Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
KSP2 or Kerbal Space Program 2. It was early access, I knew that, but it was such a broken mess that I somehow managed to put a lander on the mun, returned it to Kerbin and have never looked back. Rockets that were five parts long wobbling like a stick of candy gum, no re-entry heat and 5 fps on machine that ran KSP1 with volumetric clouds perfectly. Nope. That's not even alpha.
As of December they added re-entry heat and allegedly improved wobbling in the "For Science" update by the way.
But I'm still watching and waiting for it to improve before buying. Reviews for it have been higher lately, but I don't really trust the reviews when the devs set the bar so low. Everyone's too desperate for it to finally be worth playing. It still doesn't even sound as feature-complete as KSP1.
I was a little weary about it when I saw it having the same issues that ksp1 had at some point. You would think that one of the first things they would get right would be the physics, since they spent years getting it working in ksp1. I suspect that new company is just thinking this is a green field game, and are going to hit the same problems ksp1 had.
Yeah, it did suck. It is much much better now though. I genuinely enjoy it at the moment.
Agreed, but mostly because they haven't actually improved anything from KSP1. It's still the same wobble, and they solved it in the same way (with auto-strut). The only feature I want from ksp2 is base-building with proper collision mechanics that don't make my base leap 50 meters into the air and explode, but it seems like the ksp2 isn't capable of that.
It's literally ksp1, but slightly prettier, with far fewer features, and way more expensive. You can get 90% of ksp2 with nodded ksp1, and it'll run much better.