Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'feedback'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 9 results

  1. Hello there, I was wondering if it would be possible to implement cubemap support for planets into an update at some point. I really would love to see this, since the DDS format (a texture format used by most if not all unity games) has a max resolution of just 16k. This works fine if your planets are kerbin sized, but when you have bigger planets it can look somewhat stretched. With cubemaps in theory you could have textures up to 64k in resolution in addition to having no stretching at the poles. this would allow for much greater quality and clarity in the textures of larger planets. Thanks so much for your time. Here's an example of what I mean. For anyone who may not know, cubemaps allow for this kind of clarity. but currently this is done by a mod called RVE64K for RSS using a workaround, so it doesn't load properly when not in orbit or in the map view.
  2. I created a feedback report explaining the situation in detail. https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/24853
  3. Pretty much this: https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/24221 I'm sure that I'm not the only one experiencing this, you can pretty much see this on every stream on twitch from time to time. I'm not the expert in Unity, but is there really no way this can be done? I highly doubt that.
  4. So, KSP 2 just got announced and we are all really excited. I never expected this but I'm so happy they've done it anyway. Throughout the years feedback has been an important part of KSP's development, so let's start it off early. Now that the game is still in early development, I think it's the best time to already start giving feedback. I know two trailers aren't much, but the sooner we give feedback, the earlier the developers can choose to integrate it. I'll be the first: I hope the parts we've seen so far are place-holders for the final ones. Mostly because a lot of the parts shown which have been ported over from KSP seem to be the old models, which in my opinion looked a lot worse. I hope they will either port over the revamped parts or make entirely new ones that look even better and more realistic while still keeping a slightly goofy style.
  5. Hello. I have just checked the KSPedia from the website and was wondering if changes are planned, as it feels like a very cheap placeholder at the moment. Based on the post by UomoCapra UomoCapra says "Now you won’t need to mess with the flow of your ongoing mission and you’ll be able to use your mobile phone or any other display to consult it via our website!", leading me to believe that one of the reasons KSPedia has been removed from the game was that it felt a bit inconvenient to be accessed while playing. Well, that's false. Having to open an app through the game was never a problem. And, just like when openning KSPedia through the game, if you do have to access KSPedia through your mobile phone you will also have to pause the game; the only difference is that you'll have to take more steps if going for second method. Ideally, having it both in the game and as a .pdf in the website would be better, although the first method feels more interactive and easier to access! Is the KSPedia app ever coming back to the game, or is this a permanent change? I wish this is only temporary and I do believe other players feel the same. At the moment the .pdf file is simply a very cheap compilation of screenshots from the KSPedia menus - showing even the Xbox controller button icons on the bottom. It would be interesting if it became interactive instead of a .pdf, plus with some section makers so you wouldn't have to scroll through the many pages trying to find what you're looking for. Was there any other reason for the app to be removed? UomoCapra says that it will be easier for the devs to update the KSPedia through the website (even though it's just a .pdf file). But this doesn't seem like a reason, especially when the PC version still has the app without any issue. It would be interesting to hear/read why it's been removed, listen to the community feedback before permanently removing features and saying wether it might come back or not. Communication with the community is always welcomed! Thanks.
  6. Hello respectful community and devs. I bought the game recently and I am enjoying it. But there are rough edges around and I want to point them out. I did play through all tutorial scenarios to make sure I am just doing dumb stuff all around so I had some initial knowledge when I tried to perform different stuff. I am not off Kerbin just yet but I have quite a few successful orbital mission already. 1. Contracts. Really many contracts have unclear objectives. For example contract for testing parts like couplers or chutes do not tell you details like the part HAS to be activated using STAGING when all requirements are met. I spent quite a lot of time to understand that. Same goes for parts like engines that have a rightclick option for running the test. I had some problems understanding how do observation missions work as well as temperature/pressure tests and it was always an issue to spot required sensor in flight to rightclick it. Jokes in mission descriptions are fine but there should definitely be exact clear explanation for every objective. Missions with taking data on surface are really confusing until you have any means of travelling on ground like rovers or something. Landing a plane on this stage is even worse of a problem. 2. Planes Planes are really confusing in every possible aspect. There are almost no means of navigation. And the most annoying thing there is no autopilot. While planes are obvious tools for taking test data with "below" alt, getting to the spot is really confusing with no means for warping. KSP runway location is also a problem to locate both in map mode and in navigation. I had too big of an issue landing plane cause I could not visually locate the runway as well. So for now I just ignore planes while they can be really useful. 3. Map First and the most annoying thing is that KSP center is not visible on map. In both in-flight and from space center. I am sure showing KSP base on map with direction grid (like navball) would be great. Second problem is night/dark side. I find is rediculous that space program with that high tech all around can't see the planetary map from map view. And in-flight especially on a plane I just can't see anything like a blind kitten. Really not good at all. 4. Stability Launch Enhancer I am sure this one is meant to be used to stabilize rocket before launch cause sometimes rockets just fall due to wind or other stuff. But in my experience this thing only reduces launch stability as when it is released rocket experiences a major shake like one when physics ititialize before launch. For now thats all. This is not some kind of a rage post or something. I just tried pointing out weak spots from a newbie standpoints as most veterans are too used to all of this stuff to actually notice it.
  7. just curious what everyone think of the market and platform since console joined the network (let's say ps2 or xbox1) market and update stuff + early access + etc. - do they offer enough typing help actually to share concept and idea - are they dumbing down the user by the lack of keyboard or or proper typing helper wich make sharing some sepcific kind of info a bit tedious i personnally tend to think console are not really in osmosis with the network aspect regarding that ... kinda a bit too much dumbly merchantile & play don't think on a few layers ... wich is bit counter productive regarding the current nowdays gaming market and interenet overall i ll be curious to read other feeling about that, not especially ksp related but more in general overall gaming market related UTF-8#q=ergonomics+layers+%26+various+kind+of+data+sharing https://books.google.fr/books?id=v8LrAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA652&lpg=PA652 . . .
  8. I haven't made an SSTO in absolutely ages. In fact I haven't made one since before the significant aero changes occurred as I simply lost the ability to do it. That really had to change so I put my mind to it and over the last 3 days have designed and flown this mission in my spare time. First some stats: Name: Mullet Dyne Cross Wing (Variant 5) Parts: 86 (including payload) Mass: 43.155t Cost: 81,464 (including payload) Power: 3 x CR-7, 2 LV-N Mission Report - Click here Craft File - Click here So basically what I'm looking for is a bit of feedback if anyone wants to chip in. Since this is my first foray into SSTO's since before the major aero changes (although the design went through 5 iterations before I was happy with it) I've no real idea (beyond being capable of Mun/Minus return) whether I've got the balance, look, design, efficiency right etc. Feel free to download it and try it out, or just provide feedback based on what you see Thanks everyone! SM
  9. Hey, I just finished doing some work on a propeller model for a mod that I was thinking of creating. Im just wondering if you guys have any feedback on the model, or more specifically the texturing. Thanks for any help, I sincerely appreciate it. You can view the model in 3D right here: https://skfb.ly/NtD7