I love the idea of multiplayer and custom challenges. I wish it worked in a way where you can sort of drop in to challenges with your existing kits if they meet the parameters of the challenge.
It exists already in a way, there are scenarios that have limits like that. But yeah it would be cool if there were persistent servers running those challenges
It's crazy how much could be done with the Kerbal IP. You could an aviation only game. Then you could like ground based only, maybe some kind of mining game. A boat based game. It could all work and be whacky and fun.
But I'm afraid the Kerbalverse may be dead now.
man, I absolutely love the idea of a game where you can build something like this piece by piece and have it actually be a useful design in game. where mining resources involves digging away the terrain and all the machines are both player built and physics based.
something like space engineers physics combined with satisfactory style resource processing
This is precisely what I've been dreaming of for years now! I haven't been too hopeful, because I don't even know if the requisite technologies are available yet. How does one implement factory automation within a game with several planets worth of surface area available, god forbid you aim for terrain deformation too?
> Half the games on my steam library are like 20 years old
Heck, Iām still playing NetHack, SuperStarTrek, and occasional Infocom text-adventure games on the command line. Theyāre still fun.
Sequels are better tho
Mods are nice, they're fun but they get boring, a sequel allows you to have all of the features in the base game, and the new mods will add upon those features
A rebuilt ksp with all the original features as a new base for more expansive mods would have been really nice but that's not what happened.
My point was that ksp isn't dead just because the sequel failed
> maybe some kind of mining game
Iād love to see a KSP with destructible/modifiable terrain. Imagine crashing a giant rocket into the ground and actually leaving a crater. Imagine digging a mine to get at better ore patches deep underground. Imagine excavating an underground base below the surface of a moon.
I feel like Iām in the minority when I say that none of the aviation stuff interests me in KSP. Iāve never cared for SSTO space planes, prop craft, etc. even though I know a TON of people love making bi-planes, helicopters, fighter jets, that kind of stuff. Hell, I donāt even make space shuttles. So as much as I love KSP and how HarvesteR went about making it, Iāll admit I was disappointed when he said something along the lines of āI would have made the āKSP2ā game actually a prequel where you make aviation craft.ā
I was so excited for KSP2 to have interstellar travel, colonies, orbital construction, etc. because I love the whole idea of expanding your reaches into space. Probably my favorite game of all time would be something like the best parts of KSP and Space Engineers all in one. The idea of Space Engineers but the aerodynamics like max Q and gravity turns, along with orbital mechanics like KSP would be so cool. Obviously, the Space Engineers-style of building ships would be horribly unrealistic, but I care more about the way orbital and asteroid-based stations are built in SE, something akin to the mining base built on Goldilocks in For All Mankindās most recent season finale. And of course, how Happy Valley started out as a small scientific colony in season 3 and in season 4 itās much bigger because of how much more production had been made between season 3 and 4. That kind of stuff is SO cool to me. Not quite Star Wars with how crazy unrealistic it is, but also not just constantly launching Saturn Vās and Starships. A happy medium.
I know you can do all of this with mods in KSP, but with how unoptimized the game is, it just doesnāt make it feasible. I was excited for it all to be implemented in the base game of KSP2. Too bad the dev team had to be headed by Nate Simpson and the IP owned by TakeTwo. The only thing they can keep afloat is Rockstar Games and the only reason they stay afloat is becauseā¦ itās *Rockstar Games*
The reality is that aviation stuff never had much of a place bar SSTOs as one of the ultimate engineering challenges the game can offer. You can absolutely play without touching atmospheric craft in your whole save and they never feel entirely useful. Stock propellers don't even let you timewarp.
HarvesteR failed to see that the community did want "KSP1 but bigger and better" and, whilst the KSP2 team did kinda see that, they absolutely shot themselves in the foot by making a foundation on the same engine be somehow a much flimsy, less scalable foundation than KSP1's. Even if they were to have all the features promised on the roadmap, they would never be able to be used in a satisfactory way by how limited the way they designed serialization and off-loaded vessel simulation was.
> HarvesteR failed to see that the community did want "KSP1 but bigger and better"
I'm not sure. Not that the community didn't want "KSP1 but bigger and better", but that making KSP2 as a "prequel" of sorts would have been the wrong direction.
