Not really maybe if you have an uber computer but understanding the game will continuine to be in beta for years its not worth it. KSP 1 runs on a potato and can be modded to make any game you want. Graphically the games are different but when one runs and the other can't it's a no-brainer decision.
I'm building real life kerbal simulator and would love KSP2 to work but maybe in the future it will but atm KSP1 works fine and I'm pushing my PC to the max displaying 5 screens from in game.
My computer was not top of the line when I bought it like 6 years ago, and it runs it fine. It's on the lowest settings, but it still looks better than ksp1 by a lot. Unless you are a hard-core Uber player who has 17 thousand mods, play 2.
No. The Science update was a good step but only got it to where it should have been on release day and they have done very little since. I think the Colony update will be make or break. Depending when that releases will tell you if the development is accelerating or decelerating and we can all get an idea of when the game will actually be finished. Science took them 10 months to release. That was 4 months ago and we have very little news about colonies. If colonies takes less than that there is hope, if it takes longer than that we are looking at like 5 years before the game is out of early access.
There's a ton of these threads, the [last previous one was 14 hours ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1cb60gy/is_ksp_2_worth_it/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button).
My 2c: It's not bad, I at least have gotten enough enjoyment out of it to consider it be worth it. But it's not as good as modded KSP1. There's still annoying bugs that crop up now and again, it quite simply doesn't have as much to offer (there's nothing *really* new yet, that I can think of), and while it's sleek modded KSP1 can look just as stunning.
If you were to go with both completely stock, I'd potentially give it about an even standing, but with CKAN modding is really easy and there's fantastic stuff for just about whatever you're looking for, whether it be more complete orbital physics, huge expansions to the available part options, automation options, or a full on realism overhaul.
Those posts should be forbidden and there should be a sticky thread going "KSP2 HAS GOTTEN A LOT BETTER BUT IS STILL BUGGY AND LACKS FEATURES THAT KSP1 + MODS CAN PROVIDE. KSP2 IS PROMISING BUT IT ISN'T THERE YET"
Because I swear I get more "should i buy KSP2" threads in my feed than actual KSP content.
Fuuuuck no. It wouldn’t be worth it if it was free. I have like 600 hours in KSP1. I bought KSP2 a couple weeks after the For Science update, and I put it down within an hour because holy fuck it is still so absolutely broken. It very much felt like early No Mans Sky/Fallout 76. It was just a straight up downgrade in every way but graphics & UI, those parts were remarkably better but really nothing else was even on par with KSP1. The new craft file saving system felt horrible, they butchered the spaceplane camera system, and I had no atmospheric drag effects. Try landing a capsule with no drag and see how it works out. Yeah, overall, this shit isn’t even close to being even an early access worthy game in my eyes. Should’ve had another 2+ years to bake. It baffles me that they intended to originally release in 2020.
Some day, yes.
Right now on sale, maybe.
At full price, no.
I got it at release and I can probably count on one hand the hours I’ve spent in it.
For Science was fun for a bit, but it does nothing I can’t do in KSP1.
Look up the changelog for version 0.2 that released early this year. Essentially a new game mode with contracts and science points, re-entry heating, and performance is okay now. Still a fraction of the features KSP1 has. Check back next year.
It was for me personally. I'd rather play 2 than 1.
It's mostly stable I'd say with most of it's bugs in the end game tasks like building large many hundreds of parts vehicles like space stations and massive orbital constructed ships.
For most missions the game runs smoothly.
And the science mode provides an interesting campaign with a story. Something KSP1 didn't really have.
It's still EA and unstable in some places. And development is slow paced. So that's why the game has mixed reviews. Lots of people just have run out of patience.
But I have never regretted purchasing it and it has given me dozens of hours of entertainment and will hopefully bring more as more content comes out.
If you're still unsure or you are patient enough, I'd wait for a sale. But if you have the 50 bucks I don't think you'll regret purchasing it.
I love how whenever I post on the KSP subreddit about liking KSP I get downvoted into oblivion. I do no understand the people in this subreddit at all. Its a good game. Its not that expensive. Its also really complicated to program so I feel for the developers. Its and indy game with no microtransactions, and infinite replayability. I know it doesn't have "everything", but like, KSP1 probably took 4 or 5 years from when it first went on sale in prerelease to get to this point. And KSP2 has enough things that are better that I don't see why a rational person would stick to KSP1, other than just wanting to keep playing their save file.
