar the design language itself). Further than that, since before release, the complaints that the UI is bloated and over-exploded have been almost ubiquitous. Love how they listened to that, as a year later the UI is still filled with useless instrument tapes, and feels more like a 90s website with funny noises than a professional product.

KSP2 is still using the same "load everything in at the start" method that KSP1 used, the only thing missing here is 80% of the game (snip)" is just because of that.

I'm optimistic that Squad will continue to address these issues and deliver a truly exceptional space simulator.

Edited November 20, 2023 by Gargamel
Fixed quote

[Sans]

Just now, EugenPru said:

I'm optimistic that Squad will continue to address these issues and deliver a truly exceptional space simulator.

My deer Eugen Pru,

Don't you know Squad isn't developing KSP 2 ?

[The Aziz]

Well, they are. At least some of them, now part of Intercept.

[Vl3d]

Watching this video from 4 years ago..

 

[Periple]

9 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Watching this video from 4 years ago..

So what was in it? I'm don't feel like watching 75 minutes of handheld mobile phone video

[Vl3d]

5 minutes ago, Periple said:

So what was in it? I'm don't feel like watching 75 minutes of handheld mobile phone video

You should at least listen to it. Basically the content creators and modders were invited by the devs to see that version of KSP2 which was supposed to come out in 2020. And they saw stuff like this and more:

 

[Vl3d]

Looking back.. I think KSP2 and the dev team will go down in history as the first victims of realistic interstellar travel.. and hopefully also as the first success story.

It's really admirable that Nate and the team managed to keep the ship afloat and the dream alive through so much struggle.

[The Aziz]

Early Access or not, it was always meant to be a long term project. That hasn't changed. Only the apparent pace did.

Edited November 9, 2023 by The Aziz

[Bej Kerman]

12 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

Loading times are only barely true if you keep your save clean. As part numbers and saved craft build up, KSP1 manages it so much better (on account of keeping track of less stuff, but still)

And optimisations will happen so don't consider it a permanent mark against KSP 2.

12 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

Engines burning in warp is so far irrelevant, and comes at the cost of save game bloat, and a very hard limit on total parts per save before the game outright stops wanting to load,

Non sequitur

12 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

Whilst I dislike the altitude at the top in KSP1, just moving that over would mean KSP1 has a better UI than 2 (bar the design language itself).

Nope, the altimeter is the primary example of bad design but the rest of the UI still suffers much the same of nonsensical (and inconsistent) placements.

12 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

Love how they listened to that, as a year later the UI is still filled with useless instrument tapes, and feels more like a 90s website with funny noises than a professional product.

Or maybe features that receive a lot of compliments and little criticism aren't going to be changed to please the critics? The instrument tapes exist for the same reason they exist in real cockpits, and frankly a complaint about "funny noises" in a game about space frogs is a nitpick of the highest order.

12 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

KSP2 is still using the same "load everything in at the start" method that KSP1 used, the only thing missing here is 80% of the game and mods. The "acceptable RAM usage" is just because of that.

Please do explain part models and such loading in when they're created instead of being pulled straight from RAM.

[Vl3d]

This version also has sound:

 

[Vl3d]

50 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Early Access or not, it was always meant to be a long term project. That hasn't changed. Only the apparent pace did.

5-6 years is definitely a long term.

Edited November 9, 2023 by Vl3d

[AtomicTech]

16 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

it comes basic QOL features that Squad deprived us

I would not say that.

I would say that perhaps the engine of the original didn't easily support that and that it's awesome that we get these new QOL additions.

Not everything has to be negative

[PDCWolf]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

And optimisations will happen so don't consider it a permanent mark against KSP 2.

I refuse to judge KSP2 based on the dreams of community members. Heck, it's finally a pretty mainstream opinion even in the forums that it is not reasonable to 100% believe the official statements either. That's 8 months of building trust right there.

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Non sequitur

It'll stop being a non sequitur when people start actually playing the game for real on long term science/exploration saves. But hey, you can talk about future imagined optimizations and I can't talk about a very real issue that's currently  in the game waiting to explode? (did once already, too).

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Nope, the altimeter is the primary example of bad design but the rest of the UI still suffers much the same of nonsensical (and inconsistent) placements.

May I know what you call nonsensical placements? You mean the navball and vital information such as speed right in the center as it exists on almost every plane or spacecraft cockpit? Again, altitude I give to you, that's bad.

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Or maybe features that receive a lot of compliments and little criticism aren't going to be changed to please the critics? The instrument tapes exist for the same reason they exist in real cockpits, and frankly a complaint about "funny noises" in a game about space frogs is a nitpick of the highest order.

I mean, if you're talking from a different timeline, might as well make it clear now, because you seem to live on a completely different reality. Probably born from not leaving the forums, which is a common problem.

Normal cockpits might have a compass, altitude and speed tape, yet again, in real life they know those elements are not there to be pretty, and they should communicate information in a fast, compact and concise way:

• In real life, on a PFD, the speed tape exists to communicate overspeed, selected speed, current speed, and even acceleration. In KSP2 the speed tape does nothing but exist behind the one useful number it shows.
• The compass tape also communicates other elements, like selected heading. In KSP2 the compass tape exists as a huge useless element and the one thing it should communicate is a number which in KSP2 is sitting outside the tape, not even in it.
• An altitude tape shows your current altitude, selected altitude, vertical speed, and in some cases terrain altitude too. In KSP2 you need to hide one number to show the other, and the altitude tape exists only as a background element that does nothing useful.
• In real life, all these elements are presented in a compact way, on a single square screen that doesn't waste any space, yet shows all the useful information without overwhelming the pilot. In KSP2 it looks like someone hit the explode button, with every element taking useless space for no reason.

