Jump to content

KSP2 Hype Train Thread


Recommended Posts

Okay, for real.

As someone who does fit the recommended specs, as well as someone who has eagerly awaited this game and its promises for three years, I agree with a lot of what I am hearing from people in that this probably does not bode well for the optimization on release. Unfortunately, optimization was essentially the number one thing that I was hoping that KSP2 would improve upon. Alas, this might not be the case. I feel for my fellow players that will not be hitting recommended, let alone minimum, and hope that optimization will be vastly improved after launch.

However, I will say that I'm still excited to play the game next Friday (can't even believe I get to say that after all this time), and look forward to being a part of early access from day one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm gonna sob in a corner.

It's always my GPU!  Im praying my graphics card will squeeze by, but probably not.  Like, these specs look like you have to have a powerful desktop or top of the line gaming laptop to play.  Some of us just don't have the funds/space.  I want the game to look amazing though, so I guess this is how it has to be.  Hype levels are down though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MARL_Mk1 said:

Still waiting for them to say which resolution said specs are aiming for.

The fact that they skipped that completely would mean that it's for the (still main standard) 1080p60fps.

And this would be a complete utter disgrace.

Let me put everyone into perspective with some of the most demanding recent titles.

Cyberpunk 2077 Recommended:

OS: Windows 10
Processor: Intel Core i7-4790 or AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
Memory: 12 GB RAM
Graphics: GTX 1060 6GB / GTX 1660 Super or Radeon RX 590
DirectX: Version 12
Storage: 70 GB available space


Red Dead Redemption 2 Recommended

OS: Windows 10 - April 2018 Update (v1803)
Processor: Intel® Core™ i7-4770K / AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
Memory: 12 GB RAM
Graphics: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB / AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB
Storage: 150 GB available space


Elden Ring Recommended

OS: Windows 10/11
Processor: INTEL CORE I7-8700K or AMD RYZEN 5 3600X
Memory: 16 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 1070 8 GB or AMD RADEON RX VEGA 56 8 GB
DirectX: Version 12
Storage: 60 GB available space


------------------------------

Those three games will tank your machine big time, even if you've got decent hardware from 2019-2021

Unless the specs released today are based on a higher resolution than 1080p, this literally speaks for itself.

I say GTX 1070 was released 2017, now I assume this is 1080p and medium and all released on previous generation consoles. 2077 got pulled from PS4 as it did not work, Skyrim on PS3 flashback, but the PS3 generation had less memory than phones then Skyrim was released. 
I agree this does not look very optimized but on the other hand you have to handle this 
143304-205990-205989_rc.jpg
On official release in 1-2 years then 4K levels is probably the standard . 
Yes KSP 2 is probably not very optimized as you can not optimize it for ground or air or space you do all of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kerbart said:

Oh, I have to check it out now.  They're already toxic on a nice day.

It's just constant people being disappointed, normally it's a negative guy coming in and people dogpiling but right now its just everyone being like bro I cant run this I cant spend a grand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok blah blah, people who post requirements for games released couple of years ago:

You know that all these games were supposed to run on console hardware from around 2013? Effectively limiting what these games could've been?

When do you think it's the time to move on, if not now?

Also, again, optimizations may come, back in the day I had a hard time running KSP 0.11 but the experience in 0.23 was MUCH smoother, I wonder why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dok_377 said:

There's a lot of games that look WAY BETTER and require WAY LESS. It's not april, is it? 

Games there you stay on the ground or close to it in an country sized areas.
Not travel to Duna in 100 days, doing this
Zmb10mAh.png
and then drive around in an rally car. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

You know that all these games were supposed to run on console hardware from around 2013? Effectively limiting what these games could've been?

5 minutes ago, ArmchairGravy said:

For a mere $2500 Dell can hook you up with a box that meets recommended specs.

To put it in a little more context, the new Xbox and the PS5 have hardware that is close to what is listed as recommended.

Add to that, the 1.0 release of the game will likely make it a 2024 or 2025 game, so these specs aren't really all that out of line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ArmchairGravy said:

For a mere $2500 Dell can hook you up with a box that meets recommended specs.

If you don't get Dell it can be a lot cheaper and better. But it does put all the complaining about "pricing it like a AAA game" into perspective. I'm just surprised to how many people "modern game requires modern hardware" comes as a shock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Astr0Guy5 said:

You want to expound upon that comment?  I'm intrigued.

I went to Dell's website and looked at the current line of PC's equipped with a 1080. They are in the $2500 range. They're over spec on RAM and CPU, but I'll want to run All the Mods anyway, so I'll splurge a bit. I was able to  run 2077 with my GPU sounding like a jet, so I'm not feeling great about the long-term prospects of my current rig. The "mere" was sarcastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently bought a computer that allows to play cp2077 on ultra settings. But at the same time, for some reason, the FPS was not too high and at times dropped to 20-25. And the video card roared like a diesel generator, heating PC like a stove.

Edited by Alexoff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My plan is to just buy it and hope my PC won’t explode. If it doesn’t explode, great, I’ll fine-tune the settings until I find something that’s right for me. If it does, time to get a new PC that meets the recommended specs. At least if it explodes, I’ll have a good reason to upgrade it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll still buy it to support the devs, get it cheaper than at 1.0 release, and just have it in my library.  I will also certainly endanger my computer by attempting to load it up.  Ultimately, I want this game to be the best it can be for the people who can play it, and like I've said before, upgrades can come later.  I'm gutted by these specs, but so be it.  I truly hope y'all who can run KSP2 have a blast at launch (no pun intended) and share many screenshots! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stephensan said:

needs a rtx 3080 for that

 

without the smoke.. like

If you watch this part of the video in slow motion, then the smoke seems to be added separately, since it has no visible source and it appears after landing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Aziz said:

Yeah, that, but on ultra settings and probably a 1500-part mothership.

thats very very generous thinking i really doubt you can build a 1500-part mothership, spacestation, very possible, if you can build your own space vehicle assembly, have huge refueling/processing 200+ kerbals, few ships around it to maneuver it, and a torch ship on it, with multiplayer PERHAPS. .. by the time interstellar hits we should have tons of different types of engines, huge fuel tanks, long metal bars "torch stick ship" with heck, lets say a 200 kerbal population and 4 parasite ships with air breathing, refueling/processing, and high trust, and long range will be anything close to 600-700 parts. and thats a stretch, honestly.

 

even super SSTO's won't be that big anymore, that was due to the limitations of what stock engines we had in ksp1..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys... dèep breathing time.

For most of you still running standard HD monitors (meaning 1080p) a minimum spec machine will be fine.

Those of us rocking 32 inch 4k/144hz monitors need the highest gpu we can ('t) afford. 

Although at this point I'm probably waiting for a 4080ti or whatever the next half‐Gen is... because I can lower specs as needed to keep my 3070 pushing pixels

Edited by JoeSchmuckatelli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...