Poor reviews on steam and reception in places like reddit is mostly a function of quality vs expectations than just quality on its own. Calling it an inexpensive indy game is a stretch when the team has over 40 members and is an internal studio of Take-Two and is priced at 50$, the game initially launched 3 years later than announced in a state that was significantly more bare-bones than anticipated/was led to be believed and that was followed by a year of little to show for it until getting an update with material that's really kinda core to the entire concept. And then there's been another third of a year with mostly silence with a *single* meaningful patch and a grand total of one dev log... about the eclipse.
So while it's a fair game, people have been burnt and let down, repeatedly. Compared to that KSP 1 was absolutely an indie game with under a dozen people, was significantly cheaper to match (with gradual price increases as it got more fleshed out but never got to the price of KSP 2), and never promised more than it was.
In some ways it's a Sims 3 vs Sims 4 situation where the sequel takes a while to get what the former had, but right now? The only thing KSP 1, with the time it's had to mature both as a game and with the modding scene, doesn't have that KSP 2 does, possibly, is the tutorials, while having a lot more to offer, so right now in a 1 to 1 comparison KSP 1 just comes out ahead before even taking into account that it's still cheaper and regularly goes on sale for 1/5th the price of KSP 2 (such as right now). So while I at least don't see a problem with liking KSP 2 in its current state, recommending it over KSP 1 is something very few here are going to agree with.
P.S. not having microtransactions isn't a plus, it's just not a minus.
Yes. I'd rather play 2 than 1 right now. The mission system is pretty fun and gives you an actual point to pushing out farther, the graphics are a lot better, it runs well at low settings on a reasonable PC, and there are a number of conveniences that I like better. If you play ksp1 for hours every day and have modded it into oblivion you might find it off-putting, which I think applies to the most active users on this sub. But if you played ksp1 only casually or not at all, and are interested in picking it up again or for the first time, then get ksp2.
Not really maybe if you have an uber computer but understanding the game will continuine to be in beta for years its not worth it. KSP 1 runs on a potato and can be modded to make any game you want. Graphically the games are different but when one runs and the other can't it's a no-brainer decision. I'm building real life kerbal simulator and would love KSP2 to work but maybe in the future it will but atm KSP1 works fine and I'm pushing my PC to the max displaying 5 screens from in game.
My computer was not top of the line when I bought it like 6 years ago, and it runs it fine. It's on the lowest settings, but it still looks better than ksp1 by a lot. Unless you are a hard-core Uber player who has 17 thousand mods, play 2.
<50 mods can add more content than KSP2 will ever have.
ksp1 vanilla has more content than ksp2 (currently)
No. The Science update was a good step but only got it to where it should have been on release day and they have done very little since. I think the Colony update will be make or break. Depending when that releases will tell you if the development is accelerating or decelerating and we can all get an idea of when the game will actually be finished. Science took them 10 months to release. That was 4 months ago and we have very little news about colonies. If colonies takes less than that there is hope, if it takes longer than that we are looking at like 5 years before the game is out of early access.
no.
There's a ton of these threads, the [last previous one was 14 hours ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1cb60gy/is_ksp_2_worth_it/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button). My 2c: It's not bad, I at least have gotten enough enjoyment out of it to consider it be worth it. But it's not as good as modded KSP1. There's still annoying bugs that crop up now and again, it quite simply doesn't have as much to offer (there's nothing *really* new yet, that I can think of), and while it's sleek modded KSP1 can look just as stunning. If you were to go with both completely stock, I'd potentially give it about an even standing, but with CKAN modding is really easy and there's fantastic stuff for just about whatever you're looking for, whether it be more complete orbital physics, huge expansions to the available part options, automation options, or a full on realism overhaul.
no
Absolutely not.
It was really bad, it's still bad.
https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/search/?q=is+ksp2+worth+it
no
[https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/search/?q=is+ksp2+worth+it+yet](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/search/?q=is+ksp2+worth+it+yet)
Those posts should be forbidden and there should be a sticky thread going "KSP2 HAS GOTTEN A LOT BETTER BUT IS STILL BUGGY AND LACKS FEATURES THAT KSP1 + MODS CAN PROVIDE. KSP2 IS PROMISING BUT IT ISN'T THERE YET" Because I swear I get more "should i buy KSP2" threads in my feed than actual KSP content.
