What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?

[Climberfx]

So, the question  is on topic tittle: What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?

Anybody really knows how far that trailer is from actual gameplay?

[DStaal]

1 minute ago, Climberfx said:

So, the question  is on topic tittle: What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?

Anybody really knows how far that trailer is from actual gameplay?

It could well just mean that at this point the graphics aren't finalized, so they can't claim it's actual footage.  (It could even just mean that you can't move the camera the way they did in the game.)

It could also mean it's completely rendered in some graphics program.

Until the game is actually released - or at least we get some actual gameplay footage - it's hard to say.

[KerbolExplorer]

3 minutes ago, Climberfx said:

"Not Actual Gameplay"

It means that what the trailer shows isn't representing how the game will play

[Xurkitree]

5 minutes ago, Climberfx said:

So, the question  is on topic tittle: What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?

Anybody really knows how far that trailer is from actual gameplay?

Very far. Its completely rendered in what ever animation software the new devs are using. But the art direction seems solid, so hopefully it should transfer into gameplay as well.

[Climberfx]

I hope that global illumination, engine light, reflexes, Kerbal expressions an animations, Kerbin and Mun textures are solid to final game too.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Climberfx

[Opus_723]

The screenshots on the announcement page look like they're in-game (I think?) and although they're not as high-quality as the trailer they look really good, and the art style is very similar.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Opus_723

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

The developer trailer contains actual "in-game alpha footage," so we do know some about what it looks like.

[Loskene]

There's no game to see yet as such, so that was a pre-rendered cinematic trailer. Did all the parts on the rockets look similar to ones from stock KSP and popular mods to you? That's because an artist was told to make high quality models of those for use in the trailer, none of it is representative of KSP 2. If anything the trailer is more of a tribute to KSP 1, but I liked seeing that anyway because it deserves the treatment. Stuff on their monitors in the dev video are all going to be pre-alpha/engineering test builds that only hint at what we'll be getting and certainly looks nothing like the finished product, so there's not much to go on there either. Have to wait and see.

[Kerenatus]

There are several screenshots from "pre-alpha" version on the promotion page.

From the looks of it, this visual improvement is significant even in its current state and surely will be better.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

1 hour ago, Loskene said:

There's no game to see yet as such, so that was a pre-rendered cinematic trailer. Did all the parts on the rockets look similar to ones from stock KSP and popular mods to you? That's because an artist was told to make high quality models of those for use in the trailer, none of it is representative of KSP 2. If anything the trailer is more of a tribute to KSP 1, but I liked seeing that anyway because it deserves the treatment. Stuff on their monitors in the dev video are all going to be pre-alpha/engineering test builds that only hint at what we'll be getting and certainly looks nothing like the finished product, so there's not much to go on there either. Have to wait and see.

No, not at all. Here are the screenshots from the Steam page:

Spoiler

And, on the off-chance this *isn't* gameplay for some odd reason, here are some screenshots from some helpfully labelled clips in the Developer Story trailer:

Spoiler

Frankly, that shot of what I assume to be Rask and Rusk is incredible! Why haven't they used that one more already?!

 

EDIT 2: Apparently I missed the part on dismissing the pre-alpha builds. But surely the game would only get better after these builds? What's so bad about those- they look great!

Edited August 20, 2019 by ThatGuyWithALongUsername
Added Mun landing image

[PTNLemay]

19 hours ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

The developer trailer contains actual "in-game alpha footage," so we do know some about what it looks like.

Yep.
And while they pre-Alpha footage isn't exactly the same (and doesn't look quite as shiny) it does still look like they are aiming for it to be true to the "feel" of what we saw in the trailer.

[Teek]

16 hours ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

No, not at all. Here are the screenshots from the Steam page:

  Hide contents

And, on the off-chance this *isn't* gameplay for some odd reason, here are some screenshots from some helpfully labelled clips in the Developer Story trailer:

  Hide contents

Frankly, that shot of what I assume to be Rask and Rusk is incredible! Why haven't they used that one more already?!

 

EDIT 2: Apparently I missed the part on dismissing the pre-alpha builds. But surely the game would only get better after these builds? What's so bad about those- they look great!

I think these look great!  Mun and Kerbin texture quality leave a lot to be desired, but given that KSP 1 is slated to significantly update it's own textures for the Mun, I think it's fair to say that these are just placeholders and will be updated.   All of the trees around the launch pad on Kerbin are very promising though.

Lighting on some of the screenshots looks really impressive, and I'd like to see more (especially of Rask and Rusk, and the Daedalus ship.)  That and the reflections in the Kerbal's visors makes me wonder.... Ray Tracing support, perhaps? 

[Renae]

20 hours ago, Climberfx said:

So, the question  is on topic tittle: What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?

Anybody really knows how far that trailer is from actual gameplay?

I'm guessing it's all the scripted actions of the Kerbals, the "story" the trailer was telling, to keep them from having people post after launch "IN THE TRAILER...."

[chaos_forge]

16 hours ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

And, on the off-chance this *isn't* gameplay for some odd reason, here are some screenshots from some helpfully labelled clips in the Developer Story trailer:

  Hide contents

 

That shot of the shadow over Saturn's rings shows stars shining through where they should be blocked by the rings . . . seems they disappeared the rings instead of just making them black. I'm sure it'll be fixed by release but it's pretty hilarious to see rn

[Kerenatus]

6 minutes ago, chaos_forge said:

That shot of the shadow over Saturn's rings shows stars shining through where they should be blocked by the rings . . . seems they disappeared the rings instead of just making them black. I'm sure it'll be fixed by release but it's pretty hilarious to see rn

i knew there's something wrong with that picture

i wonder how flying "in" the ring would work. Would it interrupt your orbit because of space dusts or would it just be treated as a piece of texture?

