• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mako

  1. Well, the listed specs that it sounds like you have found (like those on the Steam KSP page) are the minimum and recommended specs according to Squad. I can't recall if they've been updated at all over the course of development, but the minimum listed should be capable of running the game, but perhaps requiring lower settings and with lower framerate as compared to a more powerful system. KSP's performance is almost entirely tied to the CPU, as opposed to many games where the graphics card becomes the main performance bottleneck. So if you're only planning on playing KSP, the processor is pretty much the most important component to consider. My understanding is that the graphics capabilities of the last few generations of Core i3,5,7 series processors are usually adequate to run KSP without the need of a dedicated graphics card, but it may require reduced graphics settings. For many users, the second most important component to consider is amount of RAM, as this can affect mod use and general performance if the amount is too low. After making sure those two components are adequate, the next thing to consider might be a dedicated graphics card. If you have some desire now, or in the future, to play other games besides KSP, you will probably be wanting a dedicated card at some point. If you're buying a laptop you won't really be able to upgrade/add parts later (aside from RAM), so it's a good idea to buy for what you want now and what you think you'll want between now and when you're ready to upgrade again. If you're buying a desktop, upgrading parts is not terribly difficult so you can always add a graphics card or more RAM -- or possibly even a CPU upgrade -- at a later time. The install process is likely easier than you think and there are a lot of good resources available online to assist part picking and installation. If you have a price point in mind for how much you want to spend and an idea of how you'll be using the computer besides KSP (and any bells and whistles you might want), I'm sure we can get a some ideas together on what to look for.
  2. The port work that was done by Flying Tiger Entertainment was so problematic that Squad was forced to end their contract and (probably nearly) start over from scratch. Several months ago Squad began working with Blitzworks for the new version of the port, and work is ongoing. There is no release date at this time as Squad does not typically announce dates before the work is complete. To elaborate just a bit, the version that is available on the USA store is widely considered buggy/broken to the point of unusable/unenjoyable. There are multiple issues, but the largest one is nearly universal save game corruption requiring a totally new save file after only a few hours of gameplay. If I remember correctly, Flying Tiger Entertainment and Squad did attempt to patch that version, but never seemed able to fix the most major of bugs. In its current state it seems as though everyone is better off not being able to purchase it. Now, with Blitzworks and help from an additional QA team, Squad has been saying work is progressing well and they're very happy with how things are going so far. They're taking their time for this version, and given the mess that they're trying to move away from it seems like the right decision. The KSP Weekly that comes out on Fridays in The Daily Kerbal usually has some news regarding the current state of the console version. There's not much to say because very little of the work is new or noteworthy, but they have been mentioning it each week for a while now.
  3. No problem at all. I won't be purchasing a console KSP as I don't currently own any consoles, but I have a friend or two who might appreciate the game when it finally comes together so I've been keeping an eye out for news. Squad is taking their time this go around, and I think it'll be a while before it's released but most people probably agree with you that it's the right choice. I wanted to add, just in case you prefer the social media scene, that I bet you could check into Squad's presence on twitter and whatever else to be updated that way if it's easier. And welcome to the forums/community.
  4. In case you haven't come across this information on your own yet, the console versions are still under development and there is no release date since Squad typically does not announce those until the work is done. For the best place on these forums for information regarding the console versions and their current progress check out the last few weeks/months of KSP Weekly posts in the The Daily Kerbal section and/or the Announcements section. My summary according to those posts would be that Squad feels good about the progress being made by Blitzworks (the company now responsible for the console port work and one that seems far more reputable than the former port company), and Squad has outside QA help which should improve the development time and quality of the port. But check the first post in the KSP Weekly for the official word from Squad.
  5. It was a long way to say that Tier 0 would be in the game if Squad wanted to put it in the game. Obviously it is a very, very low priority. Which leads me to your point that they could have put the sub-par barn in place and fixed it later. If it's too low a priority to do thus far, what makes you think they would have ever done something about it? I would like to present as evidence the rocket parts that, just like the barn, were supposedly going to be updated and implemented. The only thing the community is responsible for is letting Squad know it does not believe Squad should cut corners when adding new assets/content. I think that is even more important and relevent now since updating older assets to match the quality of newer assets is postponed indefinitely.
