Mako
-
Posts
368 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Mako
-
-
13 hours ago, Foxster said:
You know what has needed a makeover (and crash diet) since forever? The red-headed step-child of parts...
5+ years on and I don't think I've ever used this part. I mostly blame my disuse of it on the fact that I'm not terribly creative, but it doesn't help that it's very ugly (and if I'm not completely mistaken was broken in some way for a while).
I can't say I'll have any more use for it revamped than I do now (I honestly forget it even exists most of the time), but it'd be nice to know it got done up as well for consistency's sake.
-
2 hours ago, razark said:
Is that something Squad has control over now? Or would merchandising rights fall under Take Two's purchase?
By my understanding, Squad no longer owns any part of KSP or Kerbals, having sold the property to Take-Two Interactive. Therefore, it is solely up to Take-Two to make merchandise happen as they're now the only people who can legally do so.
This comes up from time to time since Take-Two's purchase over a year ago, and the only "official" word we have received so far is that it's being worked on. That was said by Squad's PR person quite a while ago, and I've never seen any official word from Take-Two themselves.
I'm a bit surprised, really. Take-Two has proven time and again that they love money much more than they love delievering a good product, so over-priced, cheaply-manufactured, licensed merchandise seems like the kind of thing they would love to send your way.
-
51 minutes ago, Lisias said:
I remember I saying in the past that Managing User's Expectations is harsh, and perhaps something Squad should be doing differently. I think it worths mentioning it again.
I'm afraid I don't have the slightest clue about how this should be handled, however. The growing list of long discussions in which I'm recurrently involved in this forum appears to corroborates this, by the way.
It's not an easy problem to tackle, but I do think you've hit on what is often a contributing cause, if not the root cause, of a lot of users' frustrations with many software titles.
In the case of KSP specifically, we've never really known what to expect beyond the next update. And rarely, if ever, has the next update has been perfectly clear or detailed. Surprises are probably a good thing in general, but the community hasn't had a clear idea of KSP's future post-launch. Based on my experience with other titles and other dev teams It feels like that's because Squad itself hasn't had a clear idea.
Right now it feels like they're still working on KSP because they don't know what else to do and Take-Two is still sending money, so why not? It seems unlikely that that's the case, but that's how it feels. Whatever the case may be, I don't think anyone can say that Squad is providing enough info to have any idea what to expect, even about something as specific as the currently underway art revamp.
It can be tough to manage, but I always feel like providing as much honest information as possible is best. I know some folks in this forum like to point out that some people will misunderstand any communication and use that as an excuse to not share any info, but that just strikes me as failing to communicate clearly on the dev side and failing to comprehend on the user side. Just accept that there will be some of that, and work through it. It seems better than the alternative, and no one would have to be any more engaged than they currently are with the community.
You're right that it's not an easy, quick thing to tackle, but maybe it doesn't really matter. Maybe the numbers guys at Take-Two have figured out that KSP sold well enough that any DLC will likely sell enough to justify continued development with or without a lot of community engagement. Or maybe, like how you're feeling about KSP, it's a work in progress and we'll see improvement.
As I said earlier: I do want you to be right.
-
Tylo said it better than I could of.
Just to clarify: Everything besides what Squad employees have posted in this thread, including your posts, is speculation.
You seem to have based your speculation on what Squad has said and some optimism. I appreciate this. This is what I would like to see.
I've based my speculation on what I've observed from Squad while following KSP's development for the last 5 years, on what I've observed from other game development projects from before and after KSP, and on my natural predilection for pessimism. This is what I expect to see.
I would love for you to be right and for me to be wrong. I would love for Squad to prove me wrong, but from what I've seen so far I don't expect them to. I expect KSP to remain a great idea with decent execution and unrealized potential.
Making video games is hard, and sometimes good enough just has to be good enough. I'm happy with what I have, but it doesn't mean I don't want more or I stop seeing room for improvement.
-
17 hours ago, Lisias said:
Guidelines and copycatting are two different things.
If you had played Assassin's Creed since the first one, you would had noticed differences on the characters design. There're guidelines? Yep. But now and then such guidelines changes. Did you noticed how much the Animus changed in each version? Guess who proposed such changes?
I'm also a long time Tomb Rider player. Believe, there're a lot of design changes on each game - even at the times at Core Designs. Google for Toby Gard.
I think you need a mirror at home.
The implications of your insinuations are near offensive. You are implicitly saying that Squad are allowing a random artist to "ruin the game" and are unable to prevent such catastrophe. You are also implying that every game artist are mere copycats, unable to create and innovate.
