Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


6,192 Excellent

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • About me
    Boldly crashing what no Kerbal has crashed before!
  • Location
    Universe ! Virgo ! Milkway ! OrionArm ! SolarSystem ! Earth ! America ! SouthAmerica ! Brazil ! SãoPaulo ! Capital ! Home ! LivingRoom ! MyChair
  • Interests
    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of lines of code cried out in Null Reference Exceptions and were suddenly flooding the KSP.log...

Recent Profile Visitors

19,579 profile views
  1. Publish your KSP.log (you will find this file on the same place KSP.exe is) on dropbox, googledrive or something and I will inspect it. 99% of chances that you were bitten by a nasty KSP bug on the Assembler Resolver thingy yada yada yada . TL;DR. when something borks being loaded due a faulty dependence, everything else trying to load something (or to use a thingy called Reflection) borks relentlessly due the bug. And since TweakScale makes heavy and critical use of exactly these two things. TweakScale yells when it detects this happened (because a faulty TweakScale will ruin your whole savegame). There're 1% of chance that you forgot to copy a file, and at least once I published a package with a DLL missing (shame on me), so it costs nothing to check for the mentioned file on GameData/TweakScale/Plugins/PluginData folder. See if the new patch I'm beta testing does a better job: https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/KSP-Recall/blob/master/GameData/999_KSP-Recall/patches/101_ProceduralPartsAttachmentNodesFix.cfg Hummm… better. Let's simplify that a bit: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ProceduralShape*]]:FINAL { @node_stack_top = 0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1 @node_stack_bottom = 0, -1, 0, 0, -1, 0, 1 %xxxValue = #$MODULE[ProceduralShape*],0/length$ @xxxValue /= 2 @node_stack_top,0[1] = #$xxxValue$ @xxxValue *= -1 @node_stack_bottom,0[1] = #$xxxValue$ -xxxValue = dummy } This generic patch should work on any part based on Procedural Parts that are stackable (I just found like these until the moment). If it doesn't works, ping me here again and I will eyeball the problem As Soon As Possible®
  2. Well… I came from the car industry too (after jumping ship from the Mobile). And I know something for sure - anyone on the* team being caught mistreating a potential customer the way I saw happening on this thread would have some serious problems on his/her employability. You just can't point your finger into your customer's nose yelling "I'm a professional on this field and you are not" and expect to keep their money - even when you are right, what's (frankly) not too common: the customers know their problems better than you, they have problems on communicating them to you. Boeing is giving us a hell of a lesson about how to cope with criticism. I suggest we listen to these guys, they are the real deal.
  3. A fantastic real-life use for Infernal Robotics! Ping @Ben J. Kerman !!
  4. Lisias

    The Probe!

