Space Age: Kerbal Space Program Is Turning 0.22

By Craig Pearson on September 11th, 2013 at 6:00 pm.

This is my favourite screenshot
Believe it or not, we’ve been coddled by super-cute and ultra-tough space-race simulator, Kerbal Space Program. Players who have a ring of dead Kerbals orbiting Kerbin, or who’ve left lonely craft to sink into the canyons of Eeloo because they forgot to add chutes, might beg to differ, but with upcoming update 0.22 more will be asked of you than ever before. No longer is it enough to just make it to orbit and beyond for the fun of space adventures. There will be science to be done when you’re up there.

0.22 is the R&D update. Gathering data requires you to do experiments in space and report the findings back to Ear – er, Kerbin. It currently just involves getting a specific research tool to space, exposing it to the void, and letting it do its thing, but this is the first building block of career mode and I’d imagine future updates will complicate the issue. With the data gathered, you can beam it back to base or take the ship down and manually transfer it to the space base. The point of this is to increase the science payout for your mission. Science is kind of a currency that you spend in the new tech trees, allowing you to add new, experimental parts to your ships.

Shipbuilding is receiving a pretty major addition, enabling players to save sections of their builds. It means you can call up a pre-assembled chunk of parts and add it on to your ship without having to reconstruct it. Very handy.

It’s a brilliant game. You should buy it.

__________________

« | »

, , .

66 Comments »

  1. scatterlogical says:

    Bill, Bob & Jebidiah approve. They are sick of dying countless deaths because of insufficient R&D of Kerbal technology. You’d think that having an unlimited budget would make cutting corners a moot point.

  2. The Tupper says:

    Pah. KSP’s not hard. Working out keybindings for The Witcher 2. Now THAT’s hard.

    Anyway. Kerbal Space Program’s awesome. Everyone must buy it.

    • TheIronSky says:

      Quit complaining, you Scottish bastard. And from what I’ve seen on Toast TV, you’re no good at Kerbal, either.

    • Teovald says:

      As long as they don’t optimize it better, I don’t think everyone should buy it. Right now Kerbal is a pc killer.

      • amoliski says:

        A PC Killer… if your PC is a potato…

        • vargata says:

          its a pckiller anyway, i have a full new 8 core 4ghz pc with 16gb ram and gtx 650ti, and ksp is totally unplayable… they really has to optimize it before i would advise anybody to buy it…

          • last_user says:

            I’m using a Core 2 Quad 2.8 GHz and a GeForce 8800 GTS+8GB ram…no lag. ever.

          • EpicGoogle says:

            I created an account here just to say that my 4.0GHz Octo-core, 16GB, And Radeon 7770 GHz edition can run KSP just fine. And thats why AMD will always win.

          • cshilling99 says:

            I played a 2gb ram laptop that was an inch and 3/4 think from 2000. lol. I think it may just be some incompatibilities.

          • Joseph256 says:

            I have a fairly basic 3GB RAM ASUS X53E series laptop; minecraft can be more laggy than ksp; when I’m in Kerbin’s atmosphere and looking at kerbin I notice slight lag, but it’s still easy to play… I agree with the people above: If your computer lags to unplayablility then one of two things must be true: You’re computer/laptop is too old and you should upgrade, or it’s RAM is 100% potato powered and you should upgrade.

          • Jolkanin says:

            I can play this without lag on the old Macbook Air, you don’t have an argument.

            End of story.

          • Morzak says:

            Uh, why are people claiming no lag ever? What is you’re biggest structure? Honestly I never saw anyone having decent Frame-rate with huge structures. Sure a standard rocket that get’s you to the Mun or even Duna will run fine on about anything, but build a decently sized space-station and you will be lucky to hit 20 FPS and more likely somewhere around 10 FPS. It runs fine for most stuff but big structures just create lag and unless you have an insanely fast single core you can’t do much about it.

          • vargata says:

            I think they are all KSP accounts to sell it. :) anything above 200 parts will lag to hell and thats something really easy to exceed

          • fafeman says:

            I made an account just to say: no.
            Obviously, SQUAD is not that stupid to register several accounts to one IP. That increases chances to be DDoS’d.
            Also, no. You’re not supposed to use over 200 parts on the same ship. If you lag, turn down the resolution and graphics settings. Also, you’re only supposed to use 50-100 parts max on a payload, as it’s rendering all of the solar system at once, so you can’t really complain. Getting a beefier computer won’t help btw. The lag is coming from your overloaded processor because you are adding too many entities, and no, it’s easy to keep the part count down to 10-20 parts on an orbital rocket. I run a small ASUS home office laptop with 4 GB of ram, and I have a shitty processor, yet I am able to run KSP with hundreds of objects orbiting Kerbin at about 10-20 FPS. Away with your hasty and indecent lies.

