Profile image

Why SimplePlanes is better than SimpleRockets

356k WinsWings  one year ago

ChatGPT said: (yet, it is true to me)

SimplePlanes and SimpleRockets cater to different audiences, each with its strengths. However, some might argue that SimplePlanes has advantages over SimpleRockets for specific reasons:

1. Ease of Use and Accessibility
SimplePlanes focuses on building planes and vehicles in a way that feels intuitive. The mechanics are straightforward, making it easier for beginners to jump in and create something that works without extensive trial and error.
SimpleRockets, while offering a similar building experience, often requires more technical knowledge of rocketry, orbital mechanics, and physics, which might be daunting for casual players.

2. Creativity and Variety
In SimplePlanes, the open-ended design tools allow players to create not only planes but also cars, boats, and fantastical contraptions. The physics engine is flexible enough to accommodate wild creativity.
SimpleRockets focuses primarily on rockets and space exploration, which can feel more niche or limiting to those not as interested in aerospace engineering.

3. Ground and Atmospheric Gameplay
SimplePlanes allows for detailed exploration and interaction within atmospheric environments, including airports, islands, and other terrestrial locations. This makes gameplay more dynamic with challenges like dogfights, stunt courses, and ground missions.
SimpleRockets revolves around space, which can be more abstract and less engaging for some players who prefer tangible landscapes.

4. Community and Mods
SimplePlanes has an active community that shares a vast array of custom builds, from realistic aircraft to wild fictional machines. This diversity adds longevity to the game.
While SimpleRockets also has a strong modding community, its focus on realism might make it harder for casual players to experiment as freely.

5. Learning Curve
SimplePlanes is more forgiving, with simpler physics that doesn’t require an in-depth understanding of advanced concepts like delta-v or orbital trajectories.
SimpleRockets, being more simulation-focused, requires knowledge of astrophysics, which can be challenging for players who aren’t familiar with these concepts.

In short, SimplePlanes offers a more accessible, diverse, and creative experience, appealing to a broader audience. However, SimpleRockets excels for those who love space exploration and realism. It's a matter of preference!

Lol, sorry if I incidentally roasted some SR fans - These are just my feeling which aligned with ChatGPT

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image

    yeah, I really had a good time playing it.

    6 days ago
  • Profile image
    356k WinsWings

    @Piecekeeper, yes, you are right in your own way. After all, SR is not my game.

    7 days ago
  • Profile image

    In my opinion we can't compare this two games .first I played Simplerocket it's beauty Is in exploring planets , leaving earth, reentry, programming an so on. If we know orbital mechanics and programming it's like watching a movie. In SR we can build things like missiles ,It's a very programmable game

    +1 9 days ago
  • Profile image
    356k WinsWings

    @SPsidearm I tried Juno, but it can't customize and build realistic like SP. Then I quit

    one year ago
  • Profile image
    356k WinsWings

    @Jundroo @AndrewGarrison I have some input you might interest

    one year ago
  • Profile image
    63.3k SILVERPANZER

    And one more thing, there are no weapons in SR2 (except for mods), which eliminates some of the players who like weapons, Tanks, fighters, battleships and other.

    +1 one year ago
  • Profile image
    38.0k DDVC

    One thing that I think J:NO wins over SP is the slider for Fuselage corners instead of just four option that SP currently have. I hope that feature will be brought to SP2.

    one year ago
  • Profile image
    12.8k SPsidearm

    I downloaded Juno and then quit.

    +2 one year ago
  • Profile image

    @V I gotta agree with you! Got bored playing JNO due to the building limitations.

    +1 one year ago
  • Profile image
    65.7k PlaneFlightX

    @V that connection stuff is absolute nonsense and makes no sense. With the stuff I do in SP, I would spend most of my time connecting stuff to other stuff

    +2 one year ago
  • Profile image
    39.2k V

    JNO has build limitations that SP just doesn't have.
    .
    One connection per connection point per part?!?!? What were they thinking?! Stuff such as hypno planes are straight up impossible in JNO due to the connection point limit
    .
    (The connection limit is arbitrarily set in the editor, raw XML editing can bypass this)

    +7 one year ago
  • Profile image
    65.7k PlaneFlightX

    Meanwhile me turning it into ComplexPlanes after spending 3 years on 1 plane

    +2 one year ago
  • Profile image

    What I want from JNO to be implemented to SP:
    1: Add rational symmetry
    2: Oxygen Tanks
    3: People
    4: Actually be able to go past the atmosphere
    5: That's all
    Yes

    +2 one year ago
  • Profile image
    23.9k Axartar

    imo the lack of detail of pieces is actually a good thing from sp, allows you to model your own stuff from scratch, also I know the fixed it but in sr2 the rotational symmetry mirroring was insanely annoying

    +1 one year ago
  • Profile image

    being 3d also helps a fair amount at creating a game with more depth (HEH)

    +1 one year ago
  • Profile image
    51.6k Graingy

    simplanaz

    +1 one year ago
  • Profile image
    107k Monarchii

    simpleplanes my beloved :3

    +3 one year ago
  • Profile image

    siiiimmpllle pleaens
    mmmmm

    one year ago
  • Profile image

    Simply put, it's just simple.

    one year ago