At what point do you see yourself "committing" more seriously to KSP2?

[steveman0]

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

The biggest difference is in the orbital mechanics involved in KSP2; Kithack doesn't have to worry about that...yet

And this is the elephant in the room. KSP2 needs to use moving, splitting, and merging frames of reference for compatibility of spatial scales of interstellar distances on temporal scales varying by many orders of magnitude for the simulation while also supporting multiplayer synchronization.  These differences heap a ton of requirements above and beyond what Kithack requires as well as the original KSP where multiplayer wasn't in the mix of all of this. Maybe your experience is just different enough more than mine not to see this in the same light.

My background includes simulation including some real-time work that has taught me a few of the pitfalls of simulation resolution, sim time scales, boundary conditions, and the nuances of network sync that can uterly wreck havoc on the expected performamce of the sim when these all combine. It's a whole lot simpler when you can work in a simple single-res, single frame of reference, simulation space.

[NH4Cl Enthusiast]

2 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Now, if you want to break down what I'm really talking about, let's do that.  Felipe - who was the original author of KSP1, and who coded and released multiple versions in its history during his free time and without really being paid - has put together, once again, a game from scratch where no other space really existed before, and he's doing it with a very small team and very little funding.  KSP2, on the other hand, has a full team of developers, and is backed by one of the largest corporate gaming studios.  So my question, really, is "Why is Felipe able to get code done by himself faster than a full team is capable of".  And, to expand on that, why is he able to do so in a space that didn't really exist when the team at KSP2 has the original on-hand for inspiration but they can't seem to even get beyond the dV or maneuver node bugs?  I mean, they have the original in-house.  They have the first game to go off of.  They have everything sitting right there, but for some reason are refusing to use the old code to help them along.

 

I want to expand on this since it's one of my pet peeves. Let's just take a moment to think of all the problems that KSP2 team doesn't have to solve. The entire craft building system of how to construct rockets and planes out of lego parts, how to display rocket engine stats to players and how to implement staging and how to fine tune the parameters of part weights and Kerbin's size so that it's accessible to players and works with Unity. The orbital map view, the entire system of how to make orbital navigation into a game that's easy(ish) to understand and how to mesh it with the 3rd person physics gameplay. How the maneuver nodes work in conjunction with the navball. How the orbital and surface orientations shift while in flight. Not to mention all the math that goes into scaling the simulation to the solar system. The list just goes on. Where KSP really smashed it was how it managed to make all of this into a game. It's honestly mind boggling how difficult this would be to design from scratch. 

All of this was handed on a silver platter. That's why it irks me when people keep using the complexity as an excuse. Yes KSP is complex and while it's not a simple task, all they are doing right now is just basically porting KSP1 into a new codebase. It's "just" re-engineering work they're doing. The simple fact that they have a working model which they need to recreate makes things a lot easier.

Edited April 18 by NH4Cl Enthusiast
Mobile editing madness

[NexusHelium]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

In the grand scheme of things, sales numbers, reviews, community sentiment, KSP2 hasn't gotten a pass. It's only people here and on the discord that are ready to give it the pass because either they genuinely like it, or they really feel bad about having spent $50 on it or some other reason...

I'm one of the more positive and optimistic KSP 2 players and even I haven't given it a true pass. I am simply biding my time, waiting for the next stream of updates and massively enjoying the game in the process. 

The only thing keeping me away from the game sometimes are really just two things: rovers (and just wheels in general) and performance. Everything else I have a blast with. But no, I have not given it a "pass" per se.

[Flush Foot]

3 minutes ago, NexusHelium said:

Everything else I have a blast with

You're having fun with the maneuver plan widget? Are you trying to go interplanetary / rendez-vous with vessels in future orbits?

Not saying you can't have fun, just that that one thing is particularly irksome for me.

[NexusHelium]

3 minutes ago, Flush Foot said:

You're having fun with the maneuver plan widget? Are you trying to go interplanetary / rendez-vous with vessels in future orbits?

Not saying you can't have fun, just that that one thing is particularly irksome for me.

I... uh...

...

