KSP1 was 10% of it’s current size when it was release into EA. Don’t expect an almost finish game that they decided to release a few months early. To address the negative reviews, it’s in early access… the end. They also put so much polish in at this early stage already, subtle things like, UI sfx, music, tutorials, radio chatter, etc. For example, regarding building of vehicles, the interface, presentation and build logic is so much better and since I tend to spend up to an hour or more building vehicles, this makes the whole process way more enjoyable. There are a lot of welcome changes that couldn’t be worked around in the original codebase, so I can sort of see how this game will eventually flourish. I’ve racked up over 1200 hours in the first one, currently 3 hours in the sequel. 2 has an actual established gave dev studio, tons of employees, huge ambition, and a long development roadmap. KSP1 was codded in someones garage with no solid plans on what it will eventually become. It does make sense if you think about it. I already decided I was getting this on day one, and even then the price still shocked me, but More details on these features will be revealed at a later time. Soon players will be able to share the challenges of deep space exploration. Multiplayer/Modding: The technological developments made to the foundations of Kerbal Space Program 2 will build on the beloved modding capabilities of the original game, as well as deliver on the long-requested addition of multiplayer. Among them: Charr, a heat-blasted world of iron Ovin, a ringed super-Earth with relentless gravity Rask and Rusk, a binary pair locked in a dance of death and many more to reward exploration. In Kerbal Space Program 2, interstellar technologies pave the way to a host of new star systems and celestial bodies, each comprising novel challenges and harboring secret treasures. Interstellar Travel: Next-gen tech, colonies, and systematic resource gathering all lead to a whole new level of exploration: interstellar travel. Eventually, these colonies become advanced enough for vehicle construction, propelling deep space exploration and beyond. Colonies not only pose their own physics challenges, but also require resource gathering to build structures, space stations, habitations, and unique fuel types. This new tech will not just create novel puzzles for players to solve, but will also enable new feats of space exploration within and beyond the original Kerbolar System.Ĭolonies: Brand new to Kerbal Space Program 2 are colonies. But at any rate, this is a change that they could easily make toggleable in the difficulty settings.Next Generation Technology: As the game updates progress, players will gain access to a whole new set of next generation tools and technology including new engines, parts, fuel, and much more. When starting out building their first rockets, they would simply come to the realization that they need to have some Control parts, just like they come to the realization that they need an engine, or a parachute. IMO, I don't think that it would even be that difficult for beginners. To me, it is as obvious a flaw as is Sonic walking at a leisurely pace around loop-de-loops in many of the 3D Sonic games. It's not just unrealistic, it's ridiculous. The only thing that would affect me is having to choose my landing sites a little more carefully, which I think would actually add to gameplay and increase the challenge and be even more fun.įor a simulator fine, you want this, for a game where players don't want to be punished by some little known effect that leaves their craft spinning uncontrollably, no, you don't want this.Ĭonsidering that rocketry (and KSP) is based on Newton's third law, I don't think that the basic conservation of momentum should be a "little known effect".Īt present, small rockets don't need to have any thrust vectoring, RCS, or control surfaces of any kind. I'm already paranoid about building balanced craft. But when the ship has unbalanced thrust, the reaction wheels would eventually reach saturation in order to maintain heading, right? Same thing when landed on a slope sufficient enough to tip to lander over, regardless of the gravity of the planetary body, you would eventually tip over because you reach the limit of what a reaction wheel can do, right? If I've got this right, then I would like to see changes made to way reaction wheels currently work to more accurately reflect real life. You start the ship spinning, and then stop it at the desired heading and net change of angular momentum is zero. As long as the ship is in space, then you can change heading with reaction wheels. I think I've got a basic understanding of what's happening though. Ok, I've read some more and realize I probably need to study some more to get my head around this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |