KSP Weekly: Closer to Bennu

[steve_v]

15 minutes ago, klgraham1013 said:

1.3.1 was pretty close.

Indeed... Then they released 1.4.0, and completely blew it. I honestly thought we were past this level of ball-dropping.
Meanwhile, as said ball continues to roll about the floor, they announce 1.5.

Perhaps Squad is trying to annoy the modders so much that they all leave, and stop upstaging every release with better artwork and features people actually want?

I'm really just hanging about the forum for the odd chat, and the odd chance to complain in the dev threads. I haven't played anything >1.3.1 in any seriousness or bought the DLC, and I won't until Squad fixes the aforementioned joystick support.
I've been waiting since alpha for them to sort out their game-engine problems and lack of QA, and at this point I doubt they are going to. I expect we'll just keep getting half-baked releases, random regressions, liquid-poor memory management and janky wheels for the foreseeable future.

For now, I'm off to play a game that doesn't break in weird and wonderful ways every 6 months.

Edited September 1, 2018 by steve_v

[Deddly]

@steve_v, I'm curious as to why you don't stick with 1.3.x? That was a fine release. Since you don't have Making History, why not stick to what works?

But I hear you. Bugs that affect you personally are a real joy killer. In recent times a significant version number increase has often included a Unity engine update. I don't know if that's the case with 1.5, but if so, here's hoping it will fix your joystick issues. If not, well that sucks, but 1.3.x you know... it's actually pretty good. 

[steve_v]

55 minutes ago, Deddly said:

I'm curious as to why you don't stick with 1.3.x?

I am, I have, etc. The main draw for KSP updates are: What minor improvements to the (still) terrible garbage collector and general performance they may bring, and more importantly, new and updated mods, which are rarely backported.
The concept of picking "a fine release" is somewhat perplexing. The purpose of updating software is to make it better, not worse. Is going backwards the new going forwards or what?

I would like to buy the DLC, but I'm sure as hell not paying Squad for it if they won't fix the bugs in the core game they introduced along with it.
 

55 minutes ago, Deddly said:

In recent times a significant version number increase has often included a Unity engine update. I don't know if that's the case with 1.5, but if so, here's hoping it will fix your joystick issues.

And here's the heart of the issue: Squad decides to update the game engine, and introduces serious bugs. They ship anyway, then do nothing about fixing it... Until they change the game engine again and introduce different bugs.
It happened when KSP was crashing people's window managers, it happened when the game was constantly crashing to desktop - I take it you recall "double free or corruption"? I sure do. Lately, it's been  happening with regard to wheel physics almost every release.
 

In the case of GNU/Linux joystick support, the cause was understood nearly a year before 1.4.0 shipped (if the Unity forums are anything to go by), so either Squad failed to test their game on one of the officially supported platforms, or they simply don't care. They based the release on a known-broken game engine, and they appear completely unwilling to fix it even when a demonstration of how to do so is freely available in the form of a mod.

I figured out how read events from my joystick with about 20 minutes of SDL tutorials, and that includes finding them. This is not a difficult problem to solve, and there is no reason bar laziness or obstinacy to wait for Unity.

Squad has done nothing at all that I can see, except to subtly blame Unity, SDL and the open-source community at large.

As far as I am aware, nobody held a gun to the devs heads and forced them to use this particular Unity release, so blaming Unity for the problem is largely irrelevant.
Everyone else is using SDL for input successfully, so I see no problem there either.
As for the "open source community" "making some great gains with the database" (the GameController DB), this is, frankly, kind of insulting. It's not their job, because that's not what it's for.

The purpose of the GameController API and its associated database is to use the xbox controller as a lingua franca for xbox-controller clones and generic gamepads.
If Unity wants to use GameController and GameController only for input, they can populate the database with mappings, and they can add the functionality to properly support joysticks and steering wheels.
The same goes for Squad: if they want to use Unity, they get to deal with it's perversions. A way to do so (using SDL directly) is aptly demonstrated in the AFBW sources.

Edited September 1, 2018 by steve_v

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, Deddly said:

I'm curious as to why you don't stick with 1.3.x? That was a fine release.

For me, it's Tracking Station Evolved.  That mod is game changing.  Then I see Nertea's Aeronautics mod.  How I wish the community had stuck with 1.3.1, but, alas, modders are doing to much amazing work with 1.4...

I'm really hoping 1.5 is the update we've been waiting for.

