Ted
-
Posts
1,212 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Ted
-
-
Just now, FreeThinker said:
Yes, but it was not clear you will post the BETA key on a public forum.
Apologies there, I was hoping we'd made it clear in the article that there would be no key and that it was just opt-in. So to be clear, you won't need a key and there will be an announcement when the prerelease goes live.
-
6 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:
You're correct, no key is required for the prerelease testing.
I know it's bad Forum etiquette, but +1 to this. I've received 30 - 40 PMs in the past week asking this very thing.
-
6 minutes ago, Zalloon said:
Hi KasperVId, thanks for the good news!!
But how can we access this update via Steam? Still can't find anything in the Steam game properties here....
The Experimentals builds are still internally tested, it's the prerelease that will be publicly available. That takes place after Experimentals.
-
5 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:
- snip -
I was about to post something replying to a few of the most recent comments but this really hits the nail on the head. I'll just say the following though.
We like to provide you with a mod repository that we can provide with as much efficiency as possible to allow us to continue to focus on the game. If you would ever like to use an alternative, please feel free to and I encourage you to develop your skills in the process by perhaps even making your own!
It can be disheartening when these projects come to an end, for whatever reason, but I thank everyone who has ever helped make them happen. And in the wake of them, everyone who has the time, resources and knowledge can chip in - that's what makes the KSP Community so fantastic. During these times, we'll carry on to provide the official repository for you to host your mods on, but completely understand if you choose not to. I look forward to seeing what you guys come up with next.Also, while I haven't seen it here much, I have seen people post up on reddit that we never publicly acknowledged KerbalStuff. I've discussed it in the past in IRC, in person with people when talking about where to get KSP mods and in many more situations. It was great to see such determination and community from someone, why wouldn't I talk about it in public?
If anyone had any questions, please feel free to buzz me with them.
-
On 27/01/2016 at 0:59 PM, katateochi said:
@KasperVld do you know (roughly) what sorta specs the QA team's machines are? Would be interesting to know how our machines compare to the ones KSP is tested on.
My computer here has the following:
- Intel i5-3570k at stock clock.
- Overclocked Nvidia GTX770
- 32GB RAM
- 1TB SSD
- Running KSP at 1920x1200.
It's a pretty high mid range setup here these days, the GPU doesn't keep up with recent games. However, it provides a very good testbed for KSP. My other machine here I regularly test on is a mid-2014 Retina Macbook Pro with the Intel Iris integrated graphics. It's considerably lower end on the performance, but does play KSP well enough to test with.
The rest of the QA Team have pretty varied setups - I'll pass them this thread and I'm sure they'll share their setups.
-
Not really sure why you would have seen that, Steam Workshop is not a service we're currently using or planning on using.
-
Woohoo! I think we all owe Kasper a round of pats on the back for killing it this weekend upgrading it all.
2 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:This should have been a non-starter for selecting IPS. How on earth did you guys manage to select a new forum software that couldn't migrate URLs properly?
Maintaining inbound links with regards to search engines and external blogs and websites should have been the highest priority item in your evaluation. Now, all Google searches are going to lead to 404 errors. That's really stupid.
It's definitely a stick in the mud, but Google should update its indexes soon enough and other sights will cache them soon enough.
-
They will be in a later update. We want to give them more time for design and overall fleshing-out.
Note: This is in no way a confirmation of VTOL engines.
-
I know this thread has been inactive, but is the new look what came out of the update?
New look? The maintenance didn't go ahead due to technical issues that our server provider was experiencing. They are planning on doing it at a later date.
-
Glad to see Squad HQ has gotten an updated IVA!
I've been working with IVAs a lot lately and I was wondering: What is the reason for IVAs being rotated with respect to the craft? There seems to have been a lot of work done behind the scenes to make this possible, which to me implies a workaround for a some problem or limitation that arose.Essentially it boils down to the IVA models would need to be constantly rotated along with the vessel if they were to share the co-ordinate space. However, it's a lot easier for a computer to simply transform the co-ordinate spaces.
I wish I knew that off the top of my head, HarvesteR explained it to me a moment ago.
-
but I believe skipping physics calculations if there are no forces applied to a vessel is a rather simple optimization which, over the years, has never been introduced.
And there's one of the problems that one has to work around with an optimisation like this. How are you to skip "physics calculations" if you are calculating whether any forces are applied to the vessel to evaluate skipping them? Those themselves are the physics calculations you mention.