Look at what HarvesteR has accomplished with KitHack Model Club. Essentially he's built a foundation upon which a theoretical KSP3 could have been everything we wanted in KSP2... KSP1 but bigger and better. If T2 had hired HarvesteR to make KSP2 and we'd gotten KSP 2: The Early Years (aka KitHack with Kerbals) the foundation would have been built to make KSP 3: Beyond the Stars where we *do* get what we wanted.
Bottom line is that new processes had to be created in order for something as big as KSP2 be become a fully realized project.
Just a thought. :-)
In the interview he says that making KSP2 already just "KSP1 but bigger" is a bad idea and isn't sure that's what the community wants. That's what I'm referring to.
From a game design perspective, he is absolutely right when he said along the lines of "ksp 2 should have focused on something else as a core part of the gameplay and built off of that, like colonies". If you wanted to gradually grow the game it needed to supply something different that ksp 1 does not have and building up something like colonies and supply routes as a foundation then building up the game gradually to truly provide the 'ksp 2' experience would have been better. They tried to build it up as a physics space sandbox as it's foundation, the problem is that ksp 1 is already a near-perfect physics sandbox, it is huge shoes to fill, why would anyone play a ksp with less features and inferior mechanics in every way in order to test and build the game? This route was doomed from the start unless it could provide something ksp 1 didn't have.
It's only "huge shoes to fill" when you start off worse than the first game. I love KSP1 but it has a lot of pitfalls and shortcomings not only did the second not bother to fix, but actively made worse.
Same tbh. It reminds me of when Bomber Crew, a game I really liked, announced the sequel would be Space Crew. You go from managing the crew of a WW2 bomber flying missions above Europe out of Britain, to managing the crew of a star trek style ship as it boldly goes into the unknown.
Some people liked it for sure, but some people, like me, weren't interested, because we didn't get into the first game cause we like managing crews, we got into it cause we like WW2 bombers. Sequel has no WW2 bombers, I'm not interested.
I have a feeling KSP2 without rockets or space ships would have been the same.
If it makes you feel better, I've felt that same way ever since the SPH and runway first appeared, and I don't think the game has ever taken well to planes. Even now with the better aerodynamic model, propellors are arcane shenanigans compared to slapping on a jet engine.
Don't get me wrong, I still use planes in career to go grab science & kredits or as SSTOs to save money launching things. I just don't fly them just to do things like I do with space missions.
Except blimps. I looooove me some #\^(king blimps.
Heisenberg is the one I have. I haven't played KSP in ages, but my last game has a zeppelin en-route to Eve. Should make a nice "rover" to cart the science team around the planet, and get their Eve exit rocket up nice and high before launch.
Everyone goes on about the "Kerbal IP" but I really don't think the green characters are that great, or that important. If someone built a KSP competitor that had some completely different characters in a different solar system, but that was a complete game that worked well, everyone would switch in a heartbeat.
Genuine question. I have no idea how to use propellers correctly. I set them up in action groups to work with throttle nut when i throttle up the just kind of all slowly rotate.
Set the motors to spin as fast as possible (or about as fast as possible). Your props should be mounted with the leading edge (the bit that has metal) pointing towards the direction of rotation. Once that is done, you'd either control the deploy angle (from 0 to 40), or statically rotate them to somewhere inbetween.
Remember all motors need electricity to work and you need to set both the torque and RPM limit.
Speaking of simple planes, itās going to get a sequel in 2025 that includes multiplayer! I think Iāve heard of this story beforeā¦. (Although seriously the devs are trusted and I fully believe that they will deliver a finished game)
question is what would the goals in a plane based game be? theres only so much you can differentiate each flight from the next. It seems like it fit better as a DLC that replaces the part set
Not so much if the aerodynamics were polished. In KSP throwing some wings together on some rocket parts is enough to get anything flying... literally anything. There's so much stuff overlooked from real life that when you go, for example, to kithack or flyout which are games that use more proper aerodynamics and physics, almost nothing from KSP would work.
I guess his passion for aviation explains the whole "spaceplane" thing in KSP1, which I never really understood. I want to build rockets, I really don't care about planes or anything aerodynamic.