          • KingSmegma says:

            I’m playing it on my HP-laptop with a Pentium i5 processor of 2,5GHz, 6G RAM and a shit-tier graphics card. Sure, I get the odd hiccup, but who doesn’t in a game that’s as unfinished as this? I seriouslt think there’s something really, REALLY wrong with your comp, dude…

    • P4p3Rc1iP says:

      Well, it’s not exactly brain surgery…

  3. BobbyDylan says:

    This game just keeps getting better. And it’s already absorbed nigh on 100 hours.

    • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

      I keep hearing the love for this, worth it for a dipper in and outer?

      • InnerPartisan says:

        Do you like sandbox games? Do you like space? Do you like rockets, or things that go BOOM?

        If your answer to any of those questions is “yes”, then my answer to your question is “YES!!!!11!11one”.

      • Neurotic says:

        Do you like holding your stomach, tears streaming down your face with uncontrollable, hysterical laughter as your three little muppet-like dudes plummet to the ground in a burning inferno and explode in an almighty KABOOM! of destroyed hopes and broken muppet-like families? Then you, my friend, need KSP!

      • solidsquid says:

        They’ve got a demo which is actually pretty good at giving you an idea of what the game is like. Give that a shot, and if you like it then look at buying for the extra parts and planets

      • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

        Cheers chaps!

      • derbefrier says:

        as long as you have the patience to learn it, yeah its a lot of fun but its not easy and it does take dedication to do the really cool stuff. I have only ever managed to get into a stable orbit around Kerbal so far and I felt like a super hero when i did it.

      • phuzz says:

        The only reason I stopped playing recently is because 0.21 came out and broke all the mods I had installed. I keep meaning to sort it out, but now I have a new excuse for procrastination, I’m waiting for 0.22!
        However, you may want to avoid KSP if you have trouble not spending all of your spare time playing a game. I can’t remember the number of nights when I’ve ended up playing until the wee hours because I had to try ‘just one more launch’.

      • Sharlie Shaplin says:

        Yes, it’s worth it! I love this game dearly.

      • vargata says:

        do you like laggs and stuttering sound? do you like toys exploding on their own without any reason? do you like when rockets are put together with some kind of rubberised glue and during the flight they are swinging on each other and detaching to destroy hours of works? if your answer is yes for any of these, then my answer is YES, KSP is for you… sad I’ve made the mistake to pay for it, it is not for me.

        • karriban says:

          Do you like complaining about an alpha game being imperfect? Do you enjoy saying a game is unplayable on hardware that should, and can, easily handle it? What about griping that the physics engine in an early development game isn’t perfect? Expecting a rocket to hold together without proper support structure? Then follow Vargata’s example!

          Seriously dude, get over it. The game is still in ALPHA for fucks sake. Of course it will have issues. Development is happening at a fairly decent pace, so issues will hopefully be addressed. As for your hardware not handling the game, the only person who can fix that problem is you. Maybe you have a bunch of other stuff running in the background? perhaps a little too much porn going? I don’t know. But I do know my buddy can play this with little to no lag. Running an i5 quad core 3.4 Ghz, 8 Gigs of ram, and a mid range GTX 550ti. Your setup should be able to handle this without issue. So the fault is on you here, or maybe you have some faulty hardware, who knows? if you really can’t play this game, I would suggest checking your system out for problems.

          Also, quick little edit. You didn’t have to buy the game yet. You could have just waited until it was a bit more polished before dropping your money on it.

          • vargata says:

            yeh, if i run porn i run in front not in the background my little friend… KSP will lag as hell above 200 parts and its unplayable above 400. yah but you just hit the 10? there is no decent pace in development, what they give from patch to patch is crap nothing, i could do it alone faster. its a more than 2 years old sw and even the basics are not working. you are laughable how you try to defend it. are you a ksp member?

        • jalf says:

          Funny, all I’m hearing is “do you like getting angry at games you don’t know how to play”.

          Protip: you do not need 400 parts on a ship.
          And part of where the *game* comes in is that it is possible to build very bad, unstable rockets. You, the player, are supposed to *design* your ships so that they do not fall apart during launch.

          You know the game has a tutorial, yes? Perhaps your rockets would fare better if you tried designing them based on what actually worked. You know, in the same way that while in shooters you “keep getting shot for no reason at all”, you can nevertheless work *with* the game by dodging, crouching, standing behind cover or shooting your enemies before they kill you. And while in racing games “you keep getting lapped for no reason at all”, a skilled player will accelerate thus making his car go faster, and may even try to anticipate and avoid crashes by steering occasionally.

          Often, your success rate goes *way* up if you play the game, rather than sulking that it doesn’t play itself.

