KSP Weekly: Mapping with Magellan

[SpaceCube2000]

24 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

I think thats pretty obvious...

Still, if the devs actually do anything id prefer they pulled both the sunflare and skybox texture outside of the locked .assets files so that anyone who doesnt like whatever they ship stock doesnt have to install texture replacer and scatterer just to get 2 desperately needed fixes.  Is it really that difficult to move a few texture files to a folder outside of those stupid locked .assets (which are a absolute pain to mod and im not even sure they can be in recent versions) and open up simple texture replacing/editing for everyone without requiring resource eating mods (texture replacer isnt too bad, but its really overkill when the only feature of it i use is the ability to replace a few universe textures (never really cared about the whole kerbal customizing thing, reflecty visors are cool though but still not worth the resource use). 

That and dont even get me started on scatterer, a mod that is completely overkill when all i truly want out of it is its sunflare replacement ability so that i can override the piece of garbage that the stock game ships with.  All the other features are nice but just fluff, and id be content with just EVE if not for the unbeareable stock sunflare that doesnt look either realistic or sci-fi as id prefer (itd also do a huge number on my FPS as scatterer takes alot out of it).  The stock sunflare rendering is i guess acceptable (not quite as cool as scatterer's but still workable), just that texture is pathetic and super outdated...

I think an integrated texture replacement solution could be a excellent feature. Players like myself (who don't like using mods), would be able to customize the appearance of their game without having to install mods. 

[passinglurker]

20 hours ago, Deddly said:

I'm dying to know what @passinglurker thinks of these new textures. At first I didn't know what to think about the plain grey part on the HECS but then I figured that it is probably where the flag goes.

I had another busy weekend so sorry this was delayed, but in addition to ditto what @Nertea @Poodmund and @panzer1b said I'd say to @SQUAD...

• The IVA looks nice! Subjectively I think it could use more clutter (cargo bags, air bottles, small lockers, fire extinguisher, etc...) but I have no real technical issues with it.
   
• Its good to see them take nert's and others advice about the endcap on the mk1 pod, and the hatch may open easter egg it builds trust that they are listening
   
• I like the details on the OCTO probe core I noticed they used scratches instead of noise clouds for a change (now that's what I call progress!) and the choice to use mariner as a reference is solid.
   
• The mk1pod's paneling style still isn't consistent with porkjet's parts or even thier recent attempts at paneling with the SRB's. The panel corners need to be more rounded rounded/blunted like I said when I first saw it. The panel edges need the same details as other panelized parts. The pallet needs to be consistent mk1 pod "white" should be the same shade as mk1 cockpit "white" etc...
   
• While I'm presently assuming this just wasn't fixed yet due to time constraints making a 90% normal map free variant of the mk1 pod is still no excuse for using the normal map baid-aid technique AT ALL. They shouldn't normal map anything on a conventional panel unless the detail is also reflected and fleshed out in in the diffuse map otherwise its like they are using this "normal map corrugation" as a crutch when normal maps should really only be used to enhance parts that already look pretty good without it.
   
• That styrofoam noise like on the mk1pod's heat shield just needs to be dropped from any part that uses it its ugly and in this single case its improper as heat shields are smooth.
   
• Ditto what @HebaruSan said about octo2 looking a little flat up top I assume this was an error and again this shows the importance of these comprehensive in game renders. Now just imagine how much better things would be on top of that if we could get a preview of the unwrapped texture sheets. It would totally feel like a proper devnote to get some crunchy details like that.
   
• I still stand by what I said that cobaltwolf made the best example of kerbal foil but I'll respect squad's need to experiment in this regard since foil is especially tricky to nail down its certainly better than what we saw with the HECS2.
   
• Maybe they shouldn't  go to crazy with the pallet swap variants all we really need is a "unique" texture for character and a "space plane" style texture for people making more blended looking craft. The saturn/redstone/soyuz style schemes can be left to modders/MH/MH for consoles at a much later date after the revamp is largely resolved. 

