A hypothetical game that could replace KSP 2 and serve as a "successor", an idea

[NimNimix]

This is a radical idea, and one that would take an insane amount of time and work, one I am not capable of, but some others may be. It could not be too similar due to copyright issues, TakeTwo owns the IP for KSP, but it could be as similar as we are legally allowed to make it. After all you cant copyright the idea of a green gas giant or a purple Venus. What I am suggesting is that some hard working people could get together to make a game that would resemble what KSP 2 could've been, along with features that even KSP 2 wouldn't of had.  

If this game were to be made it should be made for easy mod compatibility, one of the things that made KSP so popular and last so long. I was thinking this hypothetical game could have a "Vulcan-like" planet, similar to the theorized planet closer to the sun than Mercury, but that was proved to not exist. And maybe it could have a Saturn analog too, and our version of Jool having 4 major moons like Jupiter rather than just 3, you can have a Europa like world and Laythe. Perhaps far more veritable difficulty settings enabling far for built in features while allowing people to still choose a more Stock KSP like experience. I have been thinking of this idea for a month or two now, and I there are too many things I've thought up to include in this one post. I want to hear the people's thoughts on such an idea, and perhaps suggestions.

[Lisias]

You know, I have this crazy idea of rebuilding a game engine that could use the assets from the previous games- like the modern Quake and Doom engines do with the original WAD files.

Perhaps the solution would be some Russian or Chinese (or both) team to rebuilt a proper game engine from scratch that could just replace the current codebase, but still be able to run the games (both KSP and KSP2).

The Business Model will be the biggest challenge, because (at least in theory) the user would need to buy the previous game and the new game engine in order to play the damned thing. But I think this can work...

Edited September 1 by Lisias
Kraken damned autocompletes...

[NimNimix]

On 8/31/2024 at 11:08 AM, Lisias said:

You know, I have this crazy idea of rebuilding a game engine that could use the assets from the previous games- like the modern Quake and Doom engines do with the original WAD files.

Perhaps the solution would be some Russian or Chinese (or both) team to rebuilt a proper game engine from scratch that could just replace the current codebase, but still be able to run the games (both KSP and KSP2).

The Business Model will be the biggest challenge, because (at least in theory) the user would need to buy the previous game and the new game engine in order to play the damned thing. But I think this can work...

That's a good idea, I was thinking, if we were to get past the point of getting a working game engine, that the game would be developed more similarly to KSP-1 from the start. Starting with a mostly barebones game and working our way up and taking community suggestions too. It would be better to have an open development like KSP-1 mostly had rather than shaky deadlines, unmet promises, and broken early accesses like that of KSP-2. For the business model side of things, it would probably start off by being crowd funded, from there, something else must be figured out. Perhaps it will rely on crowd funding until the game is feature complete enough to consider putting a price tag on it.

[Lisias]

1 hour ago, NimNimix said:

That's a good idea, I was thinking, if we were to get past the point of getting a working game engine, that the game would be developed more similarly to KSP-1 from the start. Starting with a mostly barebones game and working our way up and taking community suggestions too. It would be better to have an open development like KSP-1 mostly had rather than shaky deadlines, unmet promises, and broken early accesses like that of KSP-2. For the business model side of things, it would probably start off by being crowd funded, from there, something else must be figured out. Perhaps it will rely on crowd funding until the game is feature complete enough to consider putting a price tag on it.

You know, we have available every single KSP version ever released on Steam.

One possible way to run the project is to implement the thing using the original KSP versions are milestones: we get a working engine form KSP 0.17, do a code review on the final result, try to work out known issues that we know will screw up things in "future", clean out the gambiarras from the code, etc. And then we have a deliverable, a fully replacement for KSP 0.17.