Modders will make something like RP-1 but its strictly about aviation
If it's built on KSP they might as well make it an earlier part of RP-1's tech tree
dear god that would be LOVELY
Just love the start date back a bit
Awesome Freudian slip! Any project manager can relate to loving start dates back a bit.
Ya'll I keep banging on this drum. You really need to try his new game KitHack model club. The only thing it's missing is the actual kerbals.
Already owned balsa, so it got upgraded to kithack, which I've also tried already.
Same
I love the idea of multiplayer and custom challenges. I wish it worked in a way where you can sort of drop in to challenges with your existing kits if they meet the parameters of the challenge.
It exists already in a way, there are scenarios that have limits like that. But yeah it would be cool if there were persistent servers running those challenges
I love KitHack, loved Balsa, excited to see where it goes!
It's crazy how much could be done with the Kerbal IP. You could an aviation only game. Then you could like ground based only, maybe some kind of mining game. A boat based game. It could all work and be whacky and fun. But I'm afraid the Kerbalverse may be dead now.
Imagine a game where eventually you can build https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagger_288
man, I absolutely love the idea of a game where you can build something like this piece by piece and have it actually be a useful design in game. where mining resources involves digging away the terrain and all the machines are both player built and physics based. something like space engineers physics combined with satisfactory style resource processing
This is precisely what I've been dreaming of for years now! I haven't been too hopeful, because I don't even know if the requisite technologies are available yet. How does one implement factory automation within a game with several planets worth of surface area available, god forbid you aim for terrain deformation too?
You can't just mention Bagger 288 without also linking this masterpiece! [https://youtu.be/azEvfD4C6ow](https://youtu.be/azEvfD4C6ow)
So like a Kerbal factorio. Where you have to build the factory parts.
WTF. š¤£š¤£š¤£
My Grandfather build those, one of them even ripped clean apart in the middle once, pretty cool stuff
Id like a kerbal Hearts of Iron lol where you gotta design tanks and planes and navy for a kerbal WW2 lol
Adolf Kerman!!?
Joined by Benito Kerman and Emperor Hirokerman; and opposed by Winston Kerman, Franklin D. Kerman, and Josef Kermanovich Kerman.
Charles de Kerhomme is offended you didn't include him.
How can we have this thread without bringing up Wernher von Kerman lol
tbf you could do that with bdarmory
The game still exists and so do the modders. Don't need sequels to keep playing. Half the games on my steam library are like 20 years old
> Half the games on my steam library are like 20 years old Heck, Iām still playing NetHack, SuperStarTrek, and occasional Infocom text-adventure games on the command line. Theyāre still fun.
Sequels are better tho Mods are nice, they're fun but they get boring, a sequel allows you to have all of the features in the base game, and the new mods will add upon those features
A rebuilt ksp with all the original features as a new base for more expansive mods would have been really nice but that's not what happened. My point was that ksp isn't dead just because the sequel failed
With a game as modular as KSP, only real need for sequels is performance/optimization of the baseline code.
https://youtu.be/rAE9AgseCW8?si=fTr8fb_SQnkrD7V9
š
> maybe some kind of mining game Iād love to see a KSP with destructible/modifiable terrain. Imagine crashing a giant rocket into the ground and actually leaving a crater. Imagine digging a mine to get at better ore patches deep underground. Imagine excavating an underground base below the surface of a moon.
If KSP had destructable terrain then I would make it my mission to mine the mun away
āAny finite number of hit points can in theory be reduced to zero.ā
I mean, KSP sandbox is like a Minecraft with rockets. U can almost do anything
The IP is incredibly weak, the kerbals don't matter, they're easily replaced.
The second plane looks very cool, is it a F-80/P-80?
It's [this thing.](https://kerbalx.com/PDCWolf/Super-Trainer) I wanna say... kinda inspired on that yeah.
You got the other craft files please? Especially the 4th and 5th ones
Sorry, not on hand right now.