And finally @nestor this one's for you, and is an extension of nert's question about if you are hiding or directly replacing the old parts that get revamped. If old art assets do wind up being hid are you guys going to use this opportunity to refine the part balance? Early on requests for reballances and requests for better art went hand in hand because previous devs pointed to a distant on coming revamp as the time when ballance issues would finally be resolved. While I can't expect a newer team to remember and respect every old dev promise I would hope this is considered as a lot of kerbal's physics flaws come to light when you build crazier planes/rockets. Sure some people like crazy rockets, but it's frustrating for others when the carreer/science mode ballance steers you toward crazy and unintuitive rocket design to actually get anything done (and when you get something done you suddenly clear a quarter to half the tech tree in one fell swoop if you don't pace yourself which is rather unrewarding). I feel making clean and elegant vehicle design be a viable way to approach career mode would go a good ways toward making kerbal feel more like a space game and less like goat simulator.

Edited September 18, 2018 by passinglurker

[basic.syntax]

To better show progression, the passage of time, I think career parts and texture variants should unlock from old to new - from "repurposed oil drums," to NASA white and black.

When I'm flying around in more modern designs of the "late game," I want the contrast with my humble beginnings to stand out, as I review old satellites and fuel transfer stations, still in orbit.

Edited September 18, 2018 by basic.syntax

[KSK]

28 minutes ago, basic.syntax said:

To better show progression, the passage of time, I think career parts and texture variants should unlock from old to new - from "repurposed oil drums," to NASA white and black.

When I'm flying around in more modern designs of the "late game," I want the contrast with my humble beginnings to stand out, as I review old satellites and fuel transfer stations, still in orbit.

I spotted the quotes but I wouldn’t go quite that far in deference to those who inexplicably don’t care for the junkyard aesthetic.  Instead you could base the oldest parts on a Soviet ‘rugged but durable’ aesthetic or an early US ‘raw metal and exposed plumbing’ aesthetic.

You could have three sets of textures corresponding to the VAB and SPH levels. Upgrading either building upgrades the textures on your rocket parts or plane parts respectively. You would need three complete sets of textures though which might be a bit too much work.

[Poodmund]

Well considering the very questionable placement of parts in the Tech Tree with regards to balance and gameplay progression, I doubt much consideration would be made to put unlocks into specific, logical places in the tree. I know there was much hoo-haa during the QA testing for 1.4/MH in this regard with unlock placements but it seems it didn't get the attention that the Career/Science progression-based gameplay modes deserve.

Most notably the Wolfhound Vs Skiff motors come to mind but I am aware there were quite a few balancing issues that were brought forward but not actioned on.

[basic.syntax]

Some nice tech groundwork with texture and mesh switching has been built that could be used in Career, it would not surprise me if they had ideas along these lines:  It's easier to justify the time and money if the work can be used in multiple ways.  

[Chel]

On 9/17/2018 at 2:04 PM, Redneck said:

I myself have worked in UE4. I want you to go and find any tutorial on youtube on how to do PQS (procedural quad sphere) in UE4. There is one addon on the marketplace for like $100 that will do it as well as another for voxel terrain BUT you cant expect squad to completely re-write KSP can you?

It was a joke 

[HansonKerman]

On 9/16/2018 at 8:27 PM, The Minmus Derp said:

Can someone add plernerts?

This has been classified on the KSP Wiki as "A big maybe"

[Burning Kan]

some words

• we have been working on ensuring that asteroids behave properly whenever they enter the atmosphere of a Celestial Body
• very cool must play more with asteroids,a bigger explosion would be cool
• Each week we gather insightful feedback from the community
• thanks for asking/hearing us
• there’s more to the revamping task of the MK1 Command Pod
•  10/10 switchable color schemes,good texture/detail quality and of course the warning sign!,only this could be darker on the grey/white versions.
• new IVA, which has been done over from scratch    What do you think?
• love the IVA-because the nice MFD(would be cool if its functional-iknow wishlists should go to santa clause),flight/data recorder and the cutting window,only one i miss is the 4buttons-gears,SAS,RCS,light(and yes iknow existing hotkeys,but play mostly in the dark with mouse)maybe with a new texture or so,also wanna thx for the excellent work on the mk1-3 command pod IVA the batteries and rcs tanks on lower deck are gorgeous-great work                                                                      (also miss the 4 buttons)
• The Probodobodyne OKTO command modules also were in the artistic agenda this week
• using diffuse, normal and specular maps, retouched the geometry and added a new shader, with resource optimization in mind, they put both textures into a single map, collision mesh was tweaked to better fit the shape of the probes. 10/10 nothing left to say, out of thanks-ups one last, please dont forget the orientaion direction for rovers "FRONT" sould be where the "OKTO"sign is

my hypetrain is rolling for 1.5 keep up good work

BK

,Chapeau @SQUAD

 

 

 

 

 

[Tyko]

If Asteroids are being worked on could we have a few more asteroid models? Be nice to have more variety. There are so many recent asteroid missions with high res photos to work from.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Tyko

[Nightside]

2 hours ago, Tyko said:

If Asteroids are being worked on could we have a few more asteroid models? Be nice to have more variety. There are so many recent asteroid missions with high res photos to work from.