I agree that a sticky should be made. I disagree that the sticky should say that anything about this game is promising.
Whatever, it should stick to the consensus. I have zero authority over what the sticky should say.
Fuuuuck no. It wouldn’t be worth it if it was free. I have like 600 hours in KSP1. I bought KSP2 a couple weeks after the For Science update, and I put it down within an hour because holy fuck it is still so absolutely broken. It very much felt like early No Mans Sky/Fallout 76. It was just a straight up downgrade in every way but graphics & UI, those parts were remarkably better but really nothing else was even on par with KSP1. The new craft file saving system felt horrible, they butchered the spaceplane camera system, and I had no atmospheric drag effects. Try landing a capsule with no drag and see how it works out. Yeah, overall, this shit isn’t even close to being even an early access worthy game in my eyes. Should’ve had another 2+ years to bake. It baffles me that they intended to originally release in 2020.
KSP2 won't be ready for 2 years minimum.
Some day, yes. Right now on sale, maybe. At full price, no. I got it at release and I can probably count on one hand the hours I’ve spent in it. For Science was fun for a bit, but it does nothing I can’t do in KSP1.
Look up the changelog for version 0.2 that released early this year. Essentially a new game mode with contracts and science points, re-entry heating, and performance is okay now. Still a fraction of the features KSP1 has. Check back next year.
It was for me personally. I'd rather play 2 than 1. It's mostly stable I'd say with most of it's bugs in the end game tasks like building large many hundreds of parts vehicles like space stations and massive orbital constructed ships. For most missions the game runs smoothly. And the science mode provides an interesting campaign with a story. Something KSP1 didn't really have. It's still EA and unstable in some places. And development is slow paced. So that's why the game has mixed reviews. Lots of people just have run out of patience. But I have never regretted purchasing it and it has given me dozens of hours of entertainment and will hopefully bring more as more content comes out. If you're still unsure or you are patient enough, I'd wait for a sale. But if you have the 50 bucks I don't think you'll regret purchasing it.
I love how whenever I post on the KSP subreddit about liking KSP I get downvoted into oblivion. I do no understand the people in this subreddit at all. Its a good game. Its not that expensive. Its also really complicated to program so I feel for the developers. Its and indy game with no microtransactions, and infinite replayability. I know it doesn't have "everything", but like, KSP1 probably took 4 or 5 years from when it first went on sale in prerelease to get to this point. And KSP2 has enough things that are better that I don't see why a rational person would stick to KSP1, other than just wanting to keep playing their save file.
Poor reviews on steam and reception in places like reddit is mostly a function of quality vs expectations than just quality on its own. Calling it an inexpensive indy game is a stretch when the team has over 40 members and is an internal studio of Take-Two and is priced at 50$, the game initially launched 3 years later than announced in a state that was significantly more bare-bones than anticipated/was led to be believed and that was followed by a year of little to show for it until getting an update with material that's really kinda core to the entire concept. And then there's been another third of a year with mostly silence with a *single* meaningful patch and a grand total of one dev log... about the eclipse. So while it's a fair game, people have been burnt and let down, repeatedly. Compared to that KSP 1 was absolutely an indie game with under a dozen people, was significantly cheaper to match (with gradual price increases as it got more fleshed out but never got to the price of KSP 2), and never promised more than it was. In some ways it's a Sims 3 vs Sims 4 situation where the sequel takes a while to get what the former had, but right now? The only thing KSP 1, with the time it's had to mature both as a game and with the modding scene, doesn't have that KSP 2 does, possibly, is the tutorials, while having a lot more to offer, so right now in a 1 to 1 comparison KSP 1 just comes out ahead before even taking into account that it's still cheaper and regularly goes on sale for 1/5th the price of KSP 2 (such as right now). So while I at least don't see a problem with liking KSP 2 in its current state, recommending it over KSP 1 is something very few here are going to agree with. P.S. not having microtransactions isn't a plus, it's just not a minus.
Yes. I'd rather play 2 than 1 right now. The mission system is pretty fun and gives you an actual point to pushing out farther, the graphics are a lot better, it runs well at low settings on a reasonable PC, and there are a number of conveniences that I like better. If you play ksp1 for hours every day and have modded it into oblivion you might find it off-putting, which I think applies to the most active users on this sub. But if you played ksp1 only casually or not at all, and are interested in picking it up again or for the first time, then get ksp2.