drhay53
-
Posts
438 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by drhay53
-
-
3 hours ago, The Aziz said:
I played MSFS. Still don't know where the "great" was. Looking at terrain, seeing the low res heightmaps with textures taken directly from bing maps that fail to accurately represent anything that's more wild than slight hills... MSFS did right the aircraft and atmosphere. Nothing else.
When MSFS first came out one of the big knocks on it was that it struggled to produce high frame rates on normal hardware even on low graphics settings. It's almost like it's been out for a couple of years now and had a lot of optimizations.
-
This is from discussion earlier in the thread, but I'm personally expecting 1.5-2 years before we are getting close to a performant game that is approaching the roadmap vision. I'll in fact be pleasantly surprised if we have playable, fun colonies in 2023.
-
2 minutes ago, Periple said:
That's about the maximum effort I'd allocate. Most likely I'd just make it a priority B for the QA team -- if there's a bit of a gap between builds, then go see if you can find something interesting in the forum. Otherwise just keep 'em banging away at the builds, it's not like bugs are hard to find...
I suppose I didn't mean it was their entire job, just that there is probably one person allocated some of their time to reviewing the forum bug reports.
-
19 minutes ago, Periple said:
TBH I think this would likely be one of the very few publicly-submitted bug reports that might be helpful. It's specific and there's a significant chance that it's not a duplicate. Only question is if anybody will see it in the noise.
(My somewhat more cynical side suspects that the bug reports forum is there just as a pressure valve. Generally speaking going through bug reports from people who aren't trained QAs and are just reporting things at random just isn't worth the trouble, the effort invested in triaging them would give a better return if it was invested into in-house QA.)
My guess is there's one person in QA/testing whose job it is to go through the bug report forum, attempt to reproduce, and file internal tickets. If there's not enough info in the post or it's not easy to reproduce, it's probably just ignored.
-
I agree that the graphics just feel.....weird. Something is off that I can't quite put my finger on. Playing on a 3070ti and a ryzen 5 3600. That said, the stock rovers and planes feel pretty good to control, and exploring KSC is pretty fun. No real plans on anything major to do, just exploring.
-
flew a stock plane out to the island airfield, landed, and came back. It was fun and the plane took off and landed quite easily. Don't think I ever experienced that in KSP1. I hated flying without mods.
-
30 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
Are you planning on doing this, or just saying this is what you want? Because this thread was asking what modders would be doing, not what was desired
That's not what the OP says. It says "What is something you wish to be modded into the game, day-one?"
Edit: meaning, this is my wishlist. Which is what I thought was being asked.
-
To answer the original topic:
A reliable launch profile and autopilot like GravityTurn.
Other forms of autopilot like mechjeb.
Edit: KerbalJointReinforcement
Complain if you want, but doing everything manually gets boring after a while. I'll do it a few times but after that I'd like a mod that creates proper maneuver nodes for common patterns and automates launching. I suspect this is going to be the first thing that sends me back to ksp1 while waiting for more ksp2 content.
-
Just now, Jarin said:
Given the publisher, I would not expect a NMS situation here. T2 wants return on investments for the next fiscal year.
I share your concern, but my response to it is to give them my money in the hopes that the vision laid out by the dev team is given the resources to reach that vision.
I know a lot of people don't share my opinion on that, and think that buying early access is bad for gamers, but as a software developer myself, I accept that this model is not ever going away. As a consumer, I accept that sometimes I'll give a company my money for a vision I'm hoping they reach, but they fall short. In my opinion, they way for KSP2 to become what I want is for me to buy it, play it, stay positive, and give constructive feedback. For some games that I've played, that hasn't worked and I'll hold a grudge for a long time.
I'll just summarize by saying that, as a software developer, I really don't understand the people who take a game they want to love, and just shower it with negativity all over the internet for not reaching their expectations. I'm not saying there's never a time to go there; after a lot of burned bridges on Elite Dangerous, I'm at that point myself. But we're nowhere near that point on KSP2, and the best thing we can do for the game at this point is support the devs and give them a chance to actualize the vision they've presented to us.
-
On 2/21/2023 at 10:59 PM, mcwaffles2003 said:
Fallout 76, No Mans Sky, CP 2077, etc.... have left a lot of players cynical to the point of being jaded. It hurts, getting your hopes up that much only to have them demolished unreasonably before you. Its just a problem with modern game development and not only at the fault of devs or the mega corp distributors that own who they work for. Games today just have a lot going on and are really complicated and I don't think we as a community or the distributors for that matter are ready for how long game production takes to make finished products with genuinely innovative or expansive games, qualities KSP 2 shows it carries in spades.