1 hour ago, Deddly said:

In recent times a significant version number increase has often included a Unity engine update.

Here in lies the problem.  No one is forcing them to update the engine.

Edited September 1, 2018 by klgraham1013

[RealKerbal3x]

Looks good. I am looking forward to the part revamp. The HECS looks much more spaceprobe-y now, great work!!

[basic.syntax]

In addition to the things that may still be broken, unity engine updates bring a raft of fixes for other issues, and some enhancements. As I'm not personally affected by the regression that may never be fixed by Squad, I'm definitely looking forward to 1.5 and have appreciated their recent work to improve behavior for wheels and landing gear. Bug fixes, art updates - good stuff  

Speaking of the art update - one thing that seems missing on parts are manufacturer logos.  The "personality" of the manufacturer should influence how prominently they display their logo. Some might have a simple text statement on the back, a 'makers mark' without words, others might be full color, etc.

[StrandedonEarth]

@SQUAD, @nestor, As long as you're doing a part revamp, can we please get a 2.5m-3.75m propellant tank? And maybe some more LF-only tankage? Oh, and a 2.5m LV-N, 2.5m SRBs, and.... I better quit now, the list could get long. But I think those are the most-asked for things.

[Deddly]

@StrandedonEarth, as long as we're dreaming... some 2.5m R.A.P.I.E.R.s would be nice

[steve_v]

2 hours ago, basic.syntax said:

In addition to the things that may still be broken, unity engine updates bring a raft of fixes for other issues, and some enhancements.

Unity update, cool. But somebody needs to regression-test it on all the supported platforms before committing... If the usual lack of testing is actually what's going on, rather than just willingly shafting GNU/Linux users for the sake of a DLC shipping date.
Given the complete lack of action, I have my suspicions as to which it is.

From my point of view, the latest latest update broke more than it fixed.

Edited September 1, 2018 by steve_v

[Waxing_Kibbous]

New parts are coming along nicely- is 1.5 going to be a comprehensive graphics update?

[DMagic]

KSP might be stuck on the current Unity version for good. As far as I know they dropped all support for dx9 in Unity 2017.3.

Updating KSP to require dx11 seems like it would cut off support for a lot of older systems, and would require a change in the min spec requirements.

 

[panzer1b]

23 hours ago, SQUAD said:

 



Ill take it over the older one, but i have to say that the end cap looks terrible, no normal map to make the bolts stand out, random black circle in the middle which serves no purpose from what i can tell but makes it look bad (old end cap was much better even if that too wasnt really good), and generally too sharp edges with no speculars or good shading.

The hex-2 is a part that i use so rarely (and i think its only on a single one of my capital ship designs in a spot where you can even see it) that im not gonna have a fit if it looks like crap like it does in the stock game, but i have to say that outside of the foil texture itself, there is not much i like about that part compared to the older one, and i feel that it really didnt even take that much effort to make either unlike most of the porkjet parts. 

Now the foil texture and reflections i like, but my main complain with it is that the edges seem way out of place, the texture goes from greyish metal/plastic to foil with no defining edge feature (besides the obvious 3d model edge) that would make sense to have on the edge.  It would be better if the foil wrapped itself around that edge and then had a distinctive seam where the foil goes underneath the metal or something similar so it doesnt look like the texture just ends on the face instantly (this is also an issue with the new 2.5m tanks, the edges just end too abruptly which looks good when the tanks are covered with something, but badly when the end is exposed).

Take a look at the new revamp, and then take a look at the 2.5m fuel cans (which have somewhat modified textures but i didnt touch edges like at all and only added a few scratches a while back to try and prove a point).

That vs Porkjet's parts which show a very good use of specular maps combined with good edge textures giving each part an edge that looks good standalone as well as when stacked together, at a distance it looks like 1 solid unit, but up close you can actually tell where the individual blocks meet together.  This is something that ive yet to see come out of ANY post porkjet parts, skilled use of specular maps to make edges look good.  rather ive seen a huge drive to use normal maps (often terrible looking normal maps) as bandaids to try and cover up the lack of a good (or in most cases the utter lack of) specular map.

TLDR: please learn to use specular maps properly, and STOP relying on the bandaid that is normal mapping.  You can make beautiful parts without even using a normal map layer, highlight edges, scratches, and make the part look 10 times better then it is stock. 