It's not an impossible process to optimise, there are just many factors and unexpected outcomes that one encounters that might not be immediately obvious which makes it significantly harder than you might think.
-
Oh sure, makes perfect sense.
I'm not one of those who was fooled by Squad's silly versioning scheme. As RIC points out above the game has changed significantly with the delivery method and everyone has their own ideas of what the terms are. The problem for Squad is that they believe their own hype about the software's development stage and therefore their users believe it too. Far better, in my mind, to just keep incrementing releases and call 0.27.x a "Major Release". Or whatever it takes for Steam to be happy. No one is confused, no hype necessary, continue delivering the product as usual, stuff happens.
And for me, it's even simpler. Out of one side of their mouth, Squad said "Version numbers, alpha/beta/release status, all that doesn't matter, really. You shouldn't even be thinking in those terms," and out the other side they're screaming "WOO HOO 1.0 WE'RE OUT OF BETA AND FULLY RELEASED WOO HOO!"
I'm going to entertain this train of thought, just while the cleaners scrape together the dead horse guts that's being so gleefully smeared everywhere after yet another dead horse beatfest.
You're completely right that we didn't put much weight on the alpha/beta status as we never followed the development model that those terms apply to. We didn't do it out of some sort of PR move that was aimed at creating fog between the player and the development process. We follow an iterative and incremental development methodology with each update to KSP and the overall methodology for KSP borrows from Agile, but not by much. We've always done that and it's something I've discussed before.
I urge you to read up on iterative/incremental and you'll find that there are few, if any, places where Alpha and Beta are the canon terms to use to internally discuss a product's integrity with that methodology. So where do those words come from and why did we use them? Because they're largely used to inform consumers (and at times non-developers) about the integrity of a product from the developer's point-of-view. In other words, they're largely a marketing term now. While they are rooted in software development and still widely used there today, in games they're usually just a label for "We're not close to completing the vision we had, still laying foundations" and "We're close to release and working in a manner that reflects that".
I hope that explains the reasoning behind the decisions we made. Furthermore, I hope that the transparency helps alleviate your anxieties about KSP and its development.
At the end of the day, you speak absolutely about what me and my coworkers believe about our own project. A project we endear with all the passion, energy and skill that we have in us. A project that we want you to all enjoy. A project that we will continue to work on and refine until we feel that it is done, in an order that we deem to be the most efficient with the resources we have. If the biggest issue that you have with that project is that the version number on it is different from the one you would put on it and the way you choose to discuss that is by making sweeping statements about what I think, then so be it. But do try to take another tone, that one is getting old and it doesn't make me feel as though I can discuss KSP as candidly as I once did.
... let alone the ridiculously high system requirement (an overclocked i7 processor) because the game is, to be gentle, unoptimized.As peachoftree pointed out, that is to compile code and build assets, not to play the game. Development machines are rarely an accurate reflection of the system requirements to play it.
-
Dear KasperVld, and all of squad. I hope you realise you just acted out encouragement to post feature requests here.
This is the only topic that apparently gets some dev-attention. So it's the obvious jump-board to post requests. You just asked someone to post a link to a topic in the requests section. You basically confirmed that suggestions here get more attention than in suggestions and development.
Drop a short line in suggestions and development every now and then. Take five minutes a week to scroll through the top page of requests, and maybe respond to one or two interesting or popular topics. Doing that, you make it a worthwhile platform. This will maybe take 15 minutes of your time a week. And it doesn't need to be the same person every week, or even on an actual weekly basis. Give people a sense that the suggestions and development forum is being actively read, and THEN maybe the suggestions in this topic will lessen.What you basically did was confirm this is the best place for ones suggestions. Since they're actually being read here. Again, not saying you don't read the suggestions and development forum, just that people get a sense you're not, because you post more often in this topic, than in that forum.
Please see my previous reply to this sort of thing - http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/101289-What-is-the-point-of-the-Suggestions-subforum?p=1566451#post1566451
TL;DR we read it but don't have much time to spare in replying to threads and even when we do, we're hesitant to do much other than agree it may be a cool idea. Usually, adding something suggested would be too far down the line to commit to in a post. Additionally, we're not really at the point of exploring new ideas, so aren't following the suggestions forum as much as we usually would - Unity 5 takes a lot of our attention!
-
Is this a good time to say Unity 5.2 just came out with significant performance (rect mask for UI + render sorting) optimisations?
Probably too late for KSP 1.1 (or would cause delays) since that's just about into QA, but still sounds like good news (for the future).
We're in the process of updating to it and evaluating how well 1.1 works on it.
