Jump to content

What KSP has taught me to be annoyed at

KBMODIGITY

By KBMODIGITY
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

KBMODIGITY

KBMODIGITY

Posted
Posted

I have been playing KSP for well over a year now. It has taught me SOOOOOO much in the way of, well, rocket science. When I first started playing I thought if you just went straight up hard and fast enough you'd reach orbit. Wow was I wrong. Every aspect of this game has taught me how things in space work, from planetary captures, to the principles of docking, to even the simplest of things such as thrust to mass ratio.

My point of this thread though is I was watching the movie "Gravity" tonight. Because of KSP I was able to point out so many flaws with the movie itself. Granted I did love it and know that Hollywood will never go off of true realism. But there was one scene that really bothered me. It was where where Sandra Bullock was tethered to a space station by some parachute ropes to her leg. She caught George Clooney and stopped his momentum so he didn't float away. He decides let me go because he says he's pulling her away. With my knowledge of motion in space all she had to do was give a slight tug on the cable between them and he would have drifted towards her thus saving himself. It drove me nuts watching this.

Yes I know, just a movie. Before playing KSP I would have never have known this basic principle. All I can say is thank you KSP for making me a smarter person (although getting me mad at the occasional movie :P )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
problemecium

problemecium

Posted
Posted

I had the same beef with the film, until someone suggested that perhaps (while not clear to the characters or the viewers) the station, or at least the rope, was slowly rotating, causing a small but constant centrifugal force, which could drag the poor astronauts away into space. I still think it was a pretty pathetic death scene though.

Of course, what space survival thriller DOESN'T have somebody drift away into space to die? It's like the couple in horror movies that always wanders off to have ... in the woods so they can get axed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TythosEternal

TythosEternal

Posted
Posted

In the spirit of the thread, KSP has taught me to be annoyed at game developers who misuse the "paid alpha" approach (deliberately or out of incompetence) to charge people money for a half-baked game that never reaches completion and ends up hemmoraging their userbase out of despair. Look at Squad, folks--THERE'S how you do it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KBMODIGITY

KBMODIGITY

Posted
  • Author
Posted
In the spirit of the thread, KSP has taught me to be annoyed at game developers who misuse the "paid alpha" approach (deliberately or out of incompetence) to charge people money for a half-baked game that never reaches completion and ends up hemmoraging their userbase out of despair. Look at Squad, folks--THERE'S how you do it!

Wow, I play A TON of EA games and KSP is by far the BEST one out of all of them. Hell when I bought the game back in I think .19 I would have bought it as a full game and been completely satisfied. The bugs are to the average player pretty much non existant. The replayability with the mod support is through the roof. Just started my I think 14th career tonight.

As far as unsatisfied customers, you are the first one I have ever seen on these forums. Then again we were bound to get a troll here eventually.

If a mod could please remove that persons quote and this one and have this be a constructive post I would appreciate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
astropapi1

astropapi1

Posted
Posted
Wow, I play A TON of EA games and KSP is by far the BEST one out of all of them. Hell when I bought the game back in I think .19 I would have bought it as a full game and been completely satisfied. The bugs are to the average player pretty much non existant. The replayability with the mod support is through the roof. Just started my I think 14th career tonight.

As far as unsatisfied customers, you are the first one I have ever seen on these forums. Then again we were bound to get a troll here eventually.

If a mod could please remove that persons quote and this one and have this be a constructive post I would appreciate it.

What the hell just happened? He said SQUAD was doing it right, and that other devs should take their example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duke23

Duke23

Posted
Posted

Since I started playing KSP, I don't think I've been able to get through a single space based movie / game without putting my rage face on at one point or another "But... But that's not how that works!" Things I just never bothered to think about or look up before. For a "game" and for all the complaints I see on here from time to time about lack of realism in KSP, it's still pretty darn accurate in a lot of ways. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has looked up articles on actual orbital mechanics just to use in the game, as opposed to a game tutorial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
federicoaa

federicoaa

Posted
Posted

KSP made me feel annoyed at any space movie. They always forget Kepler mechanics and by some reason the universe is non-Newtonian.

Most people still believes that ships in space behave like inside the atmosphere -.-

Some movies I remember now:

Elysium, the part when they go to space I was like "you don't go to space upwards, you go sideways". And also, hit a spaceship with a bazooka from surface, sure

In Startrek, the USS Enterprise loses power and starts falling towards earth, was not orbiting earth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tripzter

Tripzter

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah because of KSP I cannot watch the movie Gravity. I throw popcorn at the screen and correct every bit of it.

KSP made me feel annoyed at any space movie. They always forget Kepler mechanics and by some reason the universe is non-Newtonian.

Most people still believes that ships in space behave like inside the atmosphere -.-

You'll have a blast with Gravity.

Edited by Tripzter
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TythosEternal

TythosEternal

Posted
Posted (edited)
opps,, I think I did read it wrong, Sorry im so used to steam trolls trashing games. What threw me off was him saying "I am annoyed at" and then went on to discuss KSP. My appologies

No worries, I'm glad we got it straightened out.

As for Gravity... That movie opened up so many great conversations about space technology and science among people who previously didn't care. Hell, by the usual Hollywood standards, it's practically a PhD dissertation. On top of that, it was a fun flick with amazing cinematography. I loved it, and so did my wife--there's the real shocker!

Edited by TythosEternal
Trying not to write redundant posts
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BoilingCold

BoilingCold

Posted
Posted
Of course, what space survival thriller DOESN'T have somebody drift away into space to die? It's like the couple in horror movies that always wanders off to have ... in the woods so they can get axed.

Apollo 13. If you find yourself getting annoyed with movies like Gravity can I recommend you watch Apollo 13 - even if you've already seen it, it's worth watching again after playing KSP a lot. Great film, very accurate, wonderful to watch with the knowledge learned from KSP :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Yeah because of KSP I cannot watch the movie Gravity. I throw popcorn at the screen and correct every bit of it.

You'll have a blast with Gravity.

Gravity only sacrificed realism a couple of times. It was a lot better than the current standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monthar

Monthar

Posted
Posted

I haven't seen Gravity yet and ya'll are spoiling it. :wink: j/k about the spoiling, because I figure the previews pretty much did that already.

Even with what I've learned I don't get annoyed with games or movies for not being realistic. The reason I don't get annoyed about the realism is because I know they are fictional. I don't even get annoyed with simulator games, because they are games and have to give up on some of the realism for the fun factor. In fact the only way any simulator can even come close to realism is if it's one of the simulators real pilots use in training that have all the actual controls they would have in the aircraft the simulator was designed for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wanderfound

Wanderfound

Posted
Posted
Pretty sure in that startrek example the enterprise was holding itself up, not orbiting. It wasn't moving fast enough to remain geostationary at that altitude.

If you really want to get annoyed at Trek, consider this:

The Trek universe has FTL spaceships and astronomical sensors good enough to examine things in close detail from light years away. However, a standard plot setup is for the Enterprise to arrive at a scene moments after some disaster happened and to be puzzled as to what caused it.

Why don't they just back up a couple of light minutes and look?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...