Yes, there're guidelines. But yes, such guidelines change. Did you notice it on the last Lara Croft models, didn't you? Had you played MGS on the last 30 years?
And, above all, how do you think you are able to decide if the artist is running wild, or merely defining a new guideline ? Once a game studio decide to renew the aesthetics of a game, who do you think they will hire for the job? An accountant?
You (and granted, not only you - you only had the bad luck to be that last drop on the cup of water) are making a lot of assumptions without any solid ground. You don't build a game the same way you build a Web Site, a commercial application or a consumer gadget.
It would be wise.
Speaking of near offensive, your misunderstanding of klgraham's post(s) (and mine by proxy) is pretty much there. To be fair, text is not always a good way to convey nuance, but it also seems to be a case of seeing what you want instead of what's there.
No one is asking for Squad to copycat Porkjet's style, however we would like to see them try to copy Porkjet's best practices when it comes to asset creation, such as efficient UV mapping and effective normal/specular map use.
As for the guidelines/style guide side of things, yes, they change over the life of a franchise, and possibly even over the life of a single title, especially as development teams changes. But that implies there is a guideline to begin with. The disparate styles existing in KSP are a result of many peoples' styles and likely a total lack of a style guide in favor of getting working parts in updates. Now, that the parts are in the game, there's no rush to revamp them... unless development time is coming to an end. And since there's (presumably) no rush, there's time to do things right by following best practices and enacting a style guide. From what I've seen (just taking the part previews into account), there isn't a style guide. And that's what our posts have been about.
It's not about the fact that the design style has changed, it's that it has never been consistent or coherent and the preview revamped parts don't show any sign of improving that situation.
-
The thing is, I'm less interested in anyone emulating the exact style of Porkjet's parts, and far more interested in current Squad emulating the technical proficiency exhibited by Porkjet.
Squad can do whatever style they want, I'd just like them to at least implement Porkjet's best practices when it comes to asset creation.
-
1 hour ago, klgraham1013 said:
That we aren't sure if there's a style guide is your answer on whether or not there is a style guide.
Yeah, I'm with you on that. The thing is, and this is a (mostly) rhetorical question here, but what's worse? That we're looking at the results of having a style guide, or that we're looking at the results of the lack of a style guide?
Both answers speak volumes and neither inspires hope...
-
I, too, am not a fan of the repeated texture. It makes the part look like it was rushed out the door with not enough time to avoid cutting corners, or not enough design direction/creativity to come up with a cohesive, full-height design.
However, the end cap is an improvement, especially after the giant, featureless black hole end cap on the probe core last week. The trade-off this week of decent end cap for repeating body texture is not a great value proposition.
And if, like a few others have mentioned, whites or other colors don't match between new and old parts, that's a problem. This, and other inconsistencies, makes me wonder if there is a style guide for part development, or if the artists are just winging it and hoping for the best.
I recall something about a new hire for the position of art director a while back; I hope they, in particular, are reviewing the feedback regarding the art this and these past weeks. Consistency amongst assets is important, but not so much that you're repeating textures...
-
Negativity aside, passinglurker's critique on the quality of the work shown has never come across as just complaining and is far from the "it's not porkjet so I don't like it" summary you've decided it is. Porkjet is only brought into the discussion because Porkjet's quality of work is the best we've seen in stock KSP to date, and accepting anything less seems like accepting a downgrade in quality.
The technical ability demonstrated in some of the previews is subpar when compared to other parts already in the game. That is the argument being made here. The problem is it then comes down to lack of advanced ability of the current artists (I don't mean this as an insult, I can't draw my way out of a paper bad in real life or on PC), indifference, or development considerations. Not everyone is a skilled artist, and sometimes in game development "good enough" has to be considered good enough to ship. However, it doesn't mean that it stands up to art that is already in the game.
Porkjet's work isn't being evaluated here on its style, but on its technical expertise. It does things well on the artistic side of things as well as the game asset side. It's not unattainable by folks other than Porkjet, but we haven't seen the current team at Squad attempt to meet the same quality level. It's clear they're trying something -- no one can deny that -- but what they are showing isn't as proficient as what's come before.
You can like a style and still find faults with its execution, and you can agree that something is technically excellent and still find it unattractive, and everything in between... but what is being discussed (again, negativity aside) is the technical excellence displayed in Squad's previews. Your breakdown of the discussion is inaccurate and skewed (even when we factor in negativity).
-
25 minutes ago, Deddly said:
I suggest being nice, whether it gets the results we want or not. If we don't get results, perhaps we just have to live with the fact that the devs will do what they feel is best, and that won't always match what we think is best.
