KSP Weekly: The Solar Visit

[Superfluous J]

4 minutes ago, passinglurker said:

People complain both ways because neither way is a style that fits with porkjet's work. Its almost as if people want a unified aesthetic instead of two piles consisting of "porkjets space plane parts" and "everyone who wanted to be a household name like porkjet".

Possibly. My girlfriend complains in real life that I have no eye for stuff like this. I notice if lines don't match or colors are off, but literally could not tell you what parts in the game Porkjet did or didn't do the art or models for, or which ones are "bad" because they don't conform to that style (and not because they are in and of themselves less attractive).

For me it's simple. The new versions look better the old ones (in this specific case of the HECS picture) for similar reasons that the new tanks look better than the old (oil drum) ones. They're crisper and cleaner and look more like they'd be used by a space program.

[passinglurker]

@5thHorseman I can like crisp and clean don't get me wrong beale's tantares pulls off that style extremely well but this...

Is not crisp and clean this is just bad-CG.

The emphasis on porkjets style is simply a matter of practicality since the largest single block of parts are already done by porkjet that makes doing everything else in his style is the least amount of work to achive the goal of a unified aesthetic the only way you could possibly go lower is if you either abandon the goal or cut quality drastically.

As for the constant negativity squad gets... honestly between the launch debacle, the console debacle, the abandon ship debacle, the MH debacle etc the venture deserves our scrutiny and ire. outcry has proven the only way to budge squads set course in that past, and after this long I've come to terms with the possibility that KSP development could end, and the devs could move on so to me if they can't do this right give us a porkjet rocket revamp in everyway but name then they can just quit and move on to thier next game. We have a strong enough modding community to patch on without them. If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen as they say.

Edited August 11, 2018 by passinglurker

[Raptor9]

I would love more parts that look optimized for the harsh vacuum of space with silver or gold foil look, like the small xenon and LFO tanks.  I've mentioned this before; I think having a dual variant family of the 1.25m FL-T (or even 1.875m tanks if we were getting really ambitious) in gold mylar would be interesting for building vacuum-only ships or landers.  Beyond just the visual appeal of having gold mylar-wrapped tank vessels lacking the rigid black-and-white rocket hulls, you could adjust the stats of each variant to make it a calculated trade off during VAB assembly.

When compared to an existing FL-T400, a 1.25m diameter gold-wrapped cylinder with rounded ends (like the R-11 Baguette) would have lower mass, but also lower impact and heat tolerance, while occupying the same length and diameter space of the FL-T400.

Instead of filling this thread with a bunch of pictures, I'll just link the feedback post I made on the bugtracker, which has a better visual example of what I had in mind.

And while I'm dreaming , it would be nice if we could switch between gold and silver textures; or LFO and LF-only for making LV-N powered vessels.  I'm ignorant when it comes to normal/specular maps, but I imagine such variants might be heavier on resources and counter to what @SQUAD is trying to accomplish. 

[Superfluous J]

 

1 hour ago, passinglurker said:

I can like crisp and clean don't get me wrong beale's tantares pulls off that style extremely well but this...

Is not crisp and clean this is just bad-CG.

I have literally never noticed that before. On either version of the tank. Was it in the original orange one as well?

1 hour ago, passinglurker said:

The emphasis on porkjets style is simply a matter of practicality since the largest single block of parts are already done by porkjet that makes doing everything else in his style is the least amount of work to achive the goal of a unified aesthetic the only way you could possibly go lower is if you either abandon the goal or cut quality drastically.

I have no problem with using it or not. My problem is that I have no idea why people say such and such a part aren't in that style. It's like I'm colorblind but it's to style. I'm styleblind. You point at two parts (or a red and green patch) and say they're in different styles (colors) and I just have to say okay well they look fine to me.

1 hour ago, passinglurker said:

As for the constant negativity squad gets... honestly between the launch debacle, the console debacle, the abandon ship debacle, the MH debacle etc the venture deserves our scrutiny and ire.