This would be amazing!

[Homedawgian]

On 9/17/2018 at 5:56 AM, LegendaryAce said:

Well, if it's any consolation, Jundroo (the creators of SimplePlanes) are planning on releasing SimpleRockets 2 by October, which is just like KSP, only it works and you can play it on your phone. 

https://www.simplerockets.com/

Yep yep! Glad to see others hopping on the SR2 hype-train. If you’re trying to scratch an itch in the meantime, try out SimplePlanes for those who haven’t yet. Way more realistic with aerodynamics and fully customizable parts. There’s even wind! 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Homedawgian

[Tyko]

On 9/17/2018 at 2:56 AM, LegendaryAce said:

Well, if it's any consolation, Jundroo (the creators of SimplePlanes) are planning on releasing SimpleRockets 2 by October, which is just like KSP, only it works and you can play it on your phone. 

https://www.simplerockets.com/

FACT CHECK....please clarify your statement "which is just like KSP, only it works"...are you saying SR2 is

• 100% bug free
• the physics model is 100% accurate
• the Atmospheric model is 100% accurate
• Landers and rovers work properly
• Offers better rocket/plane/submarine/rover/lander/space station construction
• has a fully functional science / research system that emulates reality
• has a fully functional career system that's well balanced and offers a wide variety of mission types
• have a full info suite including 100% accurate DeltaV and TWR calculations

Because no v1.0 of anything is feature complete, perfect or bug free . To pre-emptively claim that SR2 "works" is not only inaccurate, it's also a slap in the face to the team at @SQUAD who have a game that's pretty darned solid compared to most other indie games (and a lot of AAA games too).

Yes, we have complaints about a few things that definitely need to be fixed, but that doesn't overshadow the bizzillion things KSP gets right.

</Rant> 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Tyko

[Homedawgian]

17 minutes ago, Tyko said:

FACT CHECK....please clarify your statement "which is just like KSP, only it works"...are you saying SR2 is

• 100% bug free
• the physics model is 100% accurate
• the Atmospheric model is 100% accurate
• Landers and rovers work properly
• Offers better rocket/plane/submarine/rover/lander/space station construction
• has a fully functional science / research system that emulates reality
• has a fully functional career system that's well balanced and offers a wide variety of mission types
• Oh yea, and does it have a full info suite including DeltaV and TWR calculations that works 100% of the time

Because no v1.0 of anything is feature complete, perfect or bug free . To pre-emptively claim that SR2 "works" is not only inaccurate, it's also a slap in the face to the team at @SQUAD who have a game that's pretty darned solid compared to most other indie games (and a lot of AAA games too).

Yes, we have complaints about a few things that definitely need to be fixed, but that doesn't overshadow the bizzillion things KSP gets right.

</Rant> 

I completely understand where you’re coming from and most of those are valid points but I also understand where LegendaryAce is coming from. SimplePlanes worked like a well oiled machine on its day one release with very few bugs before it ever even got a patch. It started off with an already better and more realistic physics model than KSP and it didn’t take months at a time for basic fixes. I’m not dogging on KSP or anything, I love it to death, I just really like how responsive Jundroo is and how great of a product they put out. I also wouldn’t say SR2 is exactly like KSP but it is a space program sim and has no need/reason to imitate KSP. Also, keep in mind that when LegendaryAce said that “it works” he was referencing to KSP console NOT working. You PC players actually have a very nice build compared to us. Oh and KSP has never nor will likely ever have a stock suite of DV or TWR readout that’s 100% reliable. That doesn’t even exist IRL.