This is something I can completely get behind. There is no downside to everyone being a bit nicer (the world could certainly use it) as long as you accept that being nicer in and of itself is unlikely to affect the outcome.
-
2 hours ago, Deddly said:
Is that not in itself a worthwhile goal? That was my only point.
Fair enough, as long as we're not arguing that friendly wording makes criticism more accurate. It might be less unpleasant, but it's not inherently more accurate.
2 hours ago, Deddly said:Well, that's just playing dirty. If they don't want more development, they should take whichever version of the game they prefer and be happy with it. If the intention is to stop development by overwhelming the devs with negativity, 1) it won't work, it will just make them ignore the person/thread; and 2) those of us who appreciate continued development will not be impressed with such tactics on the official forum.
Three things with regards to this.
1) Continued negativity from a community can and has caused creators to leave projects. I'm not saying it will happen here or that all of Squad would stop working, but there is plenty of history of people departing projects because of vocal opponents. We're people with feelings and, most importantly, limits.
2) I don't think anyone criticizing Squad's work is doing it for community recognition, so I doubt the lack of recognition will dissuade the less friendly critiques.
3) The issue with picking a version and sticking with it means you're limited to the mods available for only that version. This means giving up on any new stuff the community comes up with as well as giving up on new stock features/improvements. The thing is, when development ends no one will have to make that hard decision. Modding will continue after the last version of KSP hits the download servers. In fact, it might even thrive in an environment where modders don't have to worry about future stock changes breaking their work. And mods could focus on fixing and improving the stock game without concern for the effort being made redundant or untenable. The end of KSP development is not exactly a bad thing for a variety of reasons, and mods are one area that will likely benefit greatly.
Lastly, and this is not a numbered response to your post specifically but rather KSP development in general: One day development will end. When it does, Squad will either dissolve or begin to work on something new (be it KSP 2 [hopefully without the limitations of KSP] or something else entirely). More games doesn't sound like a bad thing to me. And I'm probably not creative enough, but I just don't see where else KSP can go from here. I have to say I'm in the clean it up, bux fix, and polish the heck out of it and call it done camp. Continuing to bolt stuff on in a largely directionless fashion (as its felt to me and we have no evidence [roadmap] to the contrary) seems like a way to drag a good game down.
-
27 minutes ago, Deddly said:
His point was that removing those parts greatly increases the quality of the critique, and he has hit the nail exactly on the head.
I don't think it increases the quality of the critique in the slightest. It does make the tone on the critique less offensive, and there is probably merit in that, but "nice" criticism is not inherently more correct or valid than "mean" criticism.
The frustration exhibited by the tone of some posts is understandable, and also isn't helpful in and of itself. The criticism being offered however, regardless of tone, seems to me to be accurate in its assessments of the quality of work being shown.
And no matter how nice you try to make the phrase "Your work is objectively unacceptable," it will always be a hard thing to hear. We can try to be as nice as possible, but the truth isn't always so kind. A person who cares about the work they do will likely be some amount of hurt hearing this (as you said, we're all human with feelings), but will hopefully see past their feelings as they realize how they can improve what they do.
We often learn more from our mistakes than from our successes, and in this it helps to have someone point out our mistakes and suggest ways to correct or avoid these problems.
Humans with feelings will, however, eventually give up -- no matter how much they care -- when met with enough negativity. It is not a great reaction, but it is an understandable, and I'd bet near 100% relatable, reaction. It seems like there is and growing number of folks who would not be opposed to this outcome, so try as anyone might, the tone may persist because being nice would encourage rather than discourage further development.
-
This is neat! I was mostly unaware of and unfamiliar with nomographs until this thread caught my attention. They seem like something I could really geek out over.
Nice work!
-
2 hours ago, shdwlrd said:
I think the point is there should be any option to allow contracts in the sandbox mode. It's a no fuss way to play with contracts.
Oh, I absolutely get that. My point was that you can already do that with very little fuss, so why wait for something that I imagine is unlikely to come and likely to be more work for Squad to implement than it is for a user to get going today with no external tools/mods necessary.
One could weakly argue that Squad already did implement what is being asked for by using the options at the new game menu and the cheat menu. I don't think there's a single good reason to wait, if that's what you want to play now.
-
9 hours ago, Cheif Operations Director said:
If your in sandbox you can not even do science for real. I would love contracts for sandbox just for the sake of it. I mean why not?
Start a Career mode game, open the cheat menu, give yourself lots of money and science points, unlock/upgrade everything, and you have exactly that: Sandbox with contracts and the ability to do (even less meaningful) science actions.