  4. Perjoss says:

    sounds like they been working hard for this update, wonder how they munaged to fit so many new features into 1 update…

    • InnerPartisan says:

      SQUAD is all about community interaction, and they’ve “absorbed” modders into their team multiple times. The the new subassembly function, for example, pretty much exists already with exactly the same functionality, albeit as a mod.

    • Ravenholme says:

      And they weren’t even Lethe in getting the update ready

    • vargata says:

      so many??? i saw 2 piece of crap moduls, brought a mod into the game and invented a techtree. If I couldnt do it on a single afternoon…

      • RogeirSkjoldson says:

        Why don’t you, then, if you’re such a badass programmer? I see you throw around big words here, how about you back them up with something substantial? No? In that case, you’re just an entitled pathetic little whiner who can’t deal with the fact that he bought a game that’s not finished yet.

        You don’t like it? That’s your decision, nobody forces you. But if you don’t, how about you just don’t play it, instead of trying to shit-talk it here?

        And for the record … your complaints are ridiculous.
        I’m running this game on a Phenom II X6 1100T, 8GB RAM and a Sapphire HD6850, and I get very little lag up to 400 parts (which is more than you usually need anyway), and it remains playable up to about 700 parts. Generally, the fact that performance decreases with increased part count is only logical, since the game calculates real-time physics for every single part. You could of course largely get rid of that problem by treating any rocket as a single solid entity, but that would rob the game of its character as well as challenge, because you could be as shitty a rocket designer as you want, it’d still fly.
        Obviously that’s one of your problems. Maybe you should just have taken some time and learned about good construction methods before slapping on as many parts as will fit and then complain about lag, wobble and exploding parts.

        Moron.

        And no, I’m not paid by Squad, nor is anybody else that disagrees with you. Because your opinion is just that, an opinion. And a rather shitty one as well, people don’t take kindly to that and will likely go out of their way to call you out on it.
        Like I did. I registered here solely to set you straight.

        You may go now.

        • 6nd says:

          Thank you Rogeir, thank you. If I could up-vote your comment, I would.

          Like you, this arrogant little fuck is the whole reason that I’ve taken the time, and effort to register on this site; now that I’ve read your comment, It would seem that I’m not the only one here out of pure animosity for complete misinformation.

          Oh, and P.S Craig: There’s no atmosphere on Eeloo; by proxy there’s no need for chutes. I’m just sayin’!

  5. realitysconcierge says:

    Does anybody know when KSP is planning to be feature complete?

    • hotmaildidntwork says:

      They have a set of promised features on their about page, https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/about.php . I think the plan is pretty much just that it will be feature complete when they get around to doing everything on that list. When that will be is anybody’s guess though, as a lot of their effort goes into doing cool things that weren’t ever promised.

      • realitysconcierge says:

        I took a look at that. I was hoping someone might know some dates, but it doesn’t look like they’ve set any. I guess I’ll just hold off until they release the career mode then. If I play it before then I’ll just burn myself out before they add the coolest stuff to the game.

        • tasteful says:

          nah don’t do that. i get burned out on games pretty quick but this has dwarf fortress – level or civ – level cyclical addiction. every new update or every few months you’re back.

    • InnerPartisan says:

      It is mind-boggling, btw, to contemplate just how far from “feature complete” KSP still is at this point.

      Seriously, if they just de-bugged .21 and sold it as-is right now, that already would be worth a full retail price many, many times over.

      God, I love this game.

  6. InnerPartisan says:

    Oh my. Is it really wise to let Jebediah – of all Kerbals! – get his hands on the awesome power of SCIENCE? This sure sounds like a recipe for disaster – just look at what he does with mere solid rocket boosters already!

  7. aepervius says:

    I love kerbal space program, but I am getting frustrated a LOT with it. Even with rendez-me a mod to make rendez vous in space easier…. I never got the hang of having two part of my space station float next to each other. They always zip by at great speed and when i slow down I modify the orbit so that I am not on a rendez vous at apogee.

  8. Didden says:

    I’d love to see some sort of Kerbalnaut recruitment and development program. Carefully picking out the best candidates before placing them in your rocket to die in a massive explosion shortly after leaving the conning tower. Make is so my south american friends!

  9. trout says:

    great game!
    i myself am terrible at it: can’t make stable orbits, land on the moon, have any idea how to conserve fuel, build non-exploding rockets, or even grasp the basic concepts involved with parabolas and trajectories and thrust and such things – and i still enjoy it!

  10. Ironclad says:

    needs more struts

  11. JS says:

    Look at me still talking, when there’s science to do
    When I look out there it makes me glad I’m not you
    I’ve experiments to run, there is research to be done
    On the Kerbals who are still alive

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>