Ohh and i know this is a bit off-topic, but can you PLEASE do SOMETHING about the atrocious stock glow effects on 90% of the stock engines.  One, many engines need it added/fixed (909 seems to have lost the effect post 1.3, i can to replace new model with old one to get it back), two, compared to mods, its just so painful to look at.  I made that texture in like 15 minutes one day and its not even what id call good, yet its 100 times better then the stock crap ive had to look at every rockit launch.

Edited September 1, 2018 by panzer1b

[passinglurker]

35 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

That vs Porkjet's parts which show a very good use of specular maps combined with good edge textures giving each part an edge that looks good standalone as well as when stacked together, at a distance it looks like 1 solid unit, but up close you can actually tell where the individual blocks meet together.  This is something that ive yet to see come out of ANY post porkjet parts, skilled use of specular maps to make edges look good.  rather ive seen a huge drive to use normal maps (often terrible looking normal maps) as bandaids to try and cover up the lack of a good (or in most cases the utter lack of) specular map.

[snip picture]

TLDR: please learn to use specular maps properly, and STOP relying on the bandaid that is normal mapping.  You can make beautiful parts without even using a normal map layer, highlight edges, scratches, and make the part look 10 times better then it is stock. 

Couldn't have said it better myself...

[scimas]

3 hours ago, DMagic said:

KSP might be stuck on the current Unity version for good. As far as I know they dropped all support for dx9 in Unity 2017.3.

Updating KSP to require dx11 seems like it would cut off support for a lot of older systems, and would require a change in the min spec requirements.

 

And Squad dropped dx11 support with 1.4 release, which is one of my biggest issues with that update. I don't know whether dx11 was ever officially supported or not, but nothing used to brake when using it in upto and including 1.3.1.

[JPLRepo]

22 minutes ago, scimas said:

And Squad dropped dx11 support with 1.4 release, which is one of my biggest issues with that update. I don't know whether dx11 was ever officially supported or not, but nothing used to brake when using it in upto and including 1.3.1.

DX11 has never been officially supported for KSP. and has worked/not worked (but totally up to the user and very hit and miss) over various releases and Unity versions throughout the entire history of KSP.

[scimas]

5 hours ago, JPLRepo said:

DX11 has never been officially supported for KSP. and has worked/not worked (but totally up to the user and very hit and miss) over various releases and Unity versions throughout the entire history of KSP.

Yeah, I understand. I've been around since 1.2.2 and suspected as much. That is why I'm not complaining all over the forums about it. Only mentioned it here because the topic popped up. 

It's just that there was noticeable performance difference for me when using dx11. And so it not working with 1.4.x was a big disappointment. 

[MR L A]

19 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

can we please get a 2.5m-3.75m propellant tank? And maybe some more LF-only tankage?

instead of MORE tanks we should just have one tank with selectable length, diameter, texture and contents... the part selection screen is turning into a real mess.

[Deddly]

I like the various sizes of tanks to choose from like we have it now. But yeah, it can sometimes be difficult to find exactly what you want. I like it how you can sort by cross-section though, that makes it much easier.

[Delay]

8 minutes ago, Deddly said:

I like the various sizes of tanks to choose from like we have it now.

One advantage you'd have by making the size of tanks variable is that part count could be massively reduced, which would make KSP run better for everyone. @Kronus_Aerospace woud finally be able to enjoy his... creations at a framerate higher than 0.04/minute.

On top of that it would increase the stability of rockets. Less struts -> less agony.

Edited September 2, 2018 by Delay

[basic.syntax]

For some parts, per-part variants are helping reduce the part-picker clutter. I think this method should be used for every part where it makes sense. Fuel tank variants for parts that have them, are currently just the texture, but could also include the geometry of the different lengths in each cross section size. (MH structural tubes and engine plates do this.)  Wouldn't surprise me if KSP design is already heading in this direction.  Separate cargo bay and modular girder segment parts (for example) could also be neatly consolidated as variants of a single part.

[Majorjim!]

On 8/31/2018 at 9:00 PM, SQUAD said:

Another highly requested feature that the team has been working on is the ability to assign Kerbals directly from the VAB/SPH into an EAS-1 External Command Seat

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFinally!!!! In all seriousness the speed of development is glacial.. Any idea when you guys will be done with KSP? So we can build hugely complex craft without fear of them being constantly broken. No wonder this forums craft sharing has gone WAY down hill..

