Well, I was not expecting this. I am not optimistic. It is not being developed by Squad, and it is being published by Take Two. While the first game could be improved in many ways (as the numerous mods showed), I fear that this game will just be generally less impressive. I hope I am wrong, though. I spent hundreds of hours lithobraking in the first game. What do you think?
1 Like
I’m pretty optimistic. The steam page mentions multiplayer and modding from the start which are both cool.
I’ve also kind of had enough of Kerbal 1 so this is a nice chance to have another go.
I hope they do something different with career mode though, the K1 version, in my view, didn’t work so well.
Indeed. I never thought that multiplayer worked well due to the slow nature of the game and frequent use of time compression, but the multiplayer mod showed it was at least possible and could be entertaining. I think an obvious improvement would be to add another space program (or more) against which the player competes. I also like the idea of there being a pre-space era in which the player develops the first aerospace technology (I would call it World War K). I also think there should be a more interesting economic simulation instead of the planet being barren except for the space center. Instead of vague spacebucks there could be different resource costs for different items (with different resources being available on other planets, of course).
I also want there to be more than just spaceflight (which is fun, but reaching planets doesn’t mean much when you can’t do anything after arriving). The cinematic trailer (which means nothing, of course) strongly suggests base building and colonization. If there were a 4X game happening in the background while the player explored, that would be amazing.
However, Take Two stinks of microtransactions, so I bet it will be lackluster in most regards and more of a skinner box than a game.
1 Like
The steam page mentions colonisation so you’re in luck there I think.
Personally I would prefer coop multiplayer than competitive. Like you can both work in the assembly hall at the same time, maybe one person builds a lander while the other works on the booster.
Then it would be fun to be able to both fly on the mission and have one person on a space walk while the other pilots the craft or something.
Coop base building could be interesting too.
Welp, that trailer sold me. Base building, colonization, (hopefully better graphics), and as on the steam page, multiplayer and modding, I am actually, truly hyped for this!
1 Like
I would expect there to be both competitive and cooperative multiplayer. The competing space program(s) could be managed by an AI. I hope there will be some AI automation, as having to do everything myself was tedious in the first game.
Did you learn nothing from Spore? Hype will just lead to disappointment. Besides, the trailer had no gameplay and was just rendered cinematics. It is pretty, yes, but we currently have no way of knowing whether it is representative of gameplay. Just because it will have base building does not mean it will have good base building.
1 Like
Alrighty then. I am no longer excited, am now dissapointed, and now hate anything to do with Kerbal Space Program. In fact, even the idea of space travel I know loathe. In all seriousness, I am naturally hyped because I have seen games that flop on release, but also games that soar far above their expectations. There just isn’t enough evidence to know where KSP 2 sits on that scale. It could suck, but it could be awesome. I just don’t know, and so I naturally turn to the state of hyped for the release.
2 Likes
Exactly. Why would anyone put time and emotional investment into a game that might not even be successful? Think of all the people spending valuable time typing posts on forums about games that will never exist! That’s why I think Thrive should be cancelled. Otherwise it might create
shivers
hype
/s
2 Likes
One can optimistically anticipate something without believing hype. Hype is necessarily misleading, as it is meant to generate excitement regardless of context. I eagerly await the release of Bannerlord, as I have good reason to believe it will be an excellent game. I do not, however, expect it to be the greatest game I have ever played or bring me intense joy. Hype leads to unreasonable expectations which then lead to disappointment. Hype is not an honest evaluation of evidence, but rather a skewed and therefore false view of reality.
Thinking of hype in retrospect is an effective way of recognizing its futility. I can think of times in my past when I was hyped (Spore is a good example of this). After the period of hype ended and I had the thing which had caused so much distress, it all became meaningless. I remember being very excited about Christmas when I was seven years old, but the day after Christmas I just kept doing what I had been doing, except with a new pile of junk in my room. I realized that collecting material posessions and eternally chasing some future extravagance is no way to achieve happiness. The result did not merit the excitement.
Thank you for teaching me your ways, I will now begin my metamorphosis into an unfeeling husk of emptiness.
2 Likes
Unfeeling husk? I think you misunderstand me. Reasonable excitement is fine, but hype is necessarily not reasonable. You can still be excited if evidence permits, but remember that both emotional extremes (depression and joy) are equally bad.
I understand what you are saying, but hype isn’t something I can really help. I really liked the first game, and want to see what this one has to offer. My hype is also less aimed at playing the game, and more seeing how it performs in the harsh world of the steam market.
No … ?
Isn’t joy kinda good by definition?
2 Likes
Joy is not always good because excess in either direction leads to false perception of reality. Depression begets an overly negative perspective, while joy begets an overly positive one. For example, let us suppose a joyous person sees a group of malicious individuals under a dark bridge. In his joy, the person may not properly fear these individuals and optimisitcally approach them despite the danger, leading to him being harmed.
Similarly, being hyped for a game may cause one to be overly optimistic or have unreasonable expectations which are unlikely to be met by the game. Instead, he should judge the evidence rationally to make reasonable conclusions about how the game will be.
I have a feeling that we have quite a different understanding of what the term hype means…
You are describing what happens when the hype machine gets out of control and the developer isn’t able to manage expectations. Hype is very important for newly released games.
1 Like
Ah, I see! If by “hype” you merely mean general knowledge of and anticipation for the game, then I agree that we had differing understandings of the word. Yes, of course people should be aware of the game. I only apply the word “hype” to situations like Spore or No Man’s Sky. Merriam-Webster defines hype as "promotional publicity of an extravagant or contrived kind ". I agree with this, and this definition is what I meant when I mentioned skewed perception.
I am often frustrated by the popular obsession with novelty. Just because something is new does not make it automatically better, yet games that were released even mere weeks ago can be quickly forgotten. Nonetheless, a discerning person can find and follow games that suit his preferences. That is why I made a post about Kerbal Space Program 2, as it at least appears to be a game that I would like (and it is relevant to Thrive’s long-term plans as well).
Not automatically no, but often times newer things are made using newer discoveries/inventions, and because of that end up better. (I.E. a lot of long-lasting series have a clear difference in quality between the first and last instalment, not just in graphics but in Quality of Life too)
This is a pretty cool interview about the game. It sounds really good, there’s going to be colony building where the colony is a rigid body array and subject to physics like the rockets are, which sounds fun. Also you can explore other solar systems, using “near future” propulsion ideas, build colonies there and then build new rockets at those colonies to go further.
Release data spring 2020 apparently. Also quite a lot more in game footage which looks pretty nice I think.
1 Like
I wasn’t aware of this video. Everything in this interview should be treated as hearsay, of course, as we do not yet have evidence that what he said will truly be in the game. I like the concept of launching rockets from colonies and exploring other star systems. However, I fear that this game will suffer from the dictator problem, i.e. the player will have to micromanage everything and nothing will happen without the player’s input. The “gameplay” shown here stinks of rendered video, and there also was no UI. As such, the “gameplay” shows little.
One thing it does show, however, is that there has been too much focus on graphics. Those explosions have far too many lighting and particle effects for what they are (removal of parts from the game world). I bet this game will have terrible performance and be massively laggy before mods are released that fix it. I hope what he said about it being more moddable is true. He mentioned and praised the two expansions for KSP 1, which suggests that he is obliged to shill for his corporation. This makes me extremely reluctant to believe anything he said. Moreover, I suspect that Take-Two already has expansions planned for this game, and I would not be surprised if large areas of the game are intentionally undeveloped so that the rest of the game can be sold to us as DLC.