KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.

[Spicat]

34 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

So, they have this seemingly inefficient system that doesn't scale well with partcounts, they're really trying to stop us from lego-ing solutions to certain stuff like we would in KSP1, and they also have a clear aversion to tell us the partcounts they're aiming for...

The parts count they are aiming for are "things from the trailer". I will let you build your opinion from there.

[Stephensan]

7 minutes ago, Spicat said:

The parts count they are aiming for are "things from the trailer". I will let you build your opinion from there.

which trailer, the annoucement or the release?

 

that big ol build that they show near jool is mind boggling huge but doesn't have a lot of parts.. the thing in that build that will kill the fps is the structural pipes

 

they had like two small ssto looking machines,  that seems to have around 29-32 parts from reference earlier in the video.

 

and around 144 parts that i can see, without the extra beams that are way smaller if i have to take a guess with the beams, shoot looking for "double thickness areas" about 15 parts each side so like 204 parts without anything extra from a rough estimate.

 

 

here is a 334 part ship, the things that take up the most parts, 

• Struts
• Non Modular Solar Panels
• Structural frame(s)
• Lights
• wheels/gear

say what you will..

[PDCWolf]

39 minutes ago, Spicat said:

The parts count they are aiming for are "things from the trailer". I will let you build your opinion from there.

I know what I think, I'd like to see other opinions, and maybe some speculation on how to make that save stuff scalable? Of course, I no longer expect the devs to tell us anything useful at any point bar K.E.R.B and patchnotes.

[The Aziz]

The big doesn't necessarily mean lots of parts, because the parts are also big.

[Dakitess]

10 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

Speaking of skepticism, I've been doing a bit of a deeper examination than I usually do. The following is entirely speculative, wildly so even.

You know how people talk about whether they ever mentioned 1000+ parts ships and such... Of course the reality is they've never mentioned any number, only hints here and there. We don't know the part budget they have in mind and they refuse to put a number on it, so speculation is sure to come up. Now, if you go around the bug report subforum, you'll see this new one (which I recommend you upvote as it's pretty critical IMO):

I... couldn't really think of that as a bug, maybe inefficient or hard to scale, but not a bug: we want colonies, orbital shipyards, miners, processors, thrusting vessels and such to work whilst we're away, we also want the heat system and to work whilst vessels are unloaded... At the same time we don't have any effective way to differentiate which vessels shouldn't be part of this system: Heat buildup and such could take a really long time, so just assuming equilibrium doesn't work, thus all vessels should remain simulated. Almost any vessel could be used to thrust whilst in warp, so all of those should be part of the simulation as well. Lastly we definitely want colonies and shipyards with their logistic lines working (we know there'll be a proof of concept system so logistic journeys don't load yet another vessel in the simulation).

Of course there's a lot of simplification to be made: Colonies can extract to an abstract pool of resources to not account for individual tanks (unlike ships), craft in equilibrium and unloaded can probably ignore the whole heating system, and probably a lot more that I'm missing, so the system can be reduced a bit. But still, the system is not really scalable as more craft are added... and I can't imagine how multiplayer handles it (if it even attempts to at all).

Then I remembered the stuff that has been shown the whole way about colonies and interstellar, and the stuff said on the interviews about those topics. Everything hints to monolithic "One big part for a lot of stuff" pieces being the norm. Plus now procedural parts help cut down some of the main part-count wasters like wings and radiators, like this single ring part transforms like 40 into one:

So, they have this seemingly inefficient system that doesn't scale well with partcounts, they're really trying to stop us from lego-ing solutions to certain stuff like we would in KSP1, and they also have a clear aversion to tell us the partcounts they're aiming for...

Once again my nose picks up a sour smell.

This is sooooooo opposite to what make the charm and the interest of KSP1... I would really hate it to generalize some "big assembly" part just to cheat on Part Count while limiting us a lot about personal construction, crazy contraption, etc, everything that make craft in KSP1 so unic and personnal.

Gimme engine, hinge, free weel, gimme habitat modules, science ones, etc, I'll make my Lego as we always did.

Theses big assemblies are totally fine in mods. But I don't see them as legitimate at all in Stock, it broke the whole spirit and it'll make crafts looking very much the same

[Alexoff]

The larger the parts, the less wobble!

In general, we are unlikely to get it in the next year, so far there is nowhere to fly with such large habitat modules

[Stephensan]

2 hours ago, Alexoff said:

The larger the parts, the less wobble!

In general, we are unlikely to get it in the next year, so far there is nowhere to fly with such large habitat modules

once they fix wobbling which is still just a single config to fix it all, the problem would be now parts fps degradations that ksp 2 has right now, save become a snail place after 300 parts in the world and just gets progressively worse.

we still need modular with limitations in place via research

• Fuel tanks 
• Solar panels
• structural metal pipe

i can them the big three due to its the biggest use of parts.

[Alexoff]

1 hour ago, Stephensan said:

once they fix wobbling which is still just a single config to fix it all, the problem would be now parts fps degradations that ksp 2 has right now

Now half of the big crafts are struts. No wobbling - no struts - more fps - PROFIT! And I think the game can be significantly optimized if the developers focus not on design (as is happening now in the entire gaming industry), but on engineering tasks.