Now we start to backport the engine into newer KSPs until we find the point in which we will need to refactor the thing, do the refactoring, make a deliverable, then code review et all again in a somewhat development model similar to RUP

Spoiler

Sooner or later we will reach KSP 1.12 and then we will have a feature complete, bugless, optimized engine that will be able to be further expanded to KSP2 - and since everbody knows where the project is going since the beginning, the whole codebase will be architected to have replaceable components that could allow such stunt.

IMHO the worst part will be the transition from KSP 1.3.1. to 1.4.x - exactly because this was also one of the worst times for KSP at all - lots of things broke badly, and a lot of the new components have bugs (or bad architectural decisions) that plagued the game for the rest of its life.

IMHO this is perfectly doable - I don't see any problem on the Development Model. Again, I'm failing to see how to fund this project, I'm currently unable to foresee a Business Model that would allow us to fulfill these objectives without compromises that would end up with another messed codebase.

[NimNimix]

12 hours ago, Lisias said:

You know, we have available every single KSP version ever released on Steam.

One possible way to run the project is to implement the thing using the original KSP versions are milestones: we get a working engine form KSP 0.17, do a code review on the final result, try to work out known issues that we know will screw up things in "future", clean out the gambiarras from the code, etc. And then we have a deliverable, a fully replacement for KSP 0.17.

Now we start to backport the engine into newer KSPs until we find the point in which we will need to refactor the thing, do the refactoring, make a deliverable, then code review et all again in a somewhat development model similar to RUP

  Reveal hidden contents

Sooner or later we will reach KSP 1.12 and then we will have a feature complete, bugless, optimized engine that will be able to be further expanded to KSP2 - and since everbody knows where the project is going since the beginning, the whole codebase will be architected to have replaceable components that could allow such stunt.

IMHO the worst part will be the transition from KSP 1.3.1. to 1.4.x - exactly because this was also one of the worst times for KSP at all - lots of things broke badly, and a lot of the new components have bugs (or bad architectural decisions) that plagued the game for the rest of its life.

IMHO this is perfectly doable - I don't see any problem on the Development Model. Again, I'm failing to see how to fund this project, I'm currently unable to foresee a Business Model that would allow us to fulfill these objectives without compromises that would end up with another messed codebase.

From what I hear the game engine that KSP uses is inherently flawed, It would certainty be easier to start from that and iron out issues but it would leave certain features unavailable still do too game engine related constraints. If it were possible to use a different game engine that was less buggy it would be optimal yet, then there would probably be issues with getting ksp-alike physics to work in the engine. Because of physiscs issues we probably will have to use the same engine as KSP-1, except with fixing the bugs that we know about with foresight now, and modifying it to be more stable, and hopefully use less ram. 

 

Overall what you said is a good idea, if this ever came to fruition, it would be a good idea to "streamline" the old game engine, and make it more efficient, use less ram, utilize more gpu power that ksp-1 leaves on the table, and other small and large issues. I hope that we could get rid of the bendy rocket issues for good if we started far back enough.

 

When it comes to funding, that's thinking a little bit ahead, all is still conceptual and not yet in motion. There is as much time as we need before a Business Model becomes a primary concern. EDIT: You should inform a few others about this idea, get more peoples ideas and suggestions on the game or how to create the game.

Edited September 2 by NimNimix

[Royale37]

I, for one, support this idea.

[LHACK4142]

imo people have lots of ideas, the issue is they only remain ideas

[Lisias]

6 hours ago, NimNimix said:

From what I hear the game engine that KSP uses is inherently flawed, It would certainty be easier to start from that and iron out issues but it would leave certain features unavailable still do too game engine related constraints. If it were possible to use a different game engine that was less buggy it would be optimal yet, then there would probably be issues with getting ksp-alike physics to work in the engine. Because of physiscs issues we probably will have to use the same engine as KSP-1, except with fixing the bugs that we know about with foresight now, and modifying it to be more stable, and hopefully use less ram.

I completely agree, being the reason I suggest to prototype the more primitive versions of KSP first, literally walking up the ladder the same they did, but... With new code.