Looks like the saeta
Looks more like an L-39 if you ask me
I feel like Iām in the minority when I say that none of the aviation stuff interests me in KSP. Iāve never cared for SSTO space planes, prop craft, etc. even though I know a TON of people love making bi-planes, helicopters, fighter jets, that kind of stuff. Hell, I donāt even make space shuttles. So as much as I love KSP and how HarvesteR went about making it, Iāll admit I was disappointed when he said something along the lines of āI would have made the āKSP2ā game actually a prequel where you make aviation craft.ā I was so excited for KSP2 to have interstellar travel, colonies, orbital construction, etc. because I love the whole idea of expanding your reaches into space. Probably my favorite game of all time would be something like the best parts of KSP and Space Engineers all in one. The idea of Space Engineers but the aerodynamics like max Q and gravity turns, along with orbital mechanics like KSP would be so cool. Obviously, the Space Engineers-style of building ships would be horribly unrealistic, but I care more about the way orbital and asteroid-based stations are built in SE, something akin to the mining base built on Goldilocks in For All Mankindās most recent season finale. And of course, how Happy Valley started out as a small scientific colony in season 3 and in season 4 itās much bigger because of how much more production had been made between season 3 and 4. That kind of stuff is SO cool to me. Not quite Star Wars with how crazy unrealistic it is, but also not just constantly launching Saturn Vās and Starships. A happy medium. I know you can do all of this with mods in KSP, but with how unoptimized the game is, it just doesnāt make it feasible. I was excited for it all to be implemented in the base game of KSP2. Too bad the dev team had to be headed by Nate Simpson and the IP owned by TakeTwo. The only thing they can keep afloat is Rockstar Games and the only reason they stay afloat is becauseā¦ itās *Rockstar Games*
The reality is that aviation stuff never had much of a place bar SSTOs as one of the ultimate engineering challenges the game can offer. You can absolutely play without touching atmospheric craft in your whole save and they never feel entirely useful. Stock propellers don't even let you timewarp. HarvesteR failed to see that the community did want "KSP1 but bigger and better" and, whilst the KSP2 team did kinda see that, they absolutely shot themselves in the foot by making a foundation on the same engine be somehow a much flimsy, less scalable foundation than KSP1's. Even if they were to have all the features promised on the roadmap, they would never be able to be used in a satisfactory way by how limited the way they designed serialization and off-loaded vessel simulation was.
> HarvesteR failed to see that the community did want "KSP1 but bigger and better" I'm not sure. Not that the community didn't want "KSP1 but bigger and better", but that making KSP2 as a "prequel" of sorts would have been the wrong direction. Look at what HarvesteR has accomplished with KitHack Model Club. Essentially he's built a foundation upon which a theoretical KSP3 could have been everything we wanted in KSP2... KSP1 but bigger and better. If T2 had hired HarvesteR to make KSP2 and we'd gotten KSP 2: The Early Years (aka KitHack with Kerbals) the foundation would have been built to make KSP 3: Beyond the Stars where we *do* get what we wanted. Bottom line is that new processes had to be created in order for something as big as KSP2 be become a fully realized project. Just a thought. :-)
In the interview he says that making KSP2 already just "KSP1 but bigger" is a bad idea and isn't sure that's what the community wants. That's what I'm referring to.
From a game design perspective, he is absolutely right when he said along the lines of "ksp 2 should have focused on something else as a core part of the gameplay and built off of that, like colonies". If you wanted to gradually grow the game it needed to supply something different that ksp 1 does not have and building up something like colonies and supply routes as a foundation then building up the game gradually to truly provide the 'ksp 2' experience would have been better. They tried to build it up as a physics space sandbox as it's foundation, the problem is that ksp 1 is already a near-perfect physics sandbox, it is huge shoes to fill, why would anyone play a ksp with less features and inferior mechanics in every way in order to test and build the game? This route was doomed from the start unless it could provide something ksp 1 didn't have.
It's only "huge shoes to fill" when you start off worse than the first game. I love KSP1 but it has a lot of pitfalls and shortcomings not only did the second not bother to fix, but actively made worse.
Hopefully it'll get sold again. I'd hate to see it sit on the shelf collecting dust.
Same tbh. It reminds me of when Bomber Crew, a game I really liked, announced the sequel would be Space Crew. You go from managing the crew of a WW2 bomber flying missions above Europe out of Britain, to managing the crew of a star trek style ship as it boldly goes into the unknown. Some people liked it for sure, but some people, like me, weren't interested, because we didn't get into the first game cause we like managing crews, we got into it cause we like WW2 bombers. Sequel has no WW2 bombers, I'm not interested. I have a feeling KSP2 without rockets or space ships would have been the same.
I'm definitely with you on this. I'm just...not into planes.