The comparison to No Mans Sky is an interesting one, and it's a path that I think we should be rooting for KSP2 to take. Yes, they overpromised and underdelivered at launch, but they stuck to their vision and added enormous value to the game with free updates, and there is no longer any real negativity around the game. It is well-respected as a game that supported its players and just quietly kept moving forward. Much more so than it's competitors in the genre.
-
1 minute ago, magnemoe said:
I don't think the Everyday Astronaut issues was graphic but rater physic, during launch surface with KSC is much more of an job than the not very large rocket.
He used 8 liquid fueled boosters with 9 tanks and this killed framerate for some reason.
Something was up with the physic, either physic or drag calculations.Based on other videos, my suspicion is that it was heavily strutted.
-
On 3/10/2021 at 8:47 PM, somnambulist said:
@linuxgurugamer -- had some free time to run a few tests. The bug is reproducible in a vanilla install with only Antenna Helper 1.0.7.3 beta and its dependencies installed. Logs and a persistence file if it's helpful https://drive.google.com/file/d/19IUt5CXOc_Z-KV6hGtCsNoMXRnWlPArZ/
Using OPM in 1.11.1 and seeing the same list-reversal type issue in the VAB. It was not present in 1.0.7.2.
I moved to the beta because I noticed that Antenna Helper was using the comms of my probe core for it's "Total Power" in-flight, instead of the power of the external antenna. This behavior persists in both 1.0.7.2 and 1.0.7.3-beta
Logs:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1owefb-UYPJsqvo02zkFfDOgu9qXWDQu5/view?usp=sharing
screenshot:
notice the incorrect "Total Power" in the Antenna Helper window, it is 5000 and should be 500,000. Also notice the discrepancy between the Antenna Helper signal strength and the stock signal strength.
edit: the issue also applies to the map view with the colored circles. Also, a craft with a relay antenna correctly uses the relay antenna power instead of the probe core's direct antenna.
-
looking at the guides that are popping up on the wiki and the sheer number of WOLF parts that are likely to be needed, it does seem to me like the most convenient progression will be to start on kerbin, then construct the next wolf modules and their transport vehicles in space. Just sort of leap-frog your way out from kerbin to reduce the sheer number of launches that would likely be needed.
That's looking to be my plan, anyway.
-
4 minutes ago, Tacombel said:
You could use the newest constellation, that includes Ship Assembling, WOLF and more.
https://github.com/BobPalmer/USI_Constellation/releases/tag/2021.03.12.01
While I can I will produce everything at KSC with support from shore. But it is really up to what you want to achieve.
I haven't yet decided exactly which version of KSP I will be playing on. Concerned that 1.11 will be missing some stuff that I consider required, but still looking into that at the moment. Does the pre-release still support KSP going back to 1.8? Also just not sure if starting a save with a pre-release is the best idea for me.
-
planning on starting my first USI-based save in a looooooonng time. Seems I've come back during a period of flux regarding in-situ construction. GC was recently unbundled and something else is possibly coming? If I'm wanting to start a save now, what should I do?
-
I was seeing the delta v issue in the VAB and then I realized that the altitude slider had defaulted to a very high altitude, making the delta v calculation basically a vacuum delta v. That looks to me like what you're seeing.
-
I installed procedural fairings and noticed that only one part from the mod is showing up in the custom filter. All of the other parts are visible from the manufacturer tab, and from the aerodynamics default filter.
So at this point I have no idea how to trust that parts are actually showing up and I'm seeing everything I'm supposed to. Kerbalism parts don't show up in the manufacturer or any of the default filter extension categories, but they do show up in simple mode.
Here's the player.log after installing procedural fairings.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kl0SNg42txIbVDgtYEYvIu5ggLpPafp0/view?usp=sharing
-
I'm trying to get the parts added in the KerbalismConfig addon to show up in a custom filter, but I can't get them to show up for some reason.
My config looks like this:
CATEGORY:NEEDS[KerbalismConfig] { name = Kerbalism icon = Kerbal colour = #FFF0F0F0 all = true FILTER { CHECK { type = folder value = KerbalismConfig } } SUBCATEGORIES { list = 0,Pods list = 1,Fuel Tanks list = 2,Engines list = 3,Command and Control list = 4,Structural list = 5,Robotics list = 6,Coupling list = 7,Payload list = 8,Aerodynamics list = 9,Ground list = 10,Thermal list = 11,Electrical list = 12,Communications list = 13,Science list = 14,Cargo list = 15,Utility list = 16,Undefined } }And my Player.log is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dH9YZvFebdSw12LEF1rRgC3oVJaSVvgZ/view?usp=sharing
Some of the parts like the Geiger counter show up in the science area, but parts like "kerbalism-container-radial-pressurized-prosemian-small.cfg" don't show up in any of the filter extension categories.