Fair

I have managed to get interplanetary and have sent at least two things to every planet and moon in the game, but it's mostly because it has been burned in my head exactly how to use the maneuver nodes perfectly and roughly how to eyeball it if I need to but, yes, I would love a precision maneuver planner to make my life that much easier. I don't need it though, and the game is still really enjoyable without it.

I would personally like performance improved a lot first.

Edited April 18 by NexusHelium

[RileyHef]

Some really great thoughts in this thread. I originally made this topic to commiserate with others about my apathy towards the game, but I've actually found some inspiration to play my exploration save again (for the first time since January) and am having some fun! (tldr at the bottom).

While I still have a chunk of tiers 3 and 4 to complete on the tech tree and numerous missions unfinished, I actually have felt most inspired by the Orbital Survey mod to continue playing. My newest goal is to map out the Kerbolar System to the best of my abilities while creating modular orbital stations with capabilities to expand with future parts. Who knows, maybe a current station will become an orbital colony someday? (Big note here, haven't done too much docking pre-0.2.0 and I am terrified of the potential bugs I'll face).

Really glad a few people pointed out the team's verbal commitment of saves being compatible with future updates and milestones - I am really banking on this being true. This has turned my focus from "trying out the new features on For Science!" to "prepping my space program for colonization and eventual interstellar capabilities". The Science Arkive mod has also driven me to complete the tech tree AND save up additional science for eventual colony parts once 0.3 drops. Not to mention many mods  also support  additional science earnings. Yeah, it's a bit of a grind, but provides some reward for creating "imaginary" missions for myself instead of following the official mission structure exclusively. Without the mods I've mentioned (and the many more I use in-game), idk if I'd be playing again at all. But with the enhancements offered by the community I've been having a good time and am planning on keeping busy with tasks in-game that should easily carry me to 0.3. 

As for a lot of the game's shortcomings, I've experienced a few issues but nothing that has completely turned me off yet. I know more problems will come as the scope and complexity of my missions evolve, but I am just not there yet. Other common gripes such as optimization have been non-factors for me - I'm always between 70-110 FPS so far (again, subject to change once complexity of crafts and missions increase). Maneuvers have been okay, and once again mods have really improved my experience with this aspect of KSP2. Overall, the game is very much playable - although it did require some tweaking from mods to maximize that enjoyment. Many, many aspects  of gameplay still make KSP2 feel incomplete and empty for me at times, but I find that it still provides me that novel "wow" factor just as often. I imagine part of that feeling is thanks to never breaking past Kerbal and Duna's  SOI's back in KSP1. Much of the franchise itself still feels new to me and I am sure this feeling is different for the veteran players on the forum. I do feel lucky in that way.

So, tldr - mods and the creation of a plan of preparation for 0.3 have inspired me to play again. I'm eager for the future improvements this game desperately needs, but feeling content with what I have for now.

[stephensmat]

For me, the time when I started investing time in gameplay was the Science Update.

A few mods for Maneuver control and an Alarm Clock, and patience enough to close/reopen the game have taken care of most of my problems with playing this game seriously. It's close to KSP1 parity as it is.

Colonies will be icing, because it's the only thing I wished  I had in KSP1 and never got. I was actually shopping for KSP1 mods to provide Colony Mode when KSP2 launched.

 

 

[Well]

I've invested more time in the game after the For Science update, but I think for most of us it's to discover the new content added. But in fact that just the science mod we have in KSP1 so the game is more interesting and playable yes, but nothing really new, I hope the colonies will change that.

But behind content, to see myself "committing" more seriously to KSP2, i need a more stable game, it's really frustrating to do complex mission in the actual KSP 2.

But I also really feel the need of more gameplay and functionality, to be honest I don't really have any interest about multiplayer so far. But even if we get everything on the road map, that's still a lack of gameplay for me, that feel like KSP1 with mod, and i think i'm not alone to think that ? It's not surprising that some player add a fake "Kerbal Dating Sim" on the road map, yes it's a joke, i'm not even sure that would be a great idea, but that exactly the "fun" the joy of all the stuff and little gameplay that could be added to the game to make a really new game , not just try to match with KSP1

[GGG-GoodGuyGreg]

As someone who only played career and has never touched sandbox in KSP1, I'm still waiting until a milestone update offers new gameplay mechanics that make for a very replayable career worthy of a game that is called "space program" and I hope it'll achieve that with something that isn't offered in KSP1.