[Redneck]

34 minutes ago, Tyko said:

FACT CHECK....please clarify your statement "which is just like KSP, only it works"...are you saying SR2 is

• 100% bug free
• the physics model is 100% accurate
• the Atmospheric model is 100% accurate
• Landers and rovers work properly
• Offers better rocket/plane/submarine/rover/lander/space station construction
• has a fully functional science / research system that emulates reality
• has a fully functional career system that's well balanced and offers a wide variety of mission types
• have a full info suite including 100% accurate DeltaV and TWR calculations

Because no v1.0 of anything is feature complete, perfect or bug free . To pre-emptively claim that SR2 "works" is not only inaccurate, it's also a slap in the face to the team at @SQUAD who have a game that's pretty darned solid compared to most other indie games (and a lot of AAA games too).

Yes, we have complaints about a few things that definitely need to be fixed, but that doesn't overshadow the bizzillion things KSP gets right.

</Rant> 

you mean the same way KSP started right? They got to start somewhere. But now i do agree that it is a little early to compare with KSP at this point. I think what he means is that he/we hope it will be as good as KSP if not better. Nothing wrong with hope or competition within this genre of games imo. Have you looked at SR2's features or roadmap? You can compare it to KSP. But like all current EA games....we shall see

[Tyko]

18 minutes ago, Homedawgian said:

I completely understand where you’re coming from and most of those are valid points but I also understand where LegendaryAce is coming from. SimplePlanes worked like a well oiled machine on its day one release with very few bugs before it ever even got a patch. It started off with an already better and more realistic physics model than KSP and it didn’t take months at a time for basic fixes. I’m not dogging on KSP or anything, I love it to death, I just really like how responsive Jundroo is and how great of a product they put out. I also wouldn’t say SR2 is exactly like KSP but it is a space program sim and has no need/reason to imitate KSP. Also, keep in mind that when LegendaryAce said that “it works” he was referencing to KSP console NOT working. You PC players actually have a very nice build compared to us. Oh and KSP has never nor will likely ever have a stock suite of DV or TWR readout that’s 100% reliable. That doesn’t even exist IRL.

 

11 minutes ago, Redneck said:

you mean the same way KSP started right? They got to start somewhere. But now i do agree that it is a little early to compare with KSP at this point. I think what he means is that he/we hope it will be as good as KSP if not better. Nothing wrong with hope or competition within this genre of games imo. Have you looked at SR2's features or roadmap? You can compare it to KSP. But like all current EA games....we shall see

Yep...appreciate and agree with all this. I was responding to @LegendaryAce 's overly broad statement implying that SR2 was going to be some wunderkind product right out of the box. This is (I believe) Jundroo's most sophisticated sim yet and hasn't been subjected to the level of scrutiny that KSP receives. I'll be following it closely.

It's way to early to claim a victor though. If anything the consumer will be the winner because KSP will have some healthy competition.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Tyko

[Redneck]

24 minutes ago, Tyko said:

 

Yep...appreciate and agree with all this. I was responding to @LegendaryAce 's overly broad statement implying that SR2 was going to be some wunderkind product right out of the box. This is (I believe) Jundroo's most sophisticated sim yet and hasn't been subjected to the level of scrutiny that KSP receives. I'll be following it closely.

It's way to early to claim a victor though. If anything the consumer will be the winner because KSP will have some healthy competition.

Fear not my friend rest assured SR2 is going to get their fair share of scrutiny as well i am sure. 

[Redneck]

This just in. New news on SR2 map for those who would like to know

 

https://steamcommunity.com/games/870200/announcements/detail/1700561993852959102

Edited September 20, 2018 by Redneck

[Ephraim Stone]

On 9/17/2018 at 12:34 AM, steve_v said:

Care to guess how many game-breaking save-corrupting bugs there were in the first Super Mario or Zelda games?
Care to guess how many different releases with different feature-sets there were being sold at the same time?

If KSP were a finished game with the same content on every platform, we wouldn't be here.
It's not, and I can absolutely understand the frustration of watching new stuff being released and knowing you can't have it because you bought the lemon version of the game.
If the console port was advertised with a big "you won't get updates like the PC release will", this would be fair enough. It wasn't, and there was no warning to the customer that they were purchasing an inferior product.
 

On that note, if I knew the GNU/Linux build was going to get shafted every time the game engine is updated, I wouldn't have bought it at all.