Well first off no, I actually don't agree that they deserve ire. But scrutiny is fine. Part of scrutiny is noting that if nothing significant is wrong, you don't have to just keep scrutinizing until you find something.

To borrow a popular meme...

 

 

[doudou]

Hello community!

Thank you Squad for these improvements, but why not get inspired by Ven's gorgeous models? it's graphic!

[nestor]

10 hours ago, Poodmund said:

It looks at though the HECS part either lacks a Bump Map or it is very weak. This kind of skews our perception of the visual representation of this part. Could anyone from SQUAD, please, either confirm or deny whether the above screen preview showing the part has a normal map applied to the object or not?

It has both normal map and specular map. 

[evileye.x]

Don't worry people, we still gonna have VSR) 

[klgraham1013]

8 hours ago, KraterKreator said:

Come on @klgraham1013. How about a "Thank you Squad for listening to your fans!". I promise it won't hurt.

Sure.  I'll give it a gold star and put it on my fridge.  E for Effort.

[Enceos]

I really like the endeavor to standardize the textures of all stock parts. Hope to see more!

[Nightside]

20 hours ago, SQUAD said:

Sorry Val 

Edited August 11, 2018 by Nightside

[klesh]

9 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

I have literally never noticed that before. On either version of the tank. Was it in the original orange one as well? 

 

It was the 1.4.2 version.  It had all kinds of issues:

https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/18298

Quote

1. Opening up the .mu file in a 3d editor reveals that the orange tank is just not modeled very cleanly. Parts of it are subtly lopsided, there are split edge normals that were obviously split by accident and then just left that way, the whole thing is just a smidge off-center. No biggie, 10 minute cleanup job in Blender.

2. When they converted the diffuse map from .png to .dds the export settings were set wrong, and the alpha channel was blanked. It wasn't actually deleted; there still is a alpha channel, the image is still DXT5 not DXT1. The channel is just completely full of nothing but white. Since the shader is using the alpha channel as its diffuse map, this makes every pixel on the tank's surface completely as shiny as all hell, and makes the messed-up geometry visually pop a lot more.

2.B. Additionally, the normal map on the white tank got straight-up wrecked in the .png -> .dds conversion. It looks like they tried to use DXT5nm compression but got the swizzling process completely wrong. You're supposed to move the data from the red channel into the alpha channel and blank the blue and red channels, but instead they just duplicated the green channel over absolutely everything. That doesn't give you a working normal map.

Fortunately the .pngs in 1.4.0 are still good, so going back and re-exporting everything the right way wasn't hard.

3. the ModulePartVariants in Rockomax64.cfg was set up all wrong. What you're seeing in Klesh's screenshot is the game loading both the orange tank's mesh AND the white tank's mesh retextured with the orange skin at the same time, and since the orange tank's mesh was modeled slightly off-center the two are clipping through each other and z-fighting like crazy. This took a little longer to figure out since ModulePartVariants is documented basically nowhere but I managed to fix it by sticking both meshes inside Rockomax64.mu and deleting Rockomax64_O.mu and commenting out the MODEL line referring to it in the .cfg.

 

[passinglurker]

10 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

I have no problem with using it or not. My problem is that I have no idea why people say such and such a part aren't in that style. It's like I'm colorblind but it's to style. I'm styleblind. You point at two parts (or a red and green patch) and say they're in different styles (colors) and I just have to say okay well they look fine to me.

If you're apathetic to how your game looks then you'd have no problem with us pushing for it to look better.

10 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

To borrow a popular meme...

You laugh but this is just a visible symptom of a much larger problem as this was produced in the same string of updates that gave us new stability issues and graphical glitches like the reentry bug. And before you say it this isn't a case of "oh they were just focusing thier resources elsewhere under the hood" We've seen time and time again throughout this games history that when squad fails they fail everywhere and they fail hard, and as a consequence everything now needs to be scrutinized. 

