runner78

Members
  • Content Count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Good

1 Follower

About runner78

  • Rank
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Unreal Engine is NOT open source. In the EULA: "You are permitted to post snippets of Engine Code, up to 30 lines of code in length. online in public forums for the sole purpose of discussing the content of the snippet..."
  2. For cosmetic weather / atmospheric effects, i think it's possible for KSP 2 have it already or they implementing it right now. Physical weather not come in the first KSP 2 release, but possible in future update. (Infos from some interviews)
  3. With some short search i found some speed limits of Empyrion 40 m/s in Atmosphare, and 110m/s in space. I don't that is correct, but with that slow speed, the Planet feels bigger, but in KSP that would be very slow. I found also a estimated diameter of 10km, that mean you can stack 7 Empyrion Planets in Kerbins Atmosphare.
  4. No. My dream would actually be a game mix of KSP and Space Engineers. But that would be extremely difficult to develop and probably too much for current consumer PC.
  5. Theoretically you can, but only you need build 2 terrain systems, and have a loadingsceen between cockpit view and "outside" view. And if you in cockpit view, you don't see the same terrain as the voxel version. Voxel can have overhangs and other complicated structures.
  6. KSP is a space program simulator, a game focus to build rockets with many boosters and fly very fast. I will KSP 2, not Astroneer 2 with orbit physics.
  7. If you fly with highspeed near the surface, the voxel system no longer can build the terrain in time. Games like "space engineers" or "no man's sky" have speed limits.
  8. Astroneer have very very small planets/moon maybe 2-5 km in diameter. The target of the game ist to dig to the cores.
  9. I prefer dual contouring over marching cubes, they can have sharp edges. For large scale voxel terrains, you need only store the chunks which have been changed. The rest is procedural generated on the fly.
  10. The biggest Planet in Space Engineers has only 120 km in diameter. No'Man Sky, not official numbers, but also very small.
  11. Pro Voxel: Difficult terrain with caves or overhangs and other spezial structure. Deformable Contra Voxel: Uses more recourses (RAM, CPU) More complicated to develope From space "low poly" version of the Planets. No details. Pro Heightmap: Easier to develop Better LOD Better performance Contra Heightmap: Spezial structures, caves or overhangs difficult to create, only with manual work and not possible to large scale of multiple planets. Limited deformable
  12. I am a voxel terrain fan, but i don't think it fits KSP. But it would be nice if maybe there is a possibility to change the hightmap, to flatten an area or make roads.
  13. I am a programmer, and i say, software work that way.
  14. Maybe with simplifyed system with grafity objects on rails, but in a full-scale physically correct n-body simulation: less step == less precision. Simple cause and effect, each moment all body positions changes and with it the gravitational forces. If there was a formula for a quick and accurate n-body calculation, that works with normal consumer PC in an fast timewrap, then you should call Stockholm.