  6. It really didn't. Squad chose to listen to community feedback and release the update without Tier 0. They could have chosen to rush to release sub-par assets, or chosen to bring those assets up to the same quality as the other Tiers. Instead they chose to postpone Tier 0. Also, they said they intended to rework Tier 0 and release it at a later date. This was 2 years ago now. Please explain how community feedback is responsible for the lack of a Tier 0 when Squad has had full control (until recently) and they've had 2 years to do something about it. The community is not a group of shareholders. Squad is not beholden to us; they chose what they do and how, and chose to listen to feedback or disregard it at their discretion. The idea that the community somehow has that much power is absurd. The people who said Tier 0 is omitted but intended to be reworked and released are no longer at Squad, but we've received no new information on Tier 0 before or since they left. It was obviously a very low priority for Squad at that time as evidenced by the sub-par assets, and it appears to have remained a very low priority ever since. If you want to be upset with someone for lack of a Tier 0, be upset with Squad and not with the community which provided the feedback Squad invited when they chose open development.
  7. The community complaining about the barn did not cause Squad to omit a Tier 0. Squad chose to omit a Tier 0 rather than postponing the update, and has chosen to continue omitting a Tier 0 ever since. At any point they could have chosen to add it in, but we've seen no signs that they are interested in doing so. If I were a gambling man, I'd bet that the community would deliver multiple options for a Tier 0 if Squad was interested in making the buildings mod-able. If a company doesn't want feedback, they don't use an open-development strategy. Squad obviously wants feedback. Choosing to only hear the feedback you like is far more damaging to a game than listening to all of the feedback. Feedback hasn't hurt this game or kept it from reaching it's full potential, inexperience from top to bottom has. It's actually remarkable that it was able to come this far, and that is only because of its unique core concept of building vehicles from prefab parts and operating them seamlessly from planet to planet under semi-relistic physics. Edit: I'd be remiss if I didn't add that I'm glad for how far KSP has come and that it's possible that the inexperience of the early team somehow made them take chances that a more experienced team would have avoided. However, as development continued, it seems (in 20/20 hindsight, of course) that management might have avoided some missteps if they had more experience. It's been an interesting ride to say the least, and any heated discussions exist because we all like this game enough to care about what happens to it. Edit #2: I forgot I wanted to point out that omitting the barn in that state was the right decision. It was objectively worse, quality wise, to the rest of the assets, and it would have been the first impression anyone playing Career mode would have seen. While I'm sure people could look past it, it would have been a bad way to present the game. The only good option was to redo the Tier 0 assets and we've seen no sign of that happening.
  8. @Svish To expand on this a bit: the physics range is now dependent on the location of the vehicle you're currently controlling. You can search around this forum to find the specifics, but in certain situations the physics range is more than 2km. What this means is any vessel (including space stations, etc.) that is in physics range of your controlled vehicle will have full physics calculations performed for it. Also, since the KSP Unity upgrade quite a while ago each seperate vessel within physics range is calculated on its own seperate thread. KSP has been multithreaded (physics on one thread, other features on other threads) for a long time, but only relatively recently able to handle splitting seperate vessels physics onto seperate threads. Any vessel outside of physics range is packed up and put on-rails so it has a minimal impact on performance. Once the controlled vessel comes within range the on-rails vessel is unpacked and now fully under control of the real-time physics simulation with its calculations performed by a seperate thread from the controlled vessel. It does make a positive difference, but overall performance is still tied to the number of parts per vessel and the single-core performance of the CPU.
  9. To better answer your question, I just did some quick Google searching. It looks like nVidia showed PhysX GPU Accelerated Rigid Body Physics handling last year at GDC. The thing is, it was built on a modified version of PhysX 3.4 at that time. As far as I'm aware, the version of Unity that KSP is built on uses (a most likely somewhat modified by Unity) PhysX version 3.3. So the technology isn't implemented in Unity to allow KSP to use GPU Acceleration for the most strenuous physics calculations it makes (those involving the rigid-body parts that we use to make vehicles). I think the only GPU Acceleration that KSP could do right now would be for cloth physics - those flags could fly in all their physics glory, but it wouldn't reduce the load on the CPU in any way. As far as why people mention the single-thread performance is the limiting factor, each vessel has all of its calculations performed by one thread. This is because each vessel is made from multiple parts that each have physics interactions and reactions with each other and the environment. If you were to split the calculations between threads, it's more likely that you could have negative effects on performance. My understanding (and I could be mistaken) is that multiple threads for a single ship could result in slower calculations for the whole ship while threads wait to combine results. Worst case is mismatched results between two different threads and now the ship explodes as it is puts two parts slightly too far apart or colliding with each other between physics frames. I believe keeping everything on one thread per ship allows certain assumptions to be made and controlled as calculations are made on all the parts. The short answer is it's the nature of the PhysX that Unity uses combined with the nature of KSP.
