Jump to content
Forum Maintenance - The forum may experience some downtime over the next few days as we upgrade the server and forum software. Thanks for your patience. ×


  • Posts

  • Joined

Posts posted by ModZero

  1. On 9/25/2021 at 6:56 AM, IgorZ said:

    GIVEN: The stock inventory system allows restricting parts from any EVA interaction. It also can enable a part for EVA movement, but not for the inventory storing.

    I think it makes a certain amount of sense from the "simulation" perspective - I don't imagine "storage compartments" as just large, structure-less voids with a bunch of snacks bouncing around next to a loose rocket engine. So I'd expect e.g. "an inflatable hab" to be stowed somewhere on the outside of the ship (like, you know, the one actually in space was hidden in the trunk - which is not a container). So from the "simulation" standpoint I think it makes sense for containers to be limited in what they can carry. This applies especially to mass - imagine a cube of plutonium just tearing through your entire storage at slightest acceleration.

    I do think that doing that properly is more complex than just a size or a single flag, and considering that putting things in inventories is also a way to cope with "game physics," I don't think this is a good limitation for a game.

  2. 4 minutes ago, Rakete said:

    Edit: As of Near Future contstruction I'm not sure if the circular ones already are updated to support 1.12, as the OP still says for KSP 1.11.

    I'm fairly sure they wouldn't be, because yeah, it's not been updated, with a note about requiring docking port surgery. I was just wondering whether the issue is "lack of a feature" or more like "totes broken, just didn't show up in a quick test."

    I also didn't want to @-mention Nertea, because I'm anxious enough asking about an incompatible version of the mod at all ;-)

  3. So, because I'm an impatient girl, I kinda wanted to try using NFT Construction in a new save. At a glance, the docking ports work (just, no rotation, because duh - but for many (all) of them it wouldn't even make much sense I think? Also, I only tested the square ports on the ground with hacked gravity) - would I be massively screwing myself by using it?

    Obviously, warranty entirely voided if I go ahead with  it :D

  4. On 7/12/2020 at 2:40 AM, linuxgurugamer said:

    I wouldn't.  How many games support multiple game windows, independent of each other?  I am not aware of any, which doesn't mean that they aren't there. This is a significant effort for very few users of it

    I know exactly one, Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance. It's kinda neat, but I'd prefer a way for a separate app to read the game's state (which can be an issue in competitive multiplayer, yes), and I kinda expect that Telemachus-equivalent would be possible in KSP.

  5. On 11/9/2019 at 9:29 AM, Thygrrr said:

    Floating point numbers ("floats") are 64 bits in memory and usually 80 bits in the FPU, you can do double precision ("doubles") at double that size if you need to, but most game physics systems work using single precision.

    It seems like "large scale" space sims will become the exception - Star Citizen, for example, is built on doubles, AFAIK. But I think even they only do the physics in double precision, not rendering. And in rendering you need local space — far away objects are just dots and you don't actually do textures on them, and rendering a Kerbal walking on a surface of a planet can be fun.

  6. I doubt it can be open sourced in any meaningful way. It likely contains plenty of licensed 3rd party code that they can't just re-license to AGPL or whatever. Even if they spent the effort of separating the licensed code from their own, it's likely you couldn't run it or build it without the bits they can't even show you (at least with the engine they can show it to you and you likely can download it yourself).

    Otherwise we could speculate about e.g. releasing the code but not any of the assets, for example, or releasing the code for KSP1 (again, likely contains closed source code they don't have ownership of, so it's a bit of a fantasy) — that wouldn't be unheard of, notably ID Software did something like that multiple times.

  7. On 9/18/2019 at 4:43 PM, swjr-swis said:

    Inserting a personal and completely subjective opinion here: I abhor all these 'realism' effects that have nothing to do with how human vision really works.

    Wait, you think they're there because they're realistic? I mean, sure, there's probably some authors who did them for that reason, but no, that's not why they're there. They're there to make the image more interesting and sometimes to mask shortcomings that would be impractical to correct otherwise.

    Also, as a glasses-wearer, eyeball grime is totally realistic.

  8. 12 minutes ago, Snark said:

    Yes, but for a compiled language like C#, at minimum you at least have to recompile.