    Hail Boeing, uh… Probe! Jebediah finally gone to Space! In one piece! https://www.engadget.com/boeing-starliner-kerbal-space-program-jeb-212326380.html Congratulations, dude! Jeb is on ISS now! (skip to 4:06)
  5. So it was organic and expontaneous? I'm impressed!
  6. Believe me, I know! Believe me, I don't care!!! It's funny to remember now, but at that time I got sick with the motion. It's like sailing on rough seas!
  7. In My Humble Opinion, a WAY better way to counter act criticisms was done by… Boeing! A Jebediah plush was sent to space on the Starliner. EXCELLENT P/R stunt, I say. This is an argument I can see value on a discussion like this one we are getting around here. As we say around here in Brazil, "Águas passadas não movem moinhos" (water under the bridge do not move mills). What you are doing today is what matters. https://www.engadget.com/boeing-starliner-kerbal-space-program-jeb-212326380.html I think that at least the P/R issue was addressed beautifully. (I loved this one - I was expecting something like this, to tell you the true) [snip] Cheers.
  8. No one beats the Dutch, however!!!
  9. IMHO we are giving too much attention to the form of the message, and to few to the content. Sometimes what we are understanding as stalling or deflection are just the dude/gall missing some nuance due language barrier or some previous post - or even some emotional response triggered by some other post that leaked into the current one (I'm surely did it sometimes). From my times on a multinational, where we had to talk to people from different countries, I had ended learning that a German can tell he/she loves you in a way a Brazilian may think he wants to ki... punch you. And a French can tell he/she wants to punch you in a way a Brazilian may think he/she loves you. Perhaps something similar may be happening on this discussion? Both "sides" appears to be interested on a good exchange of opinions - besides some exasperation here and there...
  10. There're some of these around here where I live: And this is from another state of my country: The very interesting thing is that besides being a puller (the second axle from front to rear does the traction), the engine is on very rear - so we have two articulated drive shaft from the engine to the driving axle. And I don't have the slightest idea how they do with the gear shift! On a side note, the last wagon where the engine lies is bumpy as hell, by God's sal]ke. The most comfortable wagon is the first one - dual axled. By a mile!
  11. You appears to be mixing different situations from different times on the same argument. Of course that the mindset the stakeholders had before the pandemics are different from the mindset after it. For the best, but also for the worst. Whoever is paying for this party is still doing it because he thinks he still can get a good profit from it - but as time passes, that profits shrink a bit, and he also knows it. And since this dude makes a living by maximising his profits, it's reasonable to conclude that since he didn't pulled the plug yet, he still expects to have some. But this doesn't necessarily means he's happy about it. The zeitgeist before the pandemics is drastically different from the zeitegeist we have now. World had changed absurdly, and you can bet your nice corsair keyboard this affected drastically the expectancy of profits - what's also affecting how the stakeholders are managing the pressure on the dev team. No primary stakeholder is willing to risk bankruptcy for any dev team in the World - unless he's already facing bankruptcy and there's nothing else to lose, so keeping betting on the product is the best option no matter how bad things may be. So, since there's no sign of financial troubling on TT2, and there's no sign that Private Division is going to be merged or decommissioned, and they still are funding the KSP2 development, apparently we can conclude that they are still funding the project because they still think they will recoup the costs at least. But we can't say they are sure they will have an acceptable profit on the thing, they may just be throwing some more money on the thing in order to avoid losing what was already spent - what sometimes can lead to the Sunken Cost Fallacy - no one is above the risk of falling on it. Not me, not you, not them. The complexity of the games from that time, as well the complexity of the tech environment was way, but way less complicated than nowadays. But some of the people are still the same, and unfortunately I think they had exhausted their ability to cope with the current development environment. The things I had seen on Unity, frankly… Dozens of spinlocks on a multi-task, multi-core environment? Seriously? We are not running games on a 68000 anymore. But yet... On a somewhat shallow analysis, the new guys appears to have the technical expertise, but not the competence to handle some subtleties of the development (not to mention basic tasks management or plain maturity). And the old guys failed to keep in touch with all the details of the current modern tech environment they need to cope, they apparently failed to recognise the need to learn a lot of the thingies the new guys learnt. We appear to be a group with different and distinct mindsets, with different and distinct abilities and competences - all of them failing to merge into a cohesive development effort. Given the harsh economical times that are approaching, I think the companies that will survive tomorrow will be the ones that will solve this dilemma nowadays. Things are going to get way worse before getting better. A product that WE didn't paid a cent for yet. But some people are paying for it, and they want their money back - with interest. And since we are the ones that are going to provide such money and interest in the future, the discussion on hands are not that dismissible.
  12. I wont call it "hate", but I can't criticise you for doing that neither. But definitively, it's not "blind" - there're clues (if not evidences) that he have good reasons to think how the does. It doesn't means he's right, tough. It only means that perhaps he can be. That's an excellent argument. All the heat NMS got was by Sean Murray losing the control of his anxiety and ending up talking too much before the game release. NMS would still be a bit bleak and somewhat dull game on the launch, but these weakness would not had be so evident at launch without all that heat he inadvertently started by talking too much. And, really, the game was good enough to be released. All that bad press was undeserved - but I can't say it was uncalled for... Staying silent while doing the work is a good way to handle the heat from some stakeholders - as long you have support from the primary ones (the guys that are funding you), and, believe me, Seam Murray didn't stayed silent to them. IMHO both you and @PDCWolfare forgetting that besides we are stakeholders on this project too, right now we are not the primary ones - we are somewhere between secondary and excluded at this point. Until we start to throw some money on the product, they don't own us too much (if any) explanations, so unless they are being naive as Sean Murray was, they are only telling us what some key dude there (a primary stakeholder for sure) thinks they should be explaining. There're good arguments on both sides of this discussion, and I think we could be getting even some more insights about what's happening if we manage to remember that when arguing.
  13. I know. There're a some add'ons with faulty config files around, but since on vanilla KSP they pass trough (and I'm starting to figure out why Squad royally screwed up on KSP 1.9 on that Editor stunt), blaming TweakScale as a scapegoat appears to be the most usual way out of the mess. Without the affected add'ons' authors collaboration, I'm afraid this is too much work for me doing it alone. Technically, I can launch a TweakScale Companion for Tantares and BDB to tackle down the problems on a patch or even some code, but doing it all by myself is over what I can do on my free time. No. It was outsourced! Look for the "All Tweak" thread.
  14. If you want to suck even more, I'm the right guy to help! But if you want to get better, I suggest some older vídeos from Scott Manley. I linked one of his play lists, the one I think it will help the most now. But check the others ones too! Cheers.
  • Create New...