Edited September 2, 2018 by Majorjim!

[Cheif Operations Director]

3 hours ago, Delay said:

One advantage you'd have by making the size of tanks variable is that part count could be massively reduced, which would make KSP run better for everyone. @Kronus_Aerospace woud finally be able to enjoy his... creations at a framerate higher than 0.04/minute.

On top of that it would increase the stability of rockets. Less struts -> less agony.

Makes sense

[klesh]

I do no like the revamped HECSII.  It looks like the interns have been given the keys to photoshop again.  I know you guys featured some of those new artists on your Making History launch stream, I think you need more or better artists.  That plain black circle on the end is not pretty.

[panzer1b]

You know what, i honestly think im gonna need to take KSP art into my own hands...

My sis was nice enough to give me her old photoshop after she upgraded to some new version, and now that i have decent alfa channel editing capability (was using elements 7.0 b4 and paint.net in a combo, new software works better imo), ive found why the vast majority of new parts are trash compared to what porkjet made.

This is the specular map of the MK-1 fuel tanks and aero parts dont by porkjet.  As you can see, it has very defined edges which result in bright reflections without messing with the base texture at all.  This is literally the KEY to making good looking KSP parts (and not relying on normal maps to cover up bad art).  Make a specular map with defined edges which will make them shine when light reflects off the part.  That and its in my opinion a MUCH nicer looking style compared to

Compare the 2.5m fuel tanks which im really starting to hate more and more every time i take a closer look at them in game.  I mean you may as well have NOT even bothered including any specular map here like at all.  Edges are NOT highlighted completely destroying any sort of immersion.  All you did was take the base texture, made it black/white, then messed with the brightness/contract until you got the above.  I know this may be a bit harsh, but to me (a mech engineer IRL with 0 classes or training on how to mod videogames), someone who occasionally messes around with game files to make them better, this is TERRIBLE work.  Im gonna wait till 1.5, and if this isnt fixed im making my own damn mod to replace all these so called "revamped" textures with my own homemade work.  Honestly, i could redo that entire specular map in 15 minutes or so and make it look 100 times better in game.  All i cant do on my end is fix the broken texture mapping and presense of seams (only thing ive ever used 3d model wise in videogames was blender, and i cant really edit stock models with that).

next is the specular map of one of the making history DLC fuel tanks (russian styles 1.8m i think), one which i personally thought was at least ok looks wise in game.  This is literally exactly the same texture as normal, but made black/white, NOTHING else was done to it.  It looks aceptable, but this is not high quality effort, just something that can be done in under 5 seconds using photoshop by anyone with the most basic knowledge of texture editing (or pretty much any other grafix editor that supports alfa channel editing).

Afterwards we have the new "foil" tanks, the tire shaped one, pill shaped one, and ball shaped one.  These get away with it because they have very good normals that distrupt the otherwise atrocious speculars (and arguably bad texture which lacks any features in low light conditions), but its still no excuse for the absolute lack of detail with your specular maps.

 

 

 

And just to get my point across, here is the specular map of the MK1-3 command pod.  Its also not the only part like it, the service bays come to mind here which also have teh same issue and thus look atrocious in game.

Or should i say the utter LACK of a specular map , i mean at least make the image black/white and mess with the brightness/contrast settings next time...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whoever is making these new textures just isnt doing a great job at them, cutting too many corners, and abusing normal mapping to try and hide subpar worksmanship.  Normal maps should be reserved for parts with very distinctive bumps or dents that would require too many polygons to properly model via 3d, or things that people look at alot like command pods.  They should NOT be applied to every part in the game like they are since the revamping began, especially when they are clearly not necessary to get a good look across (most of the smaller fuel tanks really dont need normal mapping at all, including the DLC tanks like the ).

Well, at least we get better 3d models that i can work with and make my own bloody textures for.  Guess ill need to make a "revamped revamp" mod for KSP once a few more of these corner cutting parts get released

Edited September 2, 2018 by panzer1b

[MR L A]

Never seen a weekly get this slated before... but having read all the comments, I think they’re pretty reasonable with their arguments.

It seems strange to me that modders have done a much better job with textures for free than the people that are getting paid to do so... maybe the team at squad should concentrate on killing bugs and let the community do the parts/textures. Hell, I’d be all in favour of squad turning to a modder like Ven and saying “here’s X amount of money, your modded textures are now stock, thanks”