    As I wrote, it enables a REPL which does help with this, but as for more complex module, eh, wrote enough of both Java and Django code and had enough of the former reload faster than latter to have doubt. But anyhow, I am happy there's a scripting interface as long as there's a REPL we can poke at somewhere, which does actually help a lot with messing with a thing's internals.

    Edit: of course a lot depends on the details. I didn't deal enough with C# and/or Unity (it's still Mono, right?) so maybe C# modules are really unwieldy or slow to load.

  9. 7 minutes ago, Snark said:

    Because?  Why is this not a good thing?

    I oppose the thesis of the sentence, not imply anything about whether it's good :-) You don't need an interpreted language for dynamic loading and/or unloading, nor having that automatically enables dynamic loading. You need some sort of dynamic linker (or a thing that fulfils the same purpose within the context), and if you want unloading, well-defined cleanup procedures. You can, and often have, dynamic loading with code written in C and C++ - that's how old browser plugins worked, that's how Linux, MacOS and Windows load device drivers (note to self: check how Windows does that now, they might have went all microkernely). I think having a scripting interface is great because it let's you have a built-in REPL prompt (REPL doesn't really work well for most compiled languages, they're not designed for that sort of thing and it gets unwieldy if you try), but that's different from dynamic loading.

    7 minutes ago, Snark said:

    Grumbling tends to be more helpful if it comes with a "why" or a "what would you like better" along for the ride.  ;)

    Sorry, it was obvious in my brain --' and I didn't want to take space with a huge paragraph. I didn't expect the "it's not a good thing" interpretation.

    Also, the forum didn't let me enter an emoji, I'm sad now.

  10. On 8/31/2019 at 2:00 AM, Snark said:

    The other reason why they're motivated to enable that is dynamic loading.

    Loud grumbling.

    On 8/30/2019 at 10:53 PM, DStaal said:

    Python and nearly all others were designed as fully stand-alone programming languages.

    While I don't like Python (perhaps because I'm paid to write it - like every 2019 hipster developer I want to write Rust and/or Typescript, but I digress and long compilation times are coffee breaks) it was actually very much built to be embeddable. In fact Sims 4 is moddable in Python. 

    it's also possibly the easiest language to read

    Extremely loud grumbling.

  11. 1 hour ago, Kerbart said:

    Chrisjen Avasarala? While I would love to hear her do the voice-over, I think every other sentence laced with profanity will not jive very well with the family-friendly character the game is promoting.

    Just have her speak Persian and play every word backwards, it's the Kerbal way and I'm in it for her voice :-)

    Edit: this also solves all the concerns about translations and content updates.

  12. 7 minutes ago, sumghai said:

    Game development is not a democracy.

    That was kind-of one of my two points (the other is that professional voice actors are, y'know, professional voice actors): petitioning commercial companies is something best done rather sparsely.


    As an educational game used by some schools for STEM courses, un-narrated tutorials are good for training students in vital reading comprehension skills, particularly important for those pursuing careers in science and engineering.

    I do have to resent this comment, though. "Vital reading comprehension skills" set in contrast to voiced tutorials pass unpleasantly close to exclusive. Depending on visual acuity (I'm pretty sure my eyesight is going to go bust before I retire) this just goes a bit across accessibility functions. While hopefully we'll have font size settings, and the game does inherently depend on having some visual function, depending that people consume "written" material just to "teach them something" is not okay.

  13. 17 minutes ago, cubinator said:

    Cassini crossed the ring plane in the space between the ring and the planet, where there was very little material. If it had crossed any thicker parts of the rings it likely would have been terribly damaged.

    It usually did that, but during the "grand finale" it went into the actual rings a few times (see here) and even "recorded" the plasma discharge from particles impacting the instruments. It is mentioned that the entire thing was rather risky, as there's plenty of material bigger than the microns it actually encountered, but it was end of mission anyway.

    Edit: in particular, re our expectations:


    During this orbit’s ring-plane crossing, the spacecraft was originally planned to be oriented with its high-gain antenna (the big dish) facing forward to help shield the spacecraft from ring particles. However, during the two earlier dives through the D ring (orbits 276 and 277), the ring particle environment was found to be benign. Because of this, mission planners decided to remove the shielding requirement for this orbit. The antenna was once again be used as a shield on the following orbit (orbit 282)


  • Create New...