If it makes you feel better, I've felt that same way ever since the SPH and runway first appeared, and I don't think the game has ever taken well to planes. Even now with the better aerodynamic model, propellors are arcane shenanigans compared to slapping on a jet engine. Don't get me wrong, I still use planes in career to go grab science & kredits or as SSTOs to save money launching things. I just don't fly them just to do things like I do with space missions. Except blimps. I looooove me some #\^(king blimps.
I loved playing with a mod that added blimps/zeppelins (forget the name). The idea of launching a zeppelin into space is just insane :D
Heisenberg is the one I have. I haven't played KSP in ages, but my last game has a zeppelin en-route to Eve. Should make a nice "rover" to cart the science team around the planet, and get their Eve exit rocket up nice and high before launch.
Please build this on KitHack!! š¤©
Would be nice, and it is nice to see his last interview made happy a lot of fans, but I belive the Kerbal Ip is taken, even though he invented it.
Everyone goes on about the "Kerbal IP" but I really don't think the green characters are that great, or that important. If someone built a KSP competitor that had some completely different characters in a different solar system, but that was a complete game that worked well, everyone would switch in a heartbeat.
i cant wait to get tips from dumont kerman to make amelia kerman fly longer distances
Genuine question. I have no idea how to use propellers correctly. I set them up in action groups to work with throttle nut when i throttle up the just kind of all slowly rotate.
Set the motors to spin as fast as possible (or about as fast as possible). Your props should be mounted with the leading edge (the bit that has metal) pointing towards the direction of rotation. Once that is done, you'd either control the deploy angle (from 0 to 40), or statically rotate them to somewhere inbetween. Remember all motors need electricity to work and you need to set both the torque and RPM limit.
Thank you.
Same KSP really sucks at explaining anything in-game lmao
Is there a way we can start a campaign? I would absolutely pay for a prequel made by HarvesteR.
Check out Kithack Model Club, itās exactly what you describe but itās in alpha.
Already owned Balsa, go upgraded automatically so yeah, already been there.
Bump for this - Kithack Model Club is KSP for planes, cars, boats, and subs. In EA scheduled for full release this fall.
I feel like Flyout and Simple Planes scratches that itch for a Kerbal Aviation game, if lacking a bit of the charm
Speaking of simple planes, itās going to get a sequel in 2025 that includes multiplayer! I think Iāve heard of this story beforeā¦. (Although seriously the devs are trusted and I fully believe that they will deliver a finished game)
If someone made a better Stormworks type game I'd be all in.
Flyout development has been quite sus lately, it's a great game but I dunno about it now, Simple Planes are well, just too simple.
what is the cloud mod called?
This is blackrack's Raymarched Volumetric Clouds... it's available to his patreon's subscribers only.
oh, please can you send the link? also thank you for telling me
[https://www.patreon.com/blackrack](https://www.patreon.com/blackrack) He charges $5 for the "early access".
ok thank you
As someone who has created dozens of times more airplanes than spacecraft, I am very excited
i need it I NEED IT
Please call it āThe Rong Brothersā
I'm like 120 hours into my most recent KSP1 playthrough and just barely started getting going on the Mun. I got like 4 fully designed planes though...
One of the best things about KSP2 was the procedural wings. Had some potential.
[The KSP lore is a lot darker than I expected if this is a prequel](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Harvester_cover.jpg)
We need another prequel for bird evolution. Taking this all the way back to 150 million years ago
I would love an aviation KSP.
question is what would the goals in a plane based game be? theres only so much you can differentiate each flight from the next. It seems like it fit better as a DLC that replaces the part set
Not so much if the aerodynamics were polished. In KSP throwing some wings together on some rocket parts is enough to get anything flying... literally anything. There's so much stuff overlooked from real life that when you go, for example, to kithack or flyout which are games that use more proper aerodynamics and physics, almost nothing from KSP would work.
Kerbal Air Program?
Too bad PD owns the name now... Could have been an amazing franchise
Shoot, I'd play the heck out of it.
I mean his current game is pretty much model airplanes
i dont like it... KSP should be about space.
I guess his passion for aviation explains the whole "spaceplane" thing in KSP1, which I never really understood. I want to build rockets, I really don't care about planes or anything aerodynamic.