[Chilkoot]

On 9/2/2023 at 3:00 PM, pk9sp said:

Take your time

Says the guy not paying salaries

[PDCWolf]

On 9/3/2023 at 10:16 AM, Stephensan said:

once they fix wobbling which is still just a single config to fix it all.

We don't know if they plan to use that setting in the config for anything else down the line. It is a workaround for now, but they clearly wanted to reserve the right to do other stuff with that setting. On the other hand, that setting does not remove the springiness of the joints, only "tunes it down" so it's not really a long term fix.

We don't even know if they really want to fix it past a statement on one of the previous K.E.R.B.s that they're "investigating".

[The Aziz]

Lol @ thinking that adding a bunch on zeros to a config line is the ultimate solution for the wobble.

[PDCWolf]

10 hours ago, The Aziz said:

Lol @ thinking that adding a bunch on zeros to a config line is the ultimate solution for the wobble.

Sadly it's the only thing that can be done for now without wasting half your part budget on struts.

[Reusables]

Is ksp2 still alive even

[The Aziz]

As you can see there was a patch few days ago. If you ask for user activity, here 

 

[Spicat]

Or on discord in the #ksp2_screenshots channel where there are a lot of them

Edited September 6, 2023 by Spicat

[Superfluous J]

6 hours ago, Reusables said:

Is ksp2 still alive even

As an inanimate non-object, I doubt it was ever alive.

[Sade]

On 9/1/2023 at 10:49 AM, Mephisto81 said:

KSP2 was released on February 24th 2023. I am glad that the developers have been able to make some progress.
From my outside perspective, performance seems to have improved quite a bit. That is good to see.

Given that only very few studios have been able to turn a critical situation like this around, the chances of long-time success for KSP2 are not the brightest right now from my point of view.

Am I mistaken? Do you think the recent patches have added enough improvements to the game to sway a larger amount of KSP1 veterans and new players to buy the game? Is my prediction wrong?

It pains me to say that I agree

[PDCWolf]

On 9/6/2023 at 2:32 AM, Reusables said:

Is ksp2 still alive even

6 months in, We're at a point where if you don't straight up exist to praise the game, you're recommended to leave the forums and keep waiting.

 

On 9/6/2023 at 3:04 AM, The Aziz said:

As you can see there was a patch few days ago. If you ask for user activity, here 

 

That thread is barely the same 10 people going "This update was so good for rover wheels [and then] Oh yes my rover exploded randomly because the terrain is undrivable, I had fun!", "I opened my game and made a craft, I hope I can play!", "I tried to dock two crafts, now I have a new bug to report", "I launched to orbit and my orbit lines disappeared so I couldn't even reach orbit", "I staged a payload and it disassembled".

That's not people playing, that's people suffering and huffing copium. Probably the worst look you can give the game for prospective customers.

 

 

 

[Chilkoot]

On 9/6/2023 at 1:32 AM, Reusables said:

Is ksp2 still alive even

For now, yes, and while the release pace has slowed quite a bit, there's no evidence that T2 has pulled the plug yet. 

The future is def. uncertain though, as reviews and what we can glean of sales are both pretty disheartening.  Every publisher has a tolerance for losses, and we have yet to see how long T2 will keep financing the Private Division line, who have had some dead-fish releases recently (including this one).

It's also concerning that the CM's appear to be in a bit of a "Baghdad Bob" cycle, though they are constrained in both what they can say and the info they are made privy to, so we can't read much into that.  The stark fact is that everything will be sunshine and roses in public communications until the day we officially hear the opposite.  Really hoping that day never comes, but history has shown that games that get off on the wrong foot with reviews almost never recover, even if they are brought to a great state eventually.  There are exceptions, but KSP's franchise legacy is no guarantee that this game will be one of them.

[Chilkoot]

On 9/6/2023 at 8:01 AM, Superfluous J said:

As an inanimate non-object, I doubt it was ever alive.

Is it an inanimate object though?  Is the story of Beowulf an inanimate object?  I think it's safe to say it's not an independent, living entity, but it's also perhaps less of an "object" than, say, a doorknob or a slab of concrete.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

We're at a point where if you don't straight up exist to praise the game, you're recommended to leave the forums and keep waiting.

Somehow this is actually something I have seen several times already in other games. If the game is in a bad state then there always seems to be a small but very vocal group of players which think that the critisism and negative feedback is bad for the game. So they are telling everyone to leave who is criticising the game to harsh. Devs and CMs like these people because they give them a good feeling and also stop listening to the criticism because listening to the small vocal group of blind fanboys is nicer.

After a while everyone with negative feedback, which is meant to highlight the current problems and to improve the game, will leave and only this very small group of blind fanboys are left. There is no usefull cirisism anymore, but the game is still bad. Devs think the game is rather good and don't understand why nobody plays it. Devs think the game design was the problem and not the actual development.

Game enters maintenance mode.

[Alexoff]

It seems that Mr. "buy another one skyrim" took away a large part of the already small audience of KSP2 ...

[fragtzack]

That StarF**** game makes me think of KSP2 every day. 

Rooting for the KSP2 dev team.

 

[Chilkoot]

2 hours ago, fragtzack said:

That StarF**** game makes me think of KSP2 every day. 

A bit off topic, but it's a ... stellar game (sorry).  Probably as bad of a time sink as KSP 1 was/is.

[Superfluous J]

7 hours ago, Chilkoot said:

Is the story of Beowulf an inanimate object?

Yes