  10. I used the rule of thumb of choosing what best applied to me. I don't make mods or videos, I don't subscribe to many youtube channels, I've played with mods but mostly stick to stock when I play these days, and I've been to a few of the Jool moons and back, but I haven't been to every planet. I feel confident I could get to every planet/moon and back from most, so Level 4 seems the most appropriate.
  11. Since @Snark went through the effort and I don't recall this thread from forever ago, I figured I'd contribute. I'm a solid 4.
  12. Since several people have mentioned it in this thread I'd like to add my voice to those asking for more assignable action group keys, ideally using a modifier like ALT+Number, and in-flight editing of action groups. I think there's some great suggestions in here that are relevant to the work the devs are doing since they're currently putting some thought into part actions and action groups.
  13. Ah, it could certainly be the case that the deal between Squad and Shapeways was terminated prior to any business with Take-Two. Perhaps the deal had an expiration date and was not renewed or perhaps one or both parties decided to end the deal. I don't remember seeing anything about Shapeways no longer making KSP items, but I definitely could have missed that news.
  14. Shapeways appears to still be very much in business after a quick check of their website. It looks like they still have a lot to offer, but probably no Kerbals until they have a new deal worked out with Take-Two. I wonder if anyone from Squad or Take-Two gave maintaining the Shapeways merchandise agreement a thought during the sale of KSP. Edit: I just checked that Cafe Press link you posted. I could be wrong, but that merchandise appears to be unaffiliated with Squad or Take-Two. It looks like it was created by a fan and I don't see anything that makes it look like those are officially licensed products.
  15. And likely those individuals who, like yourself, we're enjoying what mods brought to your GTA experience are now less interested in giving Take-Two money in the future. I didn't get into GTA V, so I can't say I'm immediately affected by this. However, I had hoped that KSP's purchase would generally be a good thing by supplying capital and resources to grow the franchise. KSP is still a title with a lot of unrealized potential and I was hoping Take-Two might help it and the franchise grow to reach some of that potential. Obviously we still have KSP as it is now, no matter what happens, but I was hopeful that we might have more and that it wouldn't come with customer-unfriendly business practices.
  16. Could they chose not to do this and still be profitable? Absolutely. Does it hurt their reputation? Yep. Does it make sense that they would do this? Not really since there are alternative solutions.
  17. Squad and Take-Two are still separate entities with Take-Two owning KSP completely. As much as I appreciate the assurance of @UomoCapra and Squad, and as much as I believe that Squad really means it, the fact remains that Take-Two can decide to do whatever they want regardless of Squad's wishes or involvment. As far as I understand the business arrangement, if Take-Two decides to take KSP development in a new direction they could fire Squad and assign a new developer to KSP at any time.
  18. Rockstar actively showcased mods, including mods that used OpenIV. OpenIV has been active for around 10 years and Rockstar and Take-Two have never spoken out against it. Take-Two chose to shut down the mod rather than attempt to work with its creator to prevent undesirable mods that may be built off of OpenIV. OpenIV was intended and designed to only function in single-player offline mode.
  19. My point is and will continue to be that Take-Two is the only entity calling the shots from here on out. They can do whatever they want to the current KSP product and any future products. The fact that they killed a popular single-player GTA mod because it enabled unfavorable mods is proof that they're willing to upset a large part of their customer base. That makes me think they wouldn't hesitate to upset the relatively small KSP community in a similar way. Imagine Take-Two decides to make new parts packs available in microtransaction form with or without Squad's involvment. This doesn't seem far-fetched. Then maybe Take-Two decides to go after something like ModuleManager or TextureReplacer since they allow users to easily incorporate free part mod packs that include similar styled parts as Take-Two's packs. This scenario, while unlikely, is not very different from the GTA scenario. It's foolish to believe it's impossible given what just happened with one of their biggest properties. Again, I'm not saying it's going to happen. Heck, KSP is probably too small for Take-Two to care about. But since they're willing to do this to GTA, I wouldn't be surprised to find they're willing to do something similar to KSP. It sets a precedent that they are unconcerned with their customers' best interests. At the very least it's an unpleasant bit of news and I think current and potential customers should be aware of the situation.
