passinglurker

Oh thank god I wasn't the only one who noticed. I find it unfortunate that normal maps a great tool for increasing fidelity is just being used to mask completely sterile swaths of texture.

It probably could all it needs is to be rendered with lighting in engine, and given a brushed up diffuse and specular map that reflects the ALL details in the normal map especially the ribbing. So far it looks like they did the usual "WIP" trick of just slacking the normal map on over a noisy diffuse. It gets the message across, but doesn't hold up under admiration so I hope this gets proper detailing for release. Also like @regex and holy @frizzank said red accents help.

I mention art quality because that is all there is to talk about. The code base is already stable, the game balance likely only getting changed in the midst of an art overhaul anyway. Art consistency is the most standout element in which ksp is lacking. Take that as a compliment to rest of the game if you want. So just to be clear on our terminology... Prioritizes graphics = the insatiable push for greater and greater fidelity, effects, and possibly frame rate. Prioritzes consistency = the desire for the rest to be as good as the best we already have. To draw a line and polish off everything up to that line in a clean and tidy package. So yes "most people" including me (to the extent that we have any right to sayi prefer to avoid presuming I speak for others) want quality in all aspects. For me that means we need to bring the elements lagging behind up to the same level of polish as everything else. This by no way means I want consistent art at the expense of the stable, feature rich, and modifiable code base we already have.

I never prioritized graphics I prioritized consistency without regression. I'll concede though that it's too early to judge but given the pattern established so far I'm choosing to withhold my hype. I'll buy a ticket on the patience ferry for this one.

So you are makeing the engine the stock rhino engine was based on? Can you just replace the rhino engine then? Sigh yet another code base overhaul... It amazes me to no end how squad has the resources to completely rewrite the game every major update yet they can't spare resources for comprehensive art and career mode game play polish. Edit: It's too soon to judge excuse my salt.

Not so much offended as just opposed to the notion that mods should be used as a crutch. Something as generally used and accepted as player information tools should be made stock in some form. Whereas something specialized like a star wars parts pack should not.

I don't think you can say kerbal should be flexible and accessible to all play styles and then immediately turn around and dismiss the play styles that would like some improvements in the quality of life and player information department.

Simple I make my case and vote with my wallet. If I'm right people will see as I do and do the same if I am wrong then that is just how the cookie crumbles. Once you start charging real money after a string of disastrous bugged releases and constant delays of core artistic and game-play polish that drain the cistern of good will dry then courtesy simply goes out the window until trust is re-earned. If they want my money without building any good will then I am under no obligation to mince words about what it takes to get my money. I did try to be courteous and careful about what I said in the past though it didn't do a lick of good I still got directly dismissed for "cheap shots" that no one but bob saw so here we are. These spats with Vanamonde are weary. I've repeated solutions ad-nauseum and made reference to works that exist inside the core game to backup my arguments about what constitutes good quality within the confines of kerbal's hand-painted art style. I am not so opposed that I hate everything that is different from standards I've pointed out in the past provided those differences are not a regression, and are applied retroactively to all previous content. I just want quality and by extension consistency, and if I am opposed then its because I am concerned that something will make achieving these ends more difficult (for example if one were to release a large set of new parts that are made to regressed or even inconsistent artistic standards adding to the workload of everything that must be fixed if/when the "rocket revamp" comes). At this point after so long Vanamonde should be fully aware of my views yet he still persists in his miss-characterization of me as some sort of unreasonable hate-troll out of some defensive reflex I can't fathom.

Untrue I liked thier 5m decoupler I like it when they show attention to detail, and good quality. This service bay is obviously not those things. I don't so much care about cylinder vs. cone as the only way to do gemini to scale is to implement a at least a few 1.5m parts and there are various reason squad may want to avoid that but what ever they make I expect it to be made well and I expect thier mods not to vilify people with standards.

*emphasis mine @Badie can you confirm that they mean finished finished or was this a typo/slip of the tongue? Cause if it is "finished" this seriously looks cheap and lazy if not sloppy. I sincerely hope this isn't actually reflective of what we can expect from "finished" work.

Mercury and Soyuz make sense because they are cramped mass over comfort sort of spacecraft. the Mk1-3 as others have pointed out is not starved for space at all so it doesn't have the same awkward cluttered charm. Adding clutter might fix that if it were just its own original spacecraft but it would seem to me that band-aid fixes would just push the pod further and further from being the "apollo equivalent". With parts that are supposed to kerbalize real world spacecraft some degree of attention to detail is important naturally it can't be a 1:1 photo-realistic clone as that wouldn't fit with kerbal's art style or anatomy but it seems pretty clear between this and the previously mentioned issues with texture and its length after adding the nose cone and docking port that the mk1-3 has flown well off the mark by this point.

