Gaming Kerbal Space Program 2 (currently in Early Access)

Frilock

Donator
Donator
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
699
Reaction score
266
Points
78
Yeah, seeing the some of the footage, absolutely no reason for those ridiculous requirements. On top of that paying $50 for an early access game? That won't even feature reentry heat at launch? Get bent! 100% cash grab.
 

clipper

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
256
Reaction score
388
Points
63
I just find this development somewhat ironic given how much emphasis they put during the (very long) marketing campaign on this one being even more accessible to masses in terms of tutorials and general gameplay design - and then they drop recommended requirements that less than 5% of potential customers satisfy (according to recent Steam hardware survey), and roughly a week before release no less. They basically derailed and then nuked the hype train from orbit at this point.

I never thought I'd see the day when MSFS ends up being an example of a well-optimized sim lol.
 

dbeachy1

O-F Administrator
Administrator
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,220
Reaction score
1,568
Points
203
Location
VA
Website
alteaaerospace.com
Preferred Pronouns
he/him
Remember this is an Early-Access release, not the final release, and every player has to decide for themselves it they want to buy and play the early-access versions now or wait until it's closer to version 1.0. The known issues section under "Flight and Maneuvering" in the official pre-release notes spell out that the development team is actively working on performance issues (bold added):

----
Known Issues (currently being addressed)
  • Re-entry heating and thermal systems are offline - you'll have a brief window here at the beginning of Early Access during which you can re-enter any atmosphere without a heat shield. We’re still buttoning down our heat transfer, ablation, and occlusion systems. Vapor cone visual effects are also still in-progress.
  • No collision on trees or rocks - we're optimizing collision for these objects right now, and in the interest of maintaining good framerates we're going to complete that optimization work before letting you crash into these objects. For now, they're holograms. While KSC buildings ARE collideable, they are not yet destructible.
  • Framerate stutters/lag - we're continuing to work down the list of performance optimizations, from highest to lowest impact. As we push processes out of the main thread and continue to improve the efficiency of our physics, resource flow, VFX, and graphics systems, framerates should improve for all players.
  • Some UI elements can be challenging to interact with - we're still cleaning up the systems that give priority to different classes of information in the map view, and there are times when you need to click a few extra times to get a hold of the maneuver planner. Similarly, you may have some challenges associating selected parts with their data in the Part Manager. We’re making several changes to the current UI so you can expect this experience to improve over time. This is a particular area within which we welcome your feedback.
----

I get that players are frustrated that the game isn't closer to a 1.0 product, and that's fair. But at least we have something to play with and provide feedback to the development team in the meantime (or at least, that's how I view it). Any major performance issues will eventually be fixed -- it's not like doing multi-threading is rocket science, not even when it's a game about rocket science. :p It just takes time, frustrating as that can be.
 

diogom

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
425
Points
98
I feel like to me the core of it is the price, not so much its condition. Or rather the ratio between the two. It's clear that it's Early Access and that should tamper expectations, and it's good that people can start having a go at it. That seemed to help the first game a lot, almost from day one (hell, I remember playing the first public version here and how different it was from what it became). But as far as I can tell, performance and bugs aside, which are to be expected for EA, and some graphical updates, KSP 2 is launching with the same or likely fewer features than KSP 1 has now, which goes for 10 dollars less. I don't know what their target price for 1.0 is, but I'm guessing it's no more than 70, maybe 60, under the assumption they do bump it up at 1.0 (my point being, a 10-20 dollar difference between EA and release at this starting level? lol). It may very well be worth the hypothetical 70 when it's complete, but right now I just can't justify spending the 50 dollars/euro for the launch content and state. Make that 30 or under, and my approach to it would be different, and I'm guessing the overall discussion would be different too. Whoever isn't interested in EA would ignore it anyway, maybe complain a bit but they always would. But the ones who are interested also don't feel forced to pay almost full price to get it or sit and watch.

I'm not saying they absolutely should make it that much cheaper or feel entitled to it, I'm sure they have their reasons and needs. All I can do is say no and why not. That said, when they probably inevitably deliver, I'm sure it will very much be worth it, I haven't followed closely but the dev team seems to be passionate and committed. But for now I'm moving on while keeping a tab on it.
 

steph

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
1,399
Reaction score
722
Points
113
Location
Vendee, France
Well; I probably won't be buying it anytime soon. KSP for Xbox is an expensive, buggy mess that can't even use mods, despite other games having implemented it for Xbox One, so it's a bit like playing the vanilla KSP, but with bugs and messed up controls. Since the original designer left, I have no reason to believe this won't be just a cash grab with little to show. And I'd have to seriously upgrade my PC, assuming I even wanted to get it
 

Frilock

Donator
Donator
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
699
Reaction score
266
Points
78
This statement might belong in the KSP 1 thread, but responding to steph, I could not imagine playing KSP on a console. That being said, and I mean no disrespect at all to Harv or anyone else who worked on it, the biggest blow to the development of the game seems to have come from the 'dev exodus' as I've heard it called. Basically a bunch of devs all left at once, seemingly out of protest (though I've heard from at least one of them directly that wasn't so much the case) sometime around 2016ish.