  20. That's not surprising. Whatever deal Squad had with Shapeways would likely no longer be valid since Squad no longer owns the Kerbal Space Program intellectual property; Squad can no longer authorize any third-party to use the Kerbal likeness for commercial products. My guess is at this point it would require Take-Two and Shapeways coming to some sort of new agreement to restart sales of KSP figures. That being said, maybe a new arrangement is in the works between Take-Two and Shapeways, but I haven't seen any official mention of Shapeways since Squad sold KSP. It likely would not take a lot of time or work to restart sales if Take-Two wishes to do so. I'm guessing Shapeways was printing to order; it's unlikely they keep a stock of figures, but even if they do I'd be surprised if they could sell anything until a new deal is made.
  21. I have no fears of Take-Two at this time. I am simply advocating that folks be informed and if they are not concerned about it then that's great. I, too, am not worried at this time. I bring up that fact that Take-Two can decide to do something similar to KSP because some folks seem to think Squad won't let that happen. My point here is Squad is essentially powerless to stop Take-Two since Take-Two is the owner of the IP. As for why they might choose to do something to KSP, Take-Two has said they're interested on making more money from microtransactions and other DLC. It's not outside the realm of possibility for Take-Two to reduce the availability of user-made mods that offer similar features that they are trying to sell. Again, I'm not saying that Take-Two is going to do anything to KSP. I'm pretty confident they won't, but if they did Squad can't stop it. Take-Two probably does not desire to mess with KSP modding, but I wouldn't be shocked to see them try if they thought mods can affect their sales numbers for new products.
  22. @LoSBoL I agree with you and others that Take-Two would be harming themselves by blocking mods for KSP and I share the sentiment that it seems unlikely they would do something to harm themselves. However, I recognize that despite the likelihood they won't choose to harm themselves the fact remains that they could still choose to do so. To some extent they are already doing so with their current action regarding GTA V. My concern stems from the fact that with something like GTA V, and even with something like KSP, when a company has full control over a popular product they can make unpopular decisions because they know they have a captive audience. People may say they'll boycott future products from Take-Two, but it'll take a lot of willpower for those folks to follow through when a hugely anticipated title like Red Dead 2 or the next GTA comes along and everyone is having fun while you ride you high horse... and Take-Two knows it just as much as they know people won't be happy with decisions to block or limit their modding communities. Edit: @Lupi I'm glad you brought it up because I believe it cetainly deserves attention and probably warrants some discussion. I saw the news earlier and thought that it wasn't particularly favorable. Businesses make business decisions. That makes sense. Where it begins to not make sense is when those decisions negatively impact the customers' opinions of the product/service and the business itself. When a business continues to make these types of decisions and the customers decide they've had enough then it doesn't matter how happy the owners/shareholders are unless they're ready to cash out. Once again, I'm not saying I think Take-Two is about to kill KSP modding in any way, but I do think it's good to be informed of what Take-Two is doing and form your own opinion. And if you're not worried about what Take-Two does you can always ignore the discussion and the folks who might want to talk about it.
  23. While I don't think it's quite time to run around and yell "The sky is falling," I don't believe the concern that Take-Two might attempt to stop some/all modding of KSP to be irrational. Despite the huge success and popularity of GTA V, Take-Two has shut down one of the major mod projects of that community. KSP isn't nearly as popular, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to accept the possibility that something similar can happen here at Take-Two's whim. And honestly at this point asking anyone at Squad for a promise that nothing will change regarding an intellectual property they don't own the rights to seems pointless. Any word/promise/guarantee that a Squad employee could give doesn't actually have an effect on what Take-Two does, at most it could only ever influence Take-Two's decisions. Hope for the best, but don't pretend like the worst is impossible. Being aware of what is going on regarding (one of) Take-Two's other properties and sharing concern that something similar could happen here is not quite fear-mongering.
  24. It seems like Squad is teasing out one part each week. I'm guessing we still have many, many weeks before the expansion is ready based on how little we know and how many questions we still have, so I suspect that it'll be a while before they get around to showing all the new parts. That being said, it would be nice to know for a fact they're working on those and other parts.
  25. This is not a fair response. Your assertion that a new texture is all that is needed to make the old parts look as good as the new parts is not accurate. There is nothing personal in the reply you quoted, so why make it personal?Nevertheless, your suggestion would probably be acceptable to many/most people. I'm not familiar with modelling and texturing techniques, and while I do not always 100% agree with @passinglurker I do 100% appreciate their explanations and attention to detail.