qzgy

Discussion on bunking of video from Hazard-ish

86 posts in this topic

So I saw this video today from Matt Lowne.

The reasoning behind this seems quite sound. Its actually kind of disappointing since the feat would have been amazing if this was true. Also kinda concerning if this is actually the case, considering the notoriety from this particular video. Any thoughts or comments?

Spoiler for moderators

Spoiler

I hope this does not go against the forum rules, especially 2.2n. Please move or lock if this is inappropriate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with trying to fake something in KSP and then sell it to the masses is that the games community is all wannabe rocket scientists and as such we are generally more clever than your typical facebook feed.  Tricks like this usually get figured out pretty fast.

Edited by Alshain
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is that it seems that the Tylo video also mentioned in the above video is actually from last year. So I don't know if 1 year counts as "pretty fast". But you are correct in your statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That one obviously didn't raise any eyebrows.  The SSTO is pretty outlandish and stands out, when people can't reproduce it they start questioning why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My math shown in Matt's video is conclusive proof that the performance shown in Hazard's video is not even close to possible with stock parts and gameplay.  If you prefer less math based evidence, many individuals have responded with other evidence that Matt did not include in the video.

1)  These are screengrabs from his build video, showing non-stock part statistics

https://i.gyazo.com/c60328274503fb372594f993567f43cf.jpg

https://i.gyazo.com/39602996f945f3770dfed6bdb6bc380d.png

2) During his landing in another video, he clearly has fuel consumption off during a landing burn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlMbG4fUmRA&feature=youtu.be&t=479

 

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had way too many Youtube subscriptions already, so it's nice to be able to remove one.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't get a ship that size off the ground with 4x as many engines as he used, so I was wondering how he did it. And I was 100% sure I didn't forget to release the launch clamps. 

Now the question is, how many MOAR ENGINES are required to make it actually fly? Because all problems can be solved with more engines and more boosters. Mostly. :) 

@hazard-ish WHHHHHHHHHHY?! :( YOU WERE SO AWESOME! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, i just don't believe a video that doesn't provide a craft file. A cynical reading would be that Hazardish has gotten lazy and tried to fleece his audience, a charitable one would be that he cheated to try to keep up with an unreasonable release schedule, as an alternative to just not putting content up, which is understandable but still excrementsty

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes it's not even subtle...

In @hazard-ish's video in which he goes to the Mün three times, look at the fuel level during the 3rd munar deorbit burn...

It doesn't go down a single bit.

So, it's safe to say he used an infinite fuel cheat/glitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EvermoreAlpaca said:

1)  These are screengrabs from his build video, showing non-stock part statistics

If each of the 12 rapiers was 0.5 rather than the stock 2 tonnes, that 18-tonne reduction in mass explains probably half of the craft's apparent advantage over stock.  The discussion might go badly if people try to divine whether differences to stock were intentional or accidental.   But it clearly helps the community to know that: no, a VTOL space-plane like that looks like that in stock parts is about 50% too heavy to do what is shown, so be inspired but don't feel bad if your performance is different.

The moral of the story might be that we gotta be careful about leftover modifications when we participate in challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think we should let him go. Not everything has to be real in order to be impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NSEP said:

I just think we should let him go. Not everything has to be real in order to be impressive.

Maybe, but then it's dishonest to advertise yourself as "100% legit" while you clearly use HyperEdit or something like that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MinimalMinmus said:

Maybe, but then it's dishonest to advertise yourself as "100% legit" while you clearly use HyperEdit or something like that

Did he say its 100% legit somewhere? Did i miss something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NSEP said:

Did he say its 100% legit somewhere? Did i miss something?

He does say the video is "STOCK" in the title itself, so yes, he says so. The video is supposed to be legit, and it most certainly isn't.

He did, however, admitted he turned re-entry heat off, but of course it was easy to miss.

And even then, to quote him: "Keep in mind: although no mods were used to make anything easier/harder than normal, for the first Kerbin aerobrake and parts of the Jool aerobrake scenes I had to briefly disable re-entry heating."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MinimalMinmus said:

He does say the video is "STOCK" in the title itself, so yes, he says so. The video is supposed to be legit, and it most certainly isn't.

He did, however, admitted he turned re-entry heat off, but of course it was easy to miss.

And even then, to quote him: "Keep in mind: although no mods were used to make anything easier/harder than normal, for the first Kerbin aerobrake and parts of the Jool aerobrake scenes I had to briefly disable re-entry heating."

Ok, so he did lie, wich is kind of sad.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still enjoyed the videos. Claiming something as stock if it isnt (at least not that easily possible in stock) is probably not very fair, but a lot of effort and editing went into these videos to make them look good. Which might be the goal in this case

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These revelations make me wonder if Hazard-ish has atleast some way of cheating on all of his videos.
I mean, if you go that far, you can go all the way.
Not that I have proof. But if you lie atleast once your probably lying all the time.

That doesn't mean I don't enjoy his videos. Most of his missions look like they haven't been cheated. But like I said, since hes lying atleast once, it's safe to guess he has already done it on his earlier videos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's probably progressively cheated more over time. Like you start by cheating a little, and when no-one notices you get emboldened and cheat a bit more and so on, seeing how far you can take it.

There's no questioning the guy's skill. It's like an athlete who takes steroids to break new records, you couldn't take your everyday joe and pump him up with steroids and have him break world records, you still have to be supremely skilled and dedicated, but it cheapens the accomplishments and does a disservice to those who play by the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good that so many in our community would like to make sure that no misinformation gets spread around. Of course, let's be careful it doesn't turn into a witch hunt. Well done for not doing that .:).

 

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick pre-thought: Has anyone noticed that he renamed that video "Notorious Tilt-wing Video"?

It's sad that a youtuber who has been so clean has resorted to dirty clickbait-y tricks and cheating to get subscriptions and views. But maybe everyone is over-reacting a little to this. It was one video that has been proven false. Behind those videos is a real person, and for whatever reason, he was dead-set on making a tilt-wing to Tylo, and he couldn't do it fairly for some reason, whether that be stress limits or time constraint, so he cheated to make it happen. I've cheated in this game a couple times, and God knows that all of you have too, so don't go hating on him. Yes, it was cheat-y and yes, it was wrong, but he obviously has a guilty conscience about it, so just forgive and forget. Don't be a hater. Don't be a hypocrite. We all like to play this game, so let's have fun, regardless of cheats and just move on.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems, that Hazard-ish is back-pedaling: 

 

But all this won't save him. He's a cheater.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Carraux said:

Seems, that Hazard-ish is back-pedaling: 

 

But all this won't save him. He's a cheater.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting..... and sad. I've worried about this same issue writing Emiko Station, that someone might call me out for something I did... so I've always been really careful to point out if and when I used HyperEdit, vs. when something amazing really did happen.

I would recommend every writer and video maker do the same, especially after reading all this.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.