This! ^^^

I couldn't agree more! Something has happened over time whereby developers think it's OK to sell half-baked junk, and then disappear with your money.

Bug reports on the consoles go utterly ignored, and even game-breakers are classed as "low" priority, presumably because that justifies the devs ignoring them.

[Ephraim Stone]

On 9/17/2018 at 4:52 PM, Cheif Operations Director said:

Yea and also once upon a time EULAs and Privacy Policies were shorter than the U.S. Law Code

Or Just say they are not going to updated it again

We pay for a working game we do not get one, then we get the working version or people who have been waiting buy it and then they stop updating it. If it is a financial failure then fine port us up too 1.5 and the ability to edit game files so we can mod (and the ability too reset the game in case) then call it a day! I know it's a lot but giving console the ability to mod would be nice. 

Again I'm on PC but this is ridiculous for the console players. 

Again, totally agree.

If Squad have decided that the console ports aren't worth the ROI and don't intend to at least correct game-breaking bugs, then just tell us.

They already have our money, so they aren't losing out, and we console players can move onto something else.

[Cheif Operations Director]

20 minutes ago, Redneck said:

This just in. New news on SR2 map for those who would like to know

 

https://steamcommunity.com/games/870200/announcements/detail/1700561993852959102

Looks good

[Deddly]

Guys, I'm sure nobody objects to a comparison of KSP with SR2. But this thread isn't the place to discuss SR2 development and new features, unless it's on topic for this particular weekly, is it? 

[klgraham1013]

3 hours ago, Redneck said:

This just in. New news on SR2 map for those who would like to know

 

https://steamcommunity.com/games/870200/announcements/detail/1700561993852959102

Some what disappointed in it using a similar interface.  I've been using any of the more advanced maneuver planners available from mods.  I feel like this "analog" approach can lack precision. 

2 hours ago, Deddly said:

Guys, I'm sure nobody objects to a comparison of KSP with SR2. But this thread isn't the place to discuss SR2 development and new features, unless it's on topic for this particular weekly, is it? 

True.  Apologies.

Edited September 20, 2018 by klgraham1013

[LegendaryAce]

7 hours ago, Homedawgian said:

I completely understand where you’re coming from and most of those are valid points but I also understand where LegendaryAce is coming from. SimplePlanes worked like a well oiled machine on its day one release with very few bugs before it ever even got a patch. It started off with an already better and more realistic physics model than KSP and it didn’t take months at a time for basic fixes. I’m not dogging on KSP or anything, I love it to death, I just really like how responsive Jundroo is and how great of a product they put out. I also wouldn’t say SR2 is exactly like KSP but it is a space program sim and has no need/reason to imitate KSP. Also, keep in mind that when LegendaryAce said that “it works” he was referencing to KSP console NOT working. You PC players actually have a very nice build compared to us. Oh and KSP has never nor will likely ever have a stock suite of DV or TWR readout that’s 100% reliable. That doesn’t even exist IRL.

Yep. You get my point exactly. As a console player, I feel I've been shafted of $50 and much of my time because I put my hopes in a dev that said they'd put a good space sim on my Xbox. But ever since we got it back in 2016, it's been a fiasco since. 

I've heard that history often repeats itself. Well right now, these weeklies are exactly what started us on a 400+ day wait for a playable game. AFAIK, Squad decided that we're not worth the effort, and let all contractual obligations expire so they could focus only on PC. 

What really saddens me is that I've loved KSP as an idea, but everything about its execution went south. Sadly, I haven't touched KSP since the last update, electing to play Elite: Dangerous instead. 

As for me comparing SR2 to KSP, I'm entirely within my rights as a purchaser of Squad's game to compare it to (what's in my eyes) a rival game. Going off the success of SimplePlanes, I've no doubt that SR2 will be so much better than the sorry state of consoles right now. As for advertising it, I just wanted to let my fellow console plebs know that there are other options. 

Edited September 21, 2018 by LegendaryAce

[LegendaryAce]

7 hours ago, Tyko said:

it's also a slap in the face to the team at @SQUAD 

Yeah, God forbid I do that while waiting for over two years for a decently playable game. If anything, Squad has slapped all of us console players in the face by consistently leaving us in the dark and casting us off. 

(Apologies for two posts. Phone limitations prevent me from double quoting.)