Regressions will be easier to cope, because we would handle them on the exact time they were discovered (one of the worst problems on KSP - technical debits lingering for numerous releases, with new features built over them).

I think you are right about the physics engine, but not necessarily - starting low profile with very simple KSP versions, but with the knowledge we have nowadays, may allow us to wet our feet on different things, perhaps even an attempt to migrate to Godot - a Unity simulation layer (like they did on WINE over the Windows API) will probably be a hell of a work, but... heck... Someone started WINE, didn't he?

Very nice side projects can born from the stunt. Sometimes the path is bigger than the goal.

 

6 hours ago, NimNimix said:

Overall what you said is a good idea, if this ever came to fruition, it would be a good idea to "streamline" the old game engine, and make it more efficient, use less ram, utilize more gpu power that ksp-1 leaves on the table, and other small and large issues. I hope that we could get rid of the bendy rocket issues for good if we started far back enough.

Speaking frankly, I would prefer a more "easier" path. The one on my signature.

I'm pragmatic - fixing the already messy codebase may not end up being so good as our idea, but it's way more feasible.

BUT... I would not hold my breath on it, so I'm open to alternatives. This may be one of them.

 

6 hours ago, NimNimix said:

When it comes to funding, that's thinking a little bit ahead, all is still conceptual and not yet in motion. There is as much time as we need before a Business Model becomes a primary concern. EDIT: You should inform a few others about this idea, get more peoples ideas and suggestions on the game or how to create the game.

That's where I respectfully think you are wrong - or not right enough, more probably - facts of life, I usually got screwed in Real Life by doing things "right", and most of the successful cases I was involved where things not that right (or even wrong) that ended up being "good enough" at that time, and the stunt stuck.

Anyway... Money talks. A Business Model will dictate how much we can afford to work on the thing without risking getting our personal lives screwed. Bills will still need to be paid, after all. It's exactly why most ideas die at first place, as stated by @LHACK4142 above.

See... We don't need to have a huge profit. We don't need even to have any profit at all - a Business Model is not about profit, is about business, and you can have a Non Profit Business Model. As a matter of fact, Internet Archive, Mozilla, GNU, and many others shows us that yes, you can have a Business Model without aiming profits.

Money changes everything, though. But still, Money is what moves the World in a way or another - we still have bills to pay.

 

5 hours ago, LHACK4142 said:

imo people have lots of ideas, the issue is they only remain ideas

I completely agree. Most of people's ideas that are tried fail, some miserably. But... All ideas not tried fails for sure.

Logic suggests that no matter how crazy is the idea, it's better to try it than not - a small chance of success is better than the absolute certainty of failure.

The sweet spot is trying the idea without getting bankrupt in the process - you know, the richest men I know all of them failed miserably a lot of times, the magic is learning to which point you can fail without getting screwed in the process, so you can survive to try a new idea tomorrow.

Edited September 2 by Lisias
Entertaining grammars made slightely less entertaining...

[oleg kerman]

Spaceflight Simulator 2 (SFS2) will come out soon, which is basically ksp but oversimplified and VERY optimized (they say you could play it on your phone).

I don't know if it could be a "successor", but an alternative for sure.

 

here is Steam link: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2960460/Spaceflight_Simulator_2/

[NimNimix]

I apologize for my silence, it was a busy week, and after reading what you have Lisias wrote, I agree. I cannot let this discussion die as there might be something to come of it. As for a business model, as you've said, it could be a non-profit, and in the beginning it probably will be, running off of donations from the KSP community. We could do a partially open play testing sending copies to trusted people and youtubers that could document development and give feedback. Once the game is at KSP-1 feature level or slightly below, we can monetize it by selling it on the steam under a indie studio and/or create a website and sell it there, although a website would necessitate paying for a web server. Its an INCREDIBLY oversimplified outline and the transition from non-profit to profit would be quite complicated but every complex thing starts out as a simple one.

 

I think if more people see this, and a few others put their ideas in or even join in on helping, something could truly come from this.