If they can't produce professional work and if they can't stand haveing thier work checked then they shouldn't keep working on this game, because we've reached a low point where if that low trend were to plateau or continue we'd actually be better off if squad just stopped. As such I don't care if squad feels unappreciated if that actually had an effect it would still be a win for the community. This is the consequence for cutting corners for so long it comes back to bite you.

9 hours ago, nestor said:

It has both normal map and specular map. 

Thanks! now can you make sure it shows in future part previews? good first impressions and all that.

[Shalfar]

How about actually fixing some of the things you keep saying you've fixed, like the landing gear bounce, especially on scene load. When I switch to a landed craft and it jumps nearly a kilometer, that's not fixed.

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, Shalfar said:

How about actually fixing some of the things you keep saying you've fixed, like the landing gear bounce, especially on scene load. When I switch to a landed craft and it jumps nearly a kilometer, that's not fixed.

I've seen streamers resort to airbrakes because they apparently make better landing gear than the landing gear while landed.

[NoMrBond]

2 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

I've seen streamers resort to airbrakes because they apparently make better landing gear than the landing gear while landed.

To detour a bit at this point, does KSP still use VPP  or is it back to using the default Unity wheel stuff since the engine upgrade to 2017.1?

In either case, is there a clear reason why landing gear is launching stuff into the air on load (shouldn't physics easing catch this?) and/or why demarcating the 'bottom' of your base with AIRBRAKES solves the problem?

[panzer1b]

On 8/10/2018 at 2:00 PM, SQUAD said:

we worked on the Probodobodyne HECS unmanned command module

Not bad imo.  Granted if i was doing the texture id probably keep some foily like normal map on the sides (just to keep a little bit of the older styling), but i much prefer the new geometry vs the old style, so good work on that part.

Now the only thing i do want to see on the newer parts that is yet to be a thing outside of my own custom modding is a bit more wear and tear like porkjet style or even some of the parts before him.  Im not saying super clean is ugly, but it really feels more like KSP when the parts at least look like they have been in use for a bit of time (never was huge on the whole junk yard style of the original parts outside of pirate vessel designs, but i still feel the new super clean and shiny part style really doesnt fit the feel of KSP being more explosions then spaceX/NASA with their lack of scrapes/wear/damage/cartooniness).

Edited August 11, 2018 by panzer1b

[passinglurker]

33 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

Granted if i was doing the texture id probably keep some foily like normal map on the sides (just to keep a little bit of the older styling)

maybe they should ask @CobaltWolf for the normal map he used  

It works very well in kerbal's hand painted style don't you think?

33 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

but i much prefer the new geometry vs the old style, so good work on that part.

hrm... I'd agree the old hecs looked like someone had just discovered the extrusion tool, but I'm not sure I'd agree that the new geometry is good either as it incorporates this toony protruding lip on the top and bottom. A design element almost everyone seems to want to be rid from kerbal as a whole if reaction to the fuel tank revamps have been anything to go by, and also engineering wise what purpose does it serve?

33 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

Now the only thing i do want to see on the newer parts that is yet to be a thing outside of my own custom modding is a bit more wear and tear like porkjet style or even some of the parts before him.  Im not saying super clean is ugly, but it really feels more like KSP when the parts at least look like they have been in use for a bit of time (never was huge on the whole junk yard style of the original parts outside of pirate vessel designs, but i still feel the new super clean and shiny part style really doesnt fit the feel of KSP being more explosions then spaceX/NASA with their lack of scrapes/wear/damage/cartooniness).

Now this I can get on board with

 

Edited August 11, 2018 by passinglurker

[Redneck]

Well back to UE4 engine I go. They are back to the not listening or responding to us again mode. Same ol song and dance. Check back in 6 months just to be disappointed and hope for something useful in the update after that.  