-
KSP is not an "Xbox One + Windows 10" title, so any Xbox achievements would not be unlockable on PC. The best you can hope for is for Steam achievements to someday be implemented, but that hasn't happened yet (as far as I'm aware -- I don't have the Steam version).
-
2 hours ago, Dicapitano said:
Take Two interactive is a much bigger developer with deeper pockets than the original team. They do have the capacity to add the necessary resources to make a great game concept even better.
Remember that initially KSP was developed by a very small team with very few resources. They did a great job but still they had to work with what they had.
One basic limitation of the same is that it uses "Patched conic approximation" for the physics engine, which excludes things like Lagrange points, perturbations, Lissajous orbits, halo orbits or tidal forces. This is something that can only be done with a dedicated engine which probably has to be written from scratch. Felipe Falanghe of Squad developed the game on a string back in 2011, and he had to choose the most cost effective option to get this done quickly, not the best one.
My view is that once you have a solid and optimized engine, the further development opportunities become endless. I remember that the European Space Agency was at one point hiring interns to work spacecraft concepts based on KSP... if you have a solid core physics engine this could really become both a great game but also a benchmark for education.
While this build-an-engine-from-scratch approach would most likely be ideal for a game such as KSP, I don't think we'll see it happen. It would take a lot of time, a lot of money, and a team that's capable of creating such a thing.
Could Take-Two make those things happen? I'm fairly certain they can afford it. But is there enough profit in it to warrant it? That seems to me to be a lot less likely.
Even if we were to entertain such ambitious hopes, we'd be looking at a thing that likely wouldn't be available for 4 to 5 years. Even if they've started already, we probably wouldn't see anything until 2022 at the earliest, and even then it might just be early looks at something still in a pre-release state.
As much as I'd like to see something like this, I just don't see Take-Two taking one chance on such a niche product that would require the amount of resources as I'd love to see devoted to something like KSP. I dont even think it's possible even if they can figure out a way to incorporate recurring purchases into this new, rebuilt-from-the-ground-up KSP...
...One finger curls on the monkey's paw...
KSP 2.0! Now with color-coded loot drops for parts, microtransactions, and DLC skins! Only $60! Add the season pass* for only $20! Preorder your copy and get these fantastic pre-order only part skins!
Buy the SOLAR SYSTEM EDITION to get the season pass* included for only $75!
Or the GALAXY EDITION with the season pass*, a set of unique GALAXY EDITION skins, a copy of the soundtrack, and 4 digital wallpapers for only $90!
Or, for the little Kerbalnaut who just has to have it all, the UNIVERSE EDITION! It includes the season pass*, a set of unique skins, soundtrack, wallpapers, an "I bought the most expensive version of KSP 2.0" t-shirt (One Size Fits All), a disapppinting Kerbal figurine, and you can download the game a week before everyone else for just $150!
*Season pass content and release date to be announced at a later date.
Honestly, I'd almost be okay with it going that way. At least then Take-Two's purchase of KSP would start to make some sense. As it stands I just don't see how they plan to make money off of one niche title that came out of early access and had its big debut/fanfare about 2 years prior to their purchase of it.
-
10 hours ago, steve_v said:
If your product is advertised as running on linux, you support linux.
But it DOES run on linux. It just doesn't support a joystick. Look, I get your point about it was working and now it's not, and I completely understand your frustration. The thing is, if the devs have interacted with the bug report then they're aware of the situation, and by now any one from Squad who cares about the situation knows how you feel.
If bringing it up with relative frequency provides you some amount of positive feeling(s), then I guess you keep doing you, but otherwise I'm just not sure what you hope to get out of it. After all, you're
10 hours ago, steve_v said:also real, real tired of hearing "Unity problem, wont fix". It's been going on since alpha.
, so you should already know what to expect.
Maybe if you complain enough Squad will remove joystick support for everyone. It's probably far easier, and more believable, than fixing joystick support for linux, at any rate. Then everyone is equal again, except the console folks, of course.
-
I haven't used a lot of mods for KSP personally, but judging by the general lack of freaking out over mods on the forums, I have to guess that KSP mods themselves aren't causing PC issues.
That being said, people usually browse websites to find mods, and websites themselves can be the transmission source of malware/adware. KSP mods all largely come from a few generally regarded as safe websites (again, judging by the lack of people reacting negatively on the forums). However, mod sites for other games, especially extremely popular games like Minecraft, can sometimes be a source of problems. How well do you trust the places you use to find and download mods? Compromised websites can potentially compromise your PC even if you never actively download a single thing from them.
Any mod can have malicious code in it, but, as others point out, most/all KSP mods should be making their source code available which reduces the risk of malicious KSP mods. It seems highly unlikely that KSP mods are responsible for the issues you describe. I would strongly suspect unsafe browsing habits by one or more users to be the problem.