Edited August 20, 2019 by Kerenatus

[magnemoe]

18 hours ago, Loskene said:

There's no game to see yet as such, so that was a pre-rendered cinematic trailer. Did all the parts on the rockets look similar to ones from stock KSP and popular mods to you? That's because an artist was told to make high quality models of those for use in the trailer, none of it is representative of KSP 2. If anything the trailer is more of a tribute to KSP 1, but I liked seeing that anyway because it deserves the treatment. Stuff on their monitors in the dev video are all going to be pre-alpha/engineering test builds that only hint at what we'll be getting and certainly looks nothing like the finished product, so there's not much to go on there either. Have to wait and see.

Game will be released in not much more than an year, so they should have most game mechanics working or they have serious problems. 
its two ways to do it, one is render in an 3rd part program, this way they can get all the details they want and set up anything. 
Problem is that things don't looks like in game.
Second is an in game scripted scene. 
Yes you can run this at slower frame rate and speed up post production. You are obviously using an top line gaming pc for this. 
This is often used for cut scenes in games showing characters as art style is the same. 

17 minutes ago, Kerenatus said:

i knew there's something wrong with that picture

i wonder how flying "in" the ring would work. Would it interrupt your orbit because of space dusts or would it just be treated as a piece of texture?

One issue with "saturn" who Scott Manley pointed out is that the large moon looks like will intercept the ring but is not in its plane. 
That will not work in any realistic way. 

Good chance they are still working on the planets and moons. 

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

13 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Game will be released in not much more than an year, so they should have most game mechanics working or they have serious problems. 
its two ways to do it, one is render in an 3rd part program, this way they can get all the details they want and set up anything. 
Problem is that things don't looks like in game.
Second is an in game scripted scene. 
Yes you can run this at slower frame rate and speed up post production. You are obviously using an top line gaming pc for this. 
This is often used for cut scenes in games showing characters as art style is the same. 

One issue with "saturn" who Scott Manley pointed out is that the large moon looks like will intercept the ring but is not in its plane. 
That will not work in any realistic way. 

Good chance they are still working on the planets and moons. 

Honestly I think that large moon thing is just perspective and a very cinematic focal length. I think (can't tell for sure of course) that the colony at the end of the cinematic trailer is on that moon. And from there it looks fine.

[Loskene]

2 minutes ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

Honestly I think that large moon thing is just perspective and a very cinematic focal length. I think (can't tell for sure of course) that the colony at the end of the cinematic trailer is on that moon. And from there it looks fine.

Having sat on moons in space engine watching them swing around ringed gas giants I can say yes it is just a perspective thing when they're high above the plane.

 

And I may have overstated a bit saying it'll look "nothing like" the finished product, but pre-alpha generally means at least one major/minor overhaul of every system between now and release, particularly visuals. Unless they're going to do an elite dangerous perpetual non-development thing in which case I will run away and never return.

[Technical Ben]

21 hours ago, Climberfx said:

So, the question  is on topic tittle: What that "Not Actual Gameplay" really means?

Anybody really knows how far that trailer is from actual gameplay?

It's a trailer. It's the opening video to the game. It's a video. No more.

Check out the dev videos/posts for what the game is shaping up to be, and may eventually turn out as.

[Jimbodiah]

It's a cinematic trailer, not based on actual gameplay. They may use the same models, but the rendering is much smoother, faster and more detailed than anything we will ever see in-game. It's there to lure in people; if it looks like actual 15-20fps gameplay, no one will buy it.

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

Honestly I think that large moon thing is just perspective and a very cinematic focal length. I think (can't tell for sure of course) that the colony at the end of the cinematic trailer is on that moon. And from there it looks fine.

You probably have an point. 
Now one major question going interstellar is will we find life?
No not interstellar civilizations, not even intelligence 

But an better reasoning behind stuff like Laythe. 
Obviously an study of an alien biosphere  would grant major insight, an advanced ecosystem so much more. 
Stuff from cool potted plants to stuff who give you some Nobel prices. 

[magnemoe]

2 hours ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

Honestly I think that large moon thing is just perspective and a very cinematic focal length. I think (can't tell for sure of course) that the colony at the end of the cinematic trailer is on that moon. And from there it looks fine.

You probably has an point 

[Climberfx]

2 hours ago, Technical Ben said:

It's a trailer. It's the opening video to the game. It's a video. No more.

Check out the dev videos/posts for what the game is shaping up to be, and may eventually turn out as.

Where i can see Dev post's? Can you put link please?

[sevenperforce]

4 hours ago, chaos_forge said:

That shot of the shadow over Saturn's rings shows stars shining through where they should be blocked by the rings . . . seems they disappeared the rings instead of just making them black. I'm sure it'll be fixed by release but it's pretty hilarious to see rn

Arguably, you would still see stars shining through. The rings aren't dense enough to actually attenuate starlight.

[Nuke]

i dont really care what the game looks like so long as it is at least as good as ksp1. the physics engine now, id love to see that be significantly more advanced.