Ok... Not gonna lie I'm still not a fan of "mk1-3" with how the proportions are turning out. How do you get in and out without messing up the control panel? Hell how do they reach the control panel with those little arms? Previous iva's like the spaceplanes had a lot of thought put in them about accessibility, mobility, and ergonomics even if it was just for show what happened? Need I remind you we are paying for this content. It seems broken on a fundamental design level how about you just scrap it and start over with something more loyal to the apollo inspiration? Just repackage the mk1-3 as a free update to replace the mk1-2 it doesn't belong on making history it is the only part that doesn't resemble its historical counterpart.

Its not that he didn't want to change it for others Angel isn't hydrophobic to feedback and to suggest that is a terrible mis-characterization. The crux of the problem is Angel had already went above and beyond to let people tweak this mod to taste and they still nitpicked and lazily expected it to be tweaked for them. Whats the point of going through all that work if people will just ignore it? people [snip] shouldn't be explaining themselves they should be apologizing.

This is an appreciation thread. Anyway Appreciation! Angel is an amazingly thoughtful modder who goes above and beyond to incorporate an unparalleled level of documentation and configurability to complex and crunchy addons such as this (and snacks life support, and pathfinder colonization, etc...) Also he likes and strives to achieve pork-a-like! What's not to appreciate!

sounds like more mesh switch options really that feature is gonna be the best thing about this update

Are you aware and acknowledging that the profile is too long? and are you gonna do something about it? Even with the "legoism" philosophy a replica needs to at least nail the profile. Old pic of the good Apollo kerbal replica for reference. Nertea's reaction on reddit since the devnotes get buried fast there

Speaking of which I for one don't mind a lack of pictures the last couple of weeks and appreciate the bar for quality WIP shots being raised, and the appropriate amount of time being taken. No point seeing something that's too raw and will likely come out very different by the end no matter what is said.

I'll make this simple for you. Modders make what they want to make and can't be convinced otherwise. In this case they wanted their mods to play well together and with stock so they did what other older modders were already doing like how railroad tracks got built to the width of wagons already in production back in the day. That's all there really is to it to follow or not is your choice users just harass people who venture from the norm because they want their mods to play well together for no extra work but you don't actually have to listen to them. So if you want 1:1 scale sidewinder missiles then just do it the opinions of users are ultimately irrelevant if they don't like it they can learn to rescale with mm scripts or something.

CLS is a mod. CLS based this off the part description Part descriptions were made during early access and are generally as bogus as the old parts looks And finally a kerbal actually does fit going head first (@Beale tested it for attention to detail reasons for his soyuz mod). Go walk a kerbal on top of a jr and look down from directly above you will see that they fit within the hatch circle.

So how do we use the parts we attach to the inside? do we have to jettison the cover? does it turn transparent when we hover over? It would be nice to have a part that is defined from all the parts radially attached to it instead of haveing to hunt for tiny parts with the camera. Great way to turn hollow structural parts like the mk1 fuselage into service modules too. Anyway good luck with your designing and defining of new gameplay elements development of new features is very welcome. Since this idea is still clearly embryonic I'll refrain from wasting time commenting on the service module's looks. Its disappointing to see absolutely no improvement from the apollo capsule though. And of course showing an ancient part like the clamp jr. along side again highlights how badly the old Not!Placeholders need a revamp. Gonna have to agree with everyone else about having a crew tunnel as a mesh switch option it'd show attention to detail especially if given a cutaway view to go with the apollo and lem IVA's, and people can alway use the offset gizmo if they some how want the tunnel and oodle of parts at the same time.

Given the limits imposed by kerbal anatomy the general uselessness of IVA's, and all the other things I'm holding the art up to as paid content already I'm not gonna lose sleep over whether kerbals are using chairs or at least I would understand the technical barrier to this (great touch to add though if you can avoid the heads clipping through the roof). I do hope they bump up the texel density of the egress hatch though the fuzziness against the rest interior is a little jarring hopefully they find time to make a more detailed hatch prop for the final version as IVA's are good for nothing but being stared at, but I understand if they just need a stand in at this early phase.

They're too far gone. The meshes are janky and low polly like they came out of 1996. Meanwhile the UVing is sloppy and inefficient and the texel density is all over the place making a texture retrofit completely impractical (believe me I've tried). The only solution is a complete art asset replacement.

Mods are not for cleaning up a devs mess. Leaning on modding like a crutch is how you frustrate and lose mod makers they want to make their own things not finish your game for you.

Oh hey that's right mesh switching is gonna be a thing that means you could technically have radial and inline versions in the same catalog entry. Or an rd107 with or without the historical divets(not that I mind being divetless just saying it's a possibility).

Yes I can be reasoned with and placated. Shocking I'm sure.