-
There are a fair few people saying they feel distanced from the development team from the new dev notes. I can't speak for the rest of the development team, but personally I'm often available in #kspofficial on espernet and will usually be up for a chat if you're interested. Similarly, I'm very reachable on Twitter and of course over the forum's PM system.
The dev notes are a great way to keep you all updated on the game's development and ins and outs, but if what you're missing is the informal communication between us, there's plenty of other places you can easily achieve that.
-
Quick question, just for clarification: Everyone who was accepted into Experimentals has been notified, correct? So anyone not notified at this point should safely assume they were not selected?
The processing for the applications is taking longer than anticipated, not all successful applicants have been notified yet.
-
Firm deadline is in place now, please don't PM any applications to me.
All successful applicants will hear back by the 23rd August.
-
You said midnight tonight, but it's only 7 pm EDT, and it seems to be closed.
Midnight isn't the same moment around the world, midnight UTC+1 is indeed 7PM EDT. For future reference
I'm over in the UK and didn't fancy staying up till 12AM EDT to close the applications!Damn, looks like I missed the opportunity by a mere couple of hours. Shame, I would have loved to submit an application. Think I'd be a pretty good experimental tester, I'm familiar with the bug tracker and have plenty of spare time. I've also done closed alpha testing for other games in the past. Ah well.Please feel free to PM me if you'd still like to apply - a gradual deadline would be nicer than this strict cutoff, but I can't think of a simple way to do that.
That does go for everyone, if you'd still like to apply and have notable experience please PM me. Your application will be given equal and full consideration.
-
Just submit it again.
Yupp, feel free to do that as I do search for duplicate entries and check for people half-submitting and redoing it etc.
Additionally, the applications will be closing at midnight tonight (UTC+1), so apply now if you're on the fence!
-
In the time between applying for this and now, I've made an account on the bug tracker. Is there a way I can update my application to reflect this?
Unfortunately not, sorry.
And yepp, Starwhip, TriggerAu and Vanamonde hit the nail on the head
-
Heh
namespace GiveValSomeAir
-
On the matter of being 18 or older to apply, it is due to persons under 18 in most countries not being able enter into legally binding contracts. In full transparency, there are ways around this with parents or guardians entering into the NDA on behalf of you and we have in the past done this on one occasion but don't plan to do so this time around. Additionally, the age requirement is also to do with experience, not just professional but interpersonal. I'm sure many of us have cringed at the things we used to post online back in our teens.
Professionally, we are looking for people with some experience in testing and general scientific methodology. This is mainly because the Experimental Team isn't a mass of hands to throw a build to, they're experienced testers who can follow detailed test cases and know what areas of the game are likely to break in different scenarios. Thankfully, and hopefully, we're past the point where we need a group for the former!
As always, exceptions can be made for, well, exceptional applicants. So please do apply even if you're under 18, even if just to give me something to read, and you never know.
Thanks!
-
Hey all,
Attentive to detail, got a bunch of free time and love KSP? Apply!
Looking to get volunteer experience in the games industry and not sure where to start? Apply!
Need an excuse to give your significant other or family for playing KSP more? Apply!
The applications for a volunteer position on our Experimental Testing Team are now open here: http://goo.gl/forms/VQfXnWTZMN
Thanks and let me know if you have any questions below!
-
Thanks for the kind words, folks. I feel honoured to be part of such a community.
I do look forward to working on KSP as Technical Producer though!
I've been
1.1 wheels:
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
The issue here is not that we don't have the necessary wheels (or "cars, suspension and the like") knowledge to approximate wheel physics, but that the middleware (both Unity and VPP) are making implementing this in KSP cumbersome and unfortunately challenging to balance currently. We've looked into PID systems for the wheels, and those can work for wheels for sure, but KSP is a game where you can make little to no assumptions about how the player has designed their vehicles - something that car manufacturers can take with certainty and something we'd need for a PID system to be fully capable. Thus, as I'm sure you can see, it's not really car expert that's needed. Going forward, we have solutions that can mitigate this and plans to solve the problems we're seeing, but this takes time and a lot more hard work from a team that has been pushing to the limit on that. I completely understand that it must be frustrating to see this as someone who is passionate about wheels and cars. And I welcome your suggestions, they make a lot of sense if you're building a system from the ground up, but at this point we're unable to implement those in the short-term.
Hopefully that has resolved some of your concerns, if you have any further ones, I'm always available via PM (though sometimes can take a few days to reply as things get busy!).