Currently even the clunky mechanics in KSP1 offer a "space program" feeling for me, and I still find it interesting to start a new career thanks to the procedurally generated contracts and the need to balance science and funds.

I'm still waiting to see how a believable, better than KSP1, space program can be had without funds, so until those things happen, KSP2 will stay in the single digit playtime for me.

[chefsbrian]

Honestly, no idea at this point. KSP2 has put a sufficiently sour taste into my mouth that its probably going to take some unexpected catalyst to really revive that interest from me. On paper, Resources being integrated into the game could do it, but in practice I'm not so sure.  They would have to be both mechanically well integrated into part cost but also colony operations. While that sounds like an 'Obvious' thing they'll do, it was also considered 'obvious' that they'd overhaul science which didn't come to pass. If base KSP2 doesn't meet expectations then modders might be able to do something about it, but at that point its just a pure gamble as to whether it'll even come to pass. Not do I have confidence at this time that the game is stable enough to even enjoy a protracted playthrough - I'm still subscribed to various KSPTubers, and its pretty rare for me to see something where they don't encounter a mission killing bug, or in recent memory the one who had his entire save file eaten. Resources might just turn out to be a monkeys paw where all it does is bring glaring attention to a new set of issues I didn't experience with my minimal consecutive mission playtime.

I already more or less have to remind myself to pop in once every few weeks or so to see if we've actually gotten any useful communication, so its not like its burning a hole in my mindspace that I'm trying to find ways for the game to fill. At this point, its a failed release in my eyes, and it'll take some mindblowing update or incredible must-play mod widely circulating and being talked about for it to really resurface it to me. 

[steveman0]

5 hours ago, chefsbrian said:

it was also considered 'obvious' that they'd overhaul science which didn't come to pass

I think it was sufficiently overhauled. The one-click use is so much easier to mamage and the new parts and use methods are far more interesting to plan for. I've seen several people express disappointment but no one seems to have a better idea for what it should have been. Were people expecting quick-time events or puzzle minigames for completing science?

The science systems does a very effective job of couraging particular mission builds and to explore the system for new places to run the science. That's the core purpose it was intended to accomplish and it worked substantially better for me than KSP1. I've collected roughly 250k science in KSP2. Never even finished science mode in 1 as it and the career structure were too tedious by comparison.

[Presto200]

7 minutes ago, steveman0 said:

I've seen several people express disappointment but no one seems to have a better idea for what it should have been. Were people expecting quick-time events or puzzle minigames for completing science?

This was my suggestion for a slight rework of Science, I basically said that I think having a 2 click system would be better, right now with 1 button press I think science is less personal, at least in KSP1 even though you had to search your craft for where you put those tiny science modules you got to feel like you're using each of your modules. I suggested having the left side science button open a menu that has a list of all your science parts on your craft(plus Kerbal crew observations) so that you can do them all individually if you want, but also have a "run all" button within this menu in case you don't care about getting to see each science part animation. 

P.S. this is not me trying to put down your comment, I agree that making Science easier (like not having to reset science modules and not having to rememeber where your science data is being stored) is much better than KSP1. I just wanted to share my thoughts that I posted about the topic.

[chefsbrian]

14 minutes ago, steveman0 said:

Were people expecting quick-time events or puzzle minigames for completing science?

Not specifically, what a lot of people were hoping for, asking for, and the development had alluded to, was science moving away from "Go place press button" grind and more towards being a long term activity, for example. The fact it took them a year post-launch to get there only reinforced the expectations that they were doing something different, and why it started to become 'obvious' that we were getting something different. Folks, myself included, were actually willing to accept a science lift n shift of the existing mechanics, but expected that to be something that launched within weeks to a couple months of release, not end of the year.

And that generally summarizes a lot of the sentiment I feel and I've been feeling - The team is taking a huge amount of time to do things, so the expectation is that the thing is new, novel, different or unique. When it delivers as equal to or inferior to the predecessor, confusion and distrust occur. The community keeps being told that there's all this work going into making a thing awesome, and then at the end of it they get what they had before mechanically, but with more bugs and less content to flesh it out.

