Is Interstellar In 4k

[Young Vadlapatla]

Ive clocked over 4000 hours in KSP 1 and I'm yet to land a kerbal on another planet (not to mention return). There are still planets I haven't even visited. I like the challenge that comes with planning and implementing complex missions, and I like realism of it. As soon as I see that things are getting too easy, I add a mod or change settings to make things more difficult but also more plausible and fun.

Now, with the imminent introduction of interstellar travel, I'm afraid KSP will go in a different direction. To make interstellar travel a relevant part of the game, devs will have to make solar system exploration much easier. Otherwise, what's the point in having these crazy sci-fi engines if the player must spend 100s of hours just to land on the Mun? So instead of adding realism, we'll see "streamlining" of many aspects of the game to rush the player towards colonies and interstellar travel. Instead of a more nuanced simulation of various aspects of spaceflight (life support, radiation, parts failure, thermal regulation, gravity assists, you name it), we'll see far-future or speculative techs that will quickly make space travel trivial.

I know the devs want to expand their user base and probably believe all hardcore KSP 1 fans will buy the game anyway, but competing in the mainstream isn't always a wise choice. Anyway, I only have to hope that I got their intentions wrong and/or that modders will augment what the stock game lacks.

Whats preventing this in KSP2 then? :p

Surely once the mod ecosystem has steam behind it you will be able to play your desired realistic KSP 2 with less 'streamlining' and enjoy the feeling of hard progression. KSP means different things for everyone, the base game isn't the final experience. The devs thought the original game was too exclusionary and that's quite valid, but you don't have to take their advice when it comes to modding haha.

Nate Simpson said in an interview, that KSP 2 will be as challenging as the original. They only add new elements, such as the animated tutorials, which make it easier for new players to get into the game.

Do you consider actually teaching players how they're supposed to play the game part of that bad "streamlining"? Because from my point of view if it takes you 100s of hours to just land on the Mun your problem is a severe lack of information and explanations, not a matter of skill or difficulty of the game.

Once you have a system in place that ensures players learn how to orbit, plan transfers, make rendezvous and docking, and landing with some precision, KSP becomes way easier and interplanetary travel accessible to most players with just some practice.

KSP never had realism to begin with, well, not the kind you're talking about. It's first and foremost a space game that's supposed to be fun. That's why the size of planets are 1/10th scale and the engines are 25% of IRL thrust. The parts are super OP in stock. Going from Kerbin to the Mun is drastically easy once you get the fundamentals down. Going from Kerbin, to Duna, then back to Kerbin is almost just as easy with the right planning. The devs of KSP 2 want to make the game, in your own words "More plausible and fun."

Interstellar travel won't make things easier, if anything it will make it harder. And you're not going to use an interstellar ship to go from Kerbin to the Mun. Metallic Hydrogen engines and Torch engines will make going from Kerbin to the Mun a lot faster, but no easier. You'll still have to plan out your maneuvers and timings and all that jazz. If you do use an interstellar ship for going to the Mun, you have to worry about turning a ship the size of a sky scraper around and maneuvering something that size is not easy.

Colonies can be done without interstellar. Heck, we NEED colonies BEFORE interstellar. Helium-3 has been confirmed to be a fuel resource. There's only one real place you can get He-3 from. Jool. You'll need to put a collection and processing plant in orbit around Jool to suck up He-3, H-2 and H-3. If anything, Interstellar will give us more reason to go to the other planets in the Kerbolar system. Duna for metals and CO2 ice. Jool for He-3, H-2 and H-3. Etcetera.

As for far future and speculative tech, Nate has said before, clearly, that the game is about NEAR future tech that is VIABLE. That means anything that can't be physically built in the next 100 years won't appear in game. I.e. Warp engines, Wormhole Drives, Blackhole Drives, etc. So don't worry about that, it won't happen.

KSP 2 won't lose any nerdiness of KSP 1, I'm fairly certain of that. If anything, space trade will enhance it. Because Nate has said you have to do at least 1 run by yourself in order for the automation to work. I don't know about you, but Kerbals becoming basically space truckers is hilarious to me, and I can picture tons of wacky situations the Kerbals can get into, let alone the player.

KSP 2 isn't trying to compete against the mainstream games, simply due to the fact that there are no mainstream space simulation games. Star Citizen, EVE and Elite Dangerous aren't really space simulators, they're more space MMORPGs imo. KSP 2 is not looking to go after them, simply because KPS 2 isn't the same game as them. KSP and KSP 2 are single player space simulation games at their core. You can have RPG adventures in them, but that's due to the player's imagination, not the game's mechanics. I wouldn't worry about KSP 2 'competing in the mainstream'. Not against those three games mentioned earlier. Both because it's not trying to, and it simply couldn't. There is no game like KSP, and none in the foreseeable future afaik. KSP 2 will go mainstream against itself, not against any space MMORPG. The only game that might compete against KSP is Simple Rockets, but that game would have to step up its game if it truly wanted to compete against KSP. And pardon the pun.

To make interstellar travel a relevant part of the game, devs will have to make solar system exploration much easier. Otherwise, what's the point in having these crazy sci-fi engines if the player must spend 100s of hours just to land on the Mun?

Like I said, if you spend 100h to land on the Mun, that's on you. With basic understanding of orbital mechanics and aerodynamics (something you can find in online tutorials now, but what you should find in ingame tutorials of KSP2) you could land on the Mun in couple of hours even if you start from scratch.

And to be honest, the colony tech is what will make the planets even more worthy exploring. But then.. as with everything, you don't have to use it. You can still launch your stuff on Mainsails from Kerbin.

Funnily enough, LS and radiation are speculated to be implemented, thermal regulation, well, you have radiators for a reason. And gravity assists are integral part of spaceflight, I use them even in KSP1, why would they be gone from KSP2 if it uses the same orbital mechanics? Parts failure never were, and probably never will be a part of stock game, for a simple reason - no random events that are out of player's control. Want to make the game fun for everyone? Don't let the 20 year long mission fail in the last quarter because an engine randomly exploded. That's not fun.

As someone who also hasn't been to another planet, I can tell that Interstellar content (and the tutorials) means that things will get harder but much more rewarding. The simple fact is that I don't know how to get to any other planets, I don't know what kind of vehicle(s) I may need to use, I don't know how much dV I may need, and at the end of it all, there's nothing there on any other planets anyway. With interstellar travel and updated resource functionalities, now there's a reason to go explore and colonize other planets, and the game can help guide you on how to do it. Instead of me spending hours watching YouTube or reading guides to get to another planet, I could watch a tutorial in-game, and choose to transfer or brute force my way wherever I want to go, with differing challenges with each.

3a8082e126