Also, be wary of any free software you have to install with an installer. For mods or just in general. It's become a not uncommon practice, even for some decent, legitimate free software, to have installers install malware/Potentially-Unwanted-Programs alongside whatever you're actively trying to install. If you just click next/continue through the installer without carefully reading each screen, you might inadvertently allow the installer to install unwanted software.
This might turn out to be a good learning experience for you and your brother both in how to detect, remove, and avoid problematic/unwanted software. I wish I could recommend further reading, but I'm going by the accumulation of many years of personal experience and many learning experiences of my own. Good luck to you and your brother.
-
The trouble with asking for an answer is that they might not even have an answer. Maybe they want to update the console versions to be in parity (as much as possible, at least) with the PC versions, but don't know if they'll be able to.
Should they tell you yes, and then fail to deliver? Should they tell you no, and upset you that way instead? Or should they remain silent, do what they can, and see what happens?
There is no good answer if they can't guarantee an outcome, and my bet is that the only thing they can guarantee is that they won't do more work. That would be very easy for them to deliver on.
Not having an answer or even any idea or hint about future plans is pretty frustrating. As a PC player, I'm frustrated I don't have any idea about the future of KSP; I can only imagine how console players feel. The only thing I can say is: if you want development to continue, no news is good news.
The only product Squad works on is KSP, and they don't even own it now. They no longer have a product to sell directly. So if Squad wants to keep making money, it's in their best interest their keep working on KSP. That's about the most hope I can offer. And just going by track record for PC or console, I suspect it's much more than Squad will offer.
-
@pandaman has it right, there is no information.
At least in this the console versions are the same as the PC versions; there's no news about the future of the PC versions either.
-
2 hours ago, sh1pman said:
But does it need to be realistic?
Does it need to? No, its a video game about an impossibly small solar system with a bunch of unrealistic stuff already. @GregroxMun has pointed out how the stats don't match the models and how the models (and their swapped stats) are inspired by specific real-world historical engines. These parts arrived in an expansion called Making History, not Making Stuff Up, and in that context it makes sense for the stats to match the models in a way that lines up with their historical inspiration.
If a stat swap affects your crafts, you can always avoid the update or mod the files manually or with Module Manager. I do sympathize with your predicament, but if it's wrong it should be fixed. Engines got updates to their stats a while back to make sure their stats made some sense with their models, and I don't see any good reason to go against that line of thinking now.
-
8 hours ago, Dafni said:
Do we have a thread or more info on this tracking software? Is it known yet what it does exactly, and when?
8 hours ago, steve_v said:Standard Unity analytics, nothing more. Fire up wireshark and see for yourself.
Innocent until proven guilty and all that.Also Redshell customer tracking, which according to Redshell's website is to allow devs/publishers to track effectiveness of advertising and sales of software.
It's all fairly innocuous stuff, but it is customer tracking and it didn't show up until Take-Two's new EULA. I don't think it's some conspiracy or anything like that. All I'm saying is that apart from an external QA team which obviously wasn't given much time to work on 1.4 and Making History before release, tracking software has been Take-Two's only other known notable contribution to KSP.
-
5 hours ago, Dafni said:
@steve_v I can relate to your sentiment.
How likely would you guesstimate a fix in the next patch? Personally I dont hold high hopes anymore.
Well, since the issue is identified as a deficiency in the version of Unity that is currently used, I'd say it's not getting fixed until Unity fixes it AND Squad updates KSP to a version of Unity that has it fixed.
I'd guess it would be over a year at least before KSP switches Unity versions again, if it even happens again before development winds down. I wouldn't be surprised if it never gets fixed at all, honestly. Unfortunately the subset of joystick users of the subset of Linux users is probably small enough that the priority of such a fix is pretty limited in a limited resource environment. Since playing the game without a joystick is completely possible, as long as the game works okay on Linux I suspect Squad won't (maybe even can't due to inexperience) work on a fix outside of implementing a new version of Unity (if that ever happens again).
It's not like Take-Two seems to be throwing resources at KSP. Who knows what they're doing with regards to KSP (besides adding third-party tracking software).
KSP Loading... Our New Dev Diary!
in KSP1 The Daily Kerbal
Posted
Stretching the limits of my memory leaves me thinking it was something about how symmetry worked (or didn't) with either attachments to it or with attaching it to ships. I'm probably just mistaken, but if there's any chance I'm not it was quite a while ago.
Broken or not, updating the appearance of that part could only improve things, but I agree it would still be worse than the cubic octagonal strut.