As for KSP2, I'm likely not even going to think about getting it until I've heard some solid reviews from those who have. I'm really hoping these are just extremely conservative.
Oh, and looks like they revised their specs:
KSP2_SystemSpecs_V9.png.bc14acad01b8a45b0b468a80b24c8777.png
 

pushkin

Donator
Donator
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
42
Reaction score
55
Points
33
KSP2 early access is a train wreck.. I've been playing for the last couple of hours and it simply wasn't ready for early access yet. The performance is horrible even though I have a beefy pc with a Ryzen 9 5900x and an RTX 3070. The game lags and stutters like crazy and the graphics are less than what you would get with KSP1 + mods. It also offers nothing new compared to KSP 1. You only have a few new parts and none of the promised cool new features (or not even basic features like science or re-entry heating for that matter). My opinion is that it's not worth the 50 euros at this stage and if you like KSP you are better of playing the first one for now.

EDIT: The procedural wing generation is a welcome new addition and makes building aircraft or space planes a lot more fun! Also the stuttering got a lot better for me after lowering my resolution to 1080p coming from 1440p.
 
Last edited:

dundun92

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
42
Reaction score
29
Points
18
I tried it on my laptop w/ a 3050ti. Refunded after 30 mins. The FPS was ~7-15 near kerbin and barely 30 in space on low settings. Also, so many little QOL stuff is just missing (one notable example, hovering over a future predicted manuever node trajectory to see the future positions of the system doesnt work anymore, no TWR indicator, no burntime indicator, patched conics only displaying trajectory relative to the parent body and not new body until after you are already in the new SOI, and lots of small stuff like that). Definitely would not reccomend if you want a good gameplay experience, KSP1 is just better at this stage. Maybe once they get the missing features ironed out and performance is decent ill buy it again, but no way im paying $50 for a game that is, for what I care, a downgrade from KSP1.
 

misha.physics

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 22, 2021
Messages
468
Reaction score
592
Points
108
Location
Lviv
Preferred Pronouns
he/him
In my opinion KSP 2 is a victim of commerce.

Perhaps textures, aerodynamics, content, flight instruments, cockpits... can (or can't) be improved/added, but how they could make such inconvenient (large, color, cartoon) interface and bad optimization.

Considering how many times KSP 2 has been delayed, it's not clear how they could release such a product. Even in early access.

However, obviously KSP 2 was designed for a wide audience who likes to "pull arrows" and change the orbit. Maybe KSP 2 will get better in the future. But now it's unplayable in my opinion.
 

Fabri91

Donator
Donator
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
2,179
Reaction score
234
Points
78
Location
Valmorea
Website
www.fabri91.eu
I'll probably play guinea pig and report back how it works with my RTX 2060 Super and 3440x1440 resolution.
It runs quite badly, to say the least:
  • Even remotely looking at Kerbin (I never ventured beyond low Kerbin orbit) absolutely tanks the frames to approximately 20 FPS
  • Immediately during launch with a not-complex two-stage rocket with SRBs 10-12 is more what can be expected, and since there's time-stretching like in KSP1 when frames are very low, it leads to approximately 80% time dilation in that case.
  • It runs extremely worse than Star Citizen in its most crowded settings.
It's essentially unplayable and yesterday I refunded it on Steam.
It's probably to be avoided for at least a year, hoping that it's salvageable while considering that KSP1
  • Works
  • Costs approx, 10 USD less
In one thing it succeeded even in the present stage, though: made me realize how much I missed playing the first one.

This review on Rock, Paper, Shotgun sums it up nicely.
 

steph

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
1,399
Reaction score
722
Points
113
Location
Vendee, France
Now you're making me jealous. I can get barely anything to run at more than 15 on my machine... :ROFLMAO:
Well; at least it runs. Other than games on DosBox and Orbiter on base settings (which crashes from time to time), my rig is unable to even run most 'modern' games :ROFLMAO:
 

jedidia

shoemaker without legs
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
10,911
Reaction score
2,170
Points
203
Location
between the planets
Well; at least it runs.
Indeed. Though there'll be trouble ahead now that the new console generation is out. So far, I knew that my computer would run anything that a PS4 could run, except at lower resolution, a bit less details and usually somewhere between 15 and 25 FPS. The PS4 was a hard performance ceiling that game developers could not afford to cross, so I knew I could pick up anything that struck my fancy (very little did... The Witcher 3, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Elite: Dangerous and No Man's Sky are I think the only games I bought in the last 6 or 7 years that actually had anything in terms of requirements).
Now with the new gen, games will power up and once more become completely unplayable. Oh well, I mean, they're also mostly just getting dumber. The exceptions that emerge from the graphics vs. mechanics resource conflicts with their priorities intact are getting more and more rare.
Hell, these days my notebook (like, the one you write in with a pen) gets more gaming time than my laptop...
 