I would think if it was just a category problem, I would get a filter extension category for kerbalism that had i.e. the science parts in there, but not the others. Instead, I get no Kerbalism category in filter extensions at all.
Am I missing something?
-
I pretty much always come back and try to start a new save every few months, but I can never find any goal anymore that keeps me playing past the first 5-10 hours. I really want to find some combination of mods that's just right but I never can hit the sweet spot. I always end up frustrated with bugs or performance or lack of documentation. I will say that 1.9.1 seems to have much better performance than I was used to.
But then after a while I got dismayed that a lot of good mods weren't updated from 1.8. So then I went back to 1.8 for a bit. But then I was upset that I was playing on an older version of the game. Then I realized I didn't like the tech tree I'd picked. And eventually like always, I fizzled out again.
I have 3000 hours and I've never done a kerballed mission to anywhere outside of kerbin except duna. My problem is I always want to do some kind of complex construction based save that makes stations and bases really useful and interesting but I haven't found the right combination of mods that doesn't end up driving me crazy.
But anyway, I came back because I'll always come back. There's never really any specific reason except an itch that desperately needs scratched for a bit, before I remember why I never make it very far into a save anymore.
-
I still love the concept of this mod and I've got this nagging feeling in the back of my brain to come back to KSP for a while and try it out.....
-
I work somewhere that does a lot of software development, and I have a slightly different view on the DLC paradigm. I think that DLC is mostly a side effect of the shift in software development practices over the last 20 years, and the flexibility provided by (mostly) everyone being connected to the internet.
With the shift to agile software development trickling down to everyone, the idea is that you prioritize features that offer the most value to your customers, and you release early and often to receive feedback and constantly re-prioritize the next features. In the long run, this provides more value to the customer (and by extension, more money for you) than fronting the entire cost of development, but releasing features that it turns out nobody likes. This is partly why we see so many "early access" games these days. The cutoff for when to release the game is a decision that companies are making based on a number of different factors; and of course, in general, these people are all trying to make money. So they're trying to strike a balance between what gamers are willing to pay for, versus how much profit they will make, and how long they can pay to continue developing the game. Of course, they have to pay the development team to continue working on the game. People are expensive. Releasing DLC can be seen as an infusion of cash to keep developing the game for longer. I personally think gamers would be much more upset if companies released games, fixed a few bugs, then stopped doing anything to them and moved on to the next project.
This being said, I have my limits as well. I don't buy Paradox Interactive games, for instance.
The point I'm trying to make here is this; DLC is the result of fundamental shifts in the way the software industry works. Because of that, it's not going away. KSP 2 will have DLC. To me the question of whether or not it should is completely irrelevant, because it will. Period.
-
I had some time and found it directly in the earnings report released today.
- Announced that Kerbal Space Program 2, the sequel to the beloved original space sim, is in development and is now planned for launch on PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One during our fiscal year 2021. The original Kerbal Space Program has sold-in over 3.5 million units worldwide, and earned a Metacritic rating of 88 and a Steam user score of 91%.
Of course, I agree with everyone that this could mean anything from a month to a full year. No way to know until the dev team starts communicating again.
-
According to a "call with investors", KSP2 has been delayed until FY2021.
https://www.pcgamer.com/kerbal-space-program-2-is-delayed/
I couldn't find a deeper source than the article itself that is making the claim, but I find PC Gamer to be reputable. I didn't spend too much time trying to track down the call or a transcript.
EDIT: here is the earnings report and quote.
- Announced that Kerbal Space Program 2, the sequel to the beloved original space sim, is in development and is now planned for launch on PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One during our fiscal year 2021. The original Kerbal Space Program has sold-in over 3.5 million units worldwide, and earned a Metacritic rating of 88 and a Steam user score of 91%.
-
I am utterly flabbergasted that this question has been asked so many times.
KSP2 Release Notes - Update v0.1.1.0
in KSP2 Dev Updates
Posted
I suspect some of this list was already fixed prior to launch, and that there was a freeze period. That said, this is quite a list even if it covers an extra week or two of work. From one dev to another, well done team and keep making the vision happen.