Edited April 19 by chefsbrian

[steveman0]

2 hours ago, chefsbrian said:

more towards being a long term activity

But... how? We already have science experiments that require time in orbit, or orbits, to capture the science for a biome. Just take that to the extreme? I suppose if they simulated it so that it could work in the background when you are controlling other craft, but how does this change the gameplay outside of encouraging time warp to finish it? This is a notable problem that hasn't been answered. What exactly would be different in this ideal new science scenario?

I already find science gathering to be quite an engaging, long-term activity to the extent that it requires me planning many missions to explore new places. Going places is a large part of exploring the game after all. Pressing the button to register I've done it is a nice conclusion to the efforts of the mission for me.

[Ragnar]

I will be more committed when I can make more than single shot missions.  I need to be able to refuel somewhere.

Additionally on-orbit construction is still a  laborous.  I miss the grappler, and while docking is significantly better than it was a year ago, I still have occasional issues with docked things that won't come apart, not being able to swap control to a ship that is floating away but somehow 'still connected'. 

[ArmchairGravy]

When I don't encounter a glaringly obvious bug within 5 minutes of playing the game. When the UI actually becomes "New and Improved" instead of "New with half the features missing". When science is more than 4 biomes per planet, and is merely pushing a button to collect. When they fix the orbital cameras. When they put the tools needed to play the game in the dang game instead of having modders or websites do that for them.

[Scarecrow71]

59 minutes ago, ArmchairGravy said:

When they fix the orbital cameras.

And when they fix the VAB camera controls.

[MechBFP]

39 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

And when they fix the VAB camera controls.

When they fix the camera

[boolybooly]

With KSP2 I find there are some bugs lurking and rather than get frustrated I give it a try,  report one or two bugs then leave it for the next update.

I am confident it will be fixed I just dont want to get too jaded with it while waiting.

My hope is that when all in your face bugs are fixed and it is ready to play through to interstellar, it will still seem fresh and new!

 

[didkodidko]

When mistakes and mission criticals are not due to bad coding and bugs. 

[epaga]

I played until I unlocked the entire tech tree, and had a blast doing so.

I'll pick it back up whenever the new update hits.

But man, I'll never understand the mindset behind deciding "complete radio silence is better than little bits of info on slow progress"

[regex]

Quote

At what point do you see yourself "committing" more seriously to KSP2?

When there's more to it. I'm so burnt out on KSP1 gameplay and the game really hasn't deviated enough from that core to make it interesting again. To be sure it looks fantastic; I've had a lot of fun flying and driving around Kerbin but there's really no draw beyond that. Plus, the wheel options are literally terrible, they need far more torque or parts to increase torque or new part options (low gear, maybe) so we can climb steeper grades. Also the bugs around driving need to be fixed, the physics reset after 1km has killed too many of my rovers.

Overall I really like the game, bugs aside, but it needs more of its own personality and less "KSP1 but better".

[hjk321]

8 hours ago, regex said:

KSP1 but better

Bold of you to assume it's even reached that point yet.

As for me personally, I shelved it a few weeks ago once I hit the docking bugs when I tried to go interplanetary. That and I just have less time in general these days.

Edited April 24 by hjk321

[regex]

3 hours ago, hjk321 said:

Bold of you to assume it's even reached that point yet.

Keep it in the peanut gallery kid, I'll make my own assessments about the game thank you very much.

[TackleMcClean]

When the following criteria are met:

• Good modding support
• Thriving modding scene for the game, something at least close to the passion found among KSP1 mods
• Game breaking bugs only on a very rare level
• Possibility to build huge vessels with good performance
• Good UI

Now, these criteria make up the basis of my own personal dream for what KSP2 should be so I don't think we'll ever see the game in this state.

If we're playing with hypotheticals for a timeline I'm guessing it will be within 3 to 6 years. But I'm leaning more towards that the game will coexist with KSP1 much similar to what we have today, but with some form of orbital construction possible and accompanying bugs we will be waiting for to be fixed. I can't see how it could go further than that with the current track record and perceived velocity.

I would love to be wrong but I would feel stupid trying to tell myself anything else at this point.