[passinglurker]

On 8/10/2018 at 12:00 PM, SQUAD said:

Besides improving the look of these parts, our intention is to standardize the game’s parts in terms of geometry, pixel density (resolution), and resource optimization. Currently the pixel density varies widely from part to part and by standardizing these assets we are not only improving the visuals but also optimizing the game’s performance.

@Redneck they are at least acknowledging the problem and not making embarrassingly false excuses like "we have our own internal design reference", and "these are not placeholders you shouldn't call them that" so that's due a small measure of positive reinforcement(credit given where credit is due and all that jazz). Next we need them to walk the walk (i.e. make pork-a-likes) this is the most headway we've made in a long time

Edited August 11, 2018 by passinglurker

[LegendaryAce]

On 8/10/2018 at 5:52 PM, wizzlebippi said:

@SQUAD

Is any of this, including the expansion, coming to consoles?

Don't waste your time. We're back to the old habits. Now week three with not a word about us. 

[Delay]

12 hours ago, passinglurker said:

Next we need them to walk the walk (i.e. make pork-a-likes) this is the most headway we've made in a long time

I'm honestly quite satisfied with how the HECS will look like in 1.5. Not necessarily the fuel tanks, those look like a lazy copy-paste of the new 2.5m tanks, to be honest.

But I certainly look forward to what Squad will do to the other parts.

[Serenity]

well said @passinglurker

[Burning Kan]

On 8/11/2018 at 5:45 AM, Raptor9 said:

look optimized for the harsh vacuum of space with silver or gold foil look

variants can do this now-i would love this also

On 8/11/2018 at 5:45 AM, Raptor9 said:

compared to an existing FL-T400, a 1.25m diameter gold-wrapped cylinder with rounded ends (like the R-11 Baguette) would have lower mass, but also lower impact and heat tolerance

you speak out of my soul,think this for years,maybe in 2.0     mean 20.0

but for now the should make small steps good,before big steps wonky

I'm very excited for 1.5

and maybe one day looks like this:EDIT:in far away future-and in linux of course)

Spoiler

EDIT: thats a exaggerated example(photoshoped)dont take it too serious

KSP should look cartoonish-for me. too

the creativity and physics and the community make the game so incredible

THANKS @HarvesteR

Edited August 16, 2018 by Burning Kan
exaggerated example,

[Deddly]

On 8/11/2018 at 5:01 AM, passinglurker said:

@5thHorseman

...outcry has proven the only way to budge squads set course... 

You make some very good points, but in this, I believe you are much mistaken. People respond well to constructive criticism but rarely do they appreciate or even pay attention to general negativity. Constructive criticism invites open communication and exchange of ideas and skills, whilst negativity (along the lines of many, but not all, comments in this thread) may make friends of people who already feel a similar way, but alienates a person from the rest of the audience. Most importantly, it alienates the person from the target of the negativity, which defeats the object, don't you think? 

[StarStreak2109]

2 hours ago, Deddly said:

You make some very good points, but in this, I believe you are much mistaken. People respond well to constructive criticism but rarely do they appreciate or even pay attention to general negativity. Constructive criticism invites open communication and exchange of ideas and skills, whilst negativity (along the lines of many, but not all, comments in this thread) may make friends of people who already feel a similar way, but alienates a person from the rest of the audience. Most importantly, it alienates the person from the target of the negativity, which defeats the object, don't you think? 

So far I have seen no reaction from Squad along the lines of "We appreciate your concerns and [insert further reaction in here]...". So much for two-way comms...

Also whilst I have seen some snappy remarks, I have seen no negativity in this or other threads. And also, loving the game and criticizing the developers are not mutually exclusive, as long as it is not along the lines of "You guys are making a crap job of things...".

PS: Oh and I hope that if we ever get to a KSP 2.0, I sincerely hope that the models then do not get this plastic "Textures Unlimited" overkill kind of look...

Spoiler

 

Edited August 14, 2018 by StarStreak2109