Here's a real life PFD as an example. It sits centered in your view, so you just look down and see it, and can derive all your information from it. In the worst case, it's on one of two or more screens, but you can select on which to display it.

Just now, AtomicTech said:

I would not say that.

I would say that perhaps the engine of the original didn't easily support that and that it's awesome that we get these new QOL additions.

Not everything has to be negative

It's the same engine, but don't worry, hating on Squad and KSP1 after getting thousands of hours on it is the only cope that has been found to justify KSP2, even though KSP2 is still the worse product of the two.

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

hating on Squad and KSP1 after getting thousands of hours on it is the only cope that has been found to justify KSP2,

Console players have waited literally years for a single update they were promised for KSP 1.

[PDCWolf]

47 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Console players have waited literally years for a single update they were promised for KSP 1.

I'm still waiting for the promised multiplayer for KSP1 as well. Also everyone who got KSP-EDU has probably died in wait as well. I wonder... who took on those obligations after purchasing the franchise? why were those never addressed again?

Hmm...

 

Btw, we're on our way to 9 months... this is still the state of docking:

https://streamable.com/e31wah

 

[Periple]

11 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Btw, we're on our way to 9 months... this is still the state of docking:

https://streamable.com/e31wah

Now you're just being silly!   That's an edge case causing a CTD. It would be nice if you could dock with two ports at the same time but it's hardly surprising that something like that doesn't figure on the QA checklist. 

Edited November 9, 2023 by Periple

[Bej Kerman]

15 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

I'm still waiting for the promised multiplayer for KSP1 as well. Also everyone who got KSP-EDU has probably died in wait as well. I wonder... who took on those obligations after purchasing the franchise?

It's still Squad's fault for trying to put a game fundamentally unfit for console on console, and finding a company that was unable to do this well.

2 hours ago, AtomicTech said:

I would say that perhaps the engine of the original didn't easily support that

The good old double standard.

KSP 2 suffers from flaws -> claim it's a scam and fling excrement

KSP 1 suffers from flaws (+ outright lies about the console edition) -> don't hate the developers, it's the engine's fault!

Squad is perfect in every way and exempt from criticism of its incompetence and prioritisation of rubbish + fireworks over core features 

Edited November 9, 2023 by Bej Kerman
Typo

[Periple]

1 minute ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's still Squad's fault for trying to put a game fundamentally unfit for console on console, and finding a company that was unable to do this well.

Same for multiplayer! Literally anyone with any game development experience would tell you that you simply cannot engineer multiplayer in after the fact, you have to design for it from the start. That SQUAD didn't know this because KSP was their first game is totally understandable, but it was still a big mistake to promise it!

It's also not reasonable to expect that T2/PD would be willing to bankroll effectively a complete rewrite of the game for free.

It still remains to be seen whether and to what extent KSP2 will eventually deliver on the multiplayer promise, but at least ST/IG has taken it into account from the start!

[Bej Kerman]

4 minutes ago, Periple said:

15 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Btw, we're on our way to 9 months... this is still the state of docking:

https://streamable.com/e31wah

Now you're just being silly!   That's an edge case causing a CTD.

Indeed! Might I point out, if you used an edge case to discredit KSP 1, people would get mad (read: double standard). I've played KSP 2 fairly regularly this week, launching big rockets and I've even played with docking. it's a fairly smooth experience - dare I say way smoother than KSP 1 when it comes to low thrust gameplay particularly.

[PDCWolf]

5 minutes ago, Periple said:

Now you're just being silly!   That's an edge case causing a CTD. It would be nice if you could dock with two ports at the same time but it's hardly surprising that something like that doesn't figure on the QA checklist. 

Edge case? damn does reality change. Oh wait, reality didn't change and multiport docking was the common way to build big ships in KSP1 if you didn't want to launch them all assembled [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. It was pretty common in KSP1 before autostrut, plus this was reported month 1 (and not even by me).

I will concede that people have almost no interest in making big ships, as it's either launching them through the slog or having them wobble like wet spaghetti.

Just now, Bej Kerman said:

dare I say way smoother than KSP 1 when it comes to low thrust gameplay particularly.

Ah yes, specially with the SAS wobbling your craft all over and the phantom forces from reaction wheels being huge.

This is no fun if people will outright disguise reality just to have a point.

[Bej Kerman]

1 minute ago, Periple said:

It still remains to be seen whether and to what extent KSP2 will eventually deliver on the multiplayer promise, but at least ST/IG has taken it into account from the start!

Even ignoring the game itself and just reading up on its development, it's way less irritating reading the developers' thoughts and their plans than it was reading up on what Squad was doing with KSP 1. Reading up on Squad's development, it's impossible to not question why they were more bothered with fireworks and textures, than they were with better accommodating low thrust engines (like KSP 2 does now), fixing the holes in the parts list, hell, even extremely easy things like adding one or two more timewarp levels. It's actually stupid that they introduced Jool and Eeloo, and could have easily saved all of us over the years an accumulative tens or hundreds of hours waiting for vessels to sail to the outer parts of the system.