Face

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Beta Tester
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
4,406
Reaction score
588
Points
153
Location
Vienna
The Witcher 3, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Elite: Dangerous and No Man's Sky are I think the only games I bought in the last 6 or 7 years that actually had anything in terms of requirements
Did you check Elite lately? The new client (>4.0) had the requirements sky-rocketing. The old version is still there, but de-coupled from the "live" version. A good example for how you'll never be "safe" from hardware-requirements growing over time.
 

steph

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
1,399
Reaction score
722
Points
113
Location
Vendee, France
Indeed. Though there'll be trouble ahead now that the new console generation is out. So far, I knew that my computer would run anything that a PS4 could run, except at lower resolution, a bit less details and usually somewhere between 15 and 25 FPS. The PS4 was a hard performance ceiling that game developers could not afford to cross, so I knew I could pick up anything that struck my fancy (very little did... The Witcher 3, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Elite: Dangerous and No Man's Sky are I think the only games I bought in the last 6 or 7 years that actually had anything in terms of requirements).
Now with the new gen, games will power up and once more become completely unplayable. Oh well, I mean, they're also mostly just getting dumber. The exceptions that emerge from the graphics vs. mechanics resource conflicts with their priorities intact are getting more and more rare.
Hell, these days my notebook (like, the one you write in with a pen) gets more gaming time than my laptop...

The console gap was, and is, both blessing and curse. In my case, it meant I could get a refurbished Xbox one for 80 bucks and be able to play the vast majority of the games out there on the cheap (there are gaming shops that sell used DVDs for a fraction of the price new). Otherwise, it meant that games were 'handicapped' due to the requirement that a standard Xbox One should be able to run it, despite having come out a decade ago. I think Playstation is a bit better in terms of computing power. That also meant most recent games were nothing new, at least for the console version. Of course, that also allowed companies to get away with charging $$$ for AAA games that had nothing new, technically speaking. Would I have preferred that, say, CDPR just stuck to their initial pledge to make it for next gen only? Yeah, sure. At least that way I would have known I just have to get a new console a year out.

Now, Starfield is coming fast and I don't know whether to finally upgrade my PC or get a cheap Xbox One X for it, given that I will absolutely want to play it, in all its buggy glory. But I think one shouldn't be disappointed if gaming quality also gets an upgrade. I mean, Ubisoft has basically been selling reskins these last few years. AC Odyssey , Origins and Valhalla have pretty much the same engine and feel, with only the story varying. And don't get me going on Far Cry 6, which is basically Far Cry 5 in a tropical setting, as far as the game goes. They didn't even bother to change the vehicles too much, not to mention that it has the feel of Ghost Recon Breakpoint reloaded. Not bad as far as fun goes, but way below the mark for an AAA game.

I mean, when I saw that sweet KSP Xbox One DVD , of course I got it and bought the addons too. 30 bucks total, but it's not worth it. On Xbox , you can use a mouse and keyboard, in theory, so that would make it sort of usable, but it's bugged. Even using the in-game maneuver planner, I simply can't get to plan a flight to anything beyond the moons. That is, with the game fully updated. It kinda behaves like they don't exist. I launch into solar orbit and try to plan a Hohmann to Mars, say. And it does the trajectory, except that it doesn't trigger like it does with the moons. Flew there, eyeballing it, basically pixel close on the map. Looked around, and there was no planet, no trajectory change etc. Same went for Venus, in repeated attempts. Left it with the peri/apohelium at the target orbit, then went max time warp until I got a close pass. Still nothing

Witcher 3 is a hell of a game, tho. Currently playing it, I'm basically clearing up the backlog of quests and contracts before doing Isle of Mists. It's a long game, but I prefer it that way. I'd say Red Dead Redemption 2 is somewhat similar in terms of game mechanics. Big and captivating game world, nice story etc.
 

jedidia

shoemaker without legs
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
10,911
Reaction score
2,170
Points
203
Location
between the planets
Did you check Elite lately?
I mean, I know what's going on, but I haven't ever fired it up for a long time. I'd still be on horizons anyways, and that only because they finally threw it at everyone, and I never played online anyways, so I don't mind being decoupled (I mean, I'm a backend developer... I hear "decoupling", I immediately feel better :LOL: ).
 
Top