Suggestion: post the Minimum and Suggested PC requirements sooner, rather than later.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Just went back over the updated KSP2 page... and I don't see system requirements listed.  

FWIW: I'm not likely to be bothered by it (PC Nerd, here) - but I do hear from the occasional (Kiwis, looking at you) Aging Laptop gamer who frets about such things.

[mcwaffles2003]

anything is playable so long as you lower the resolution enough

[magnemoe]

7 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

anything is playable so long as you lower the resolution enough

KSP performance is highly depended on your part count. 

This base is laggy, an standard Mun mission is not.

[Derpiesaurus]

I think they're either in the optimisation phase or they're just getting to it. From the looks of all the gameplay they've shared (which according to a few youtubers who did a small interview with the devs) it's fairly old and to me looks quite laggy, meaning when that was recorded they weren't optimising, I would guess at least. I doubt until they're done with that they'll be able to even have an internal recommended specs, let alone one to give to the public. So I suspect minimum / recommended specs will come pretty close to launch, and it'd be silly to put them out post-launch.

[Brofessional]

Sysreqs are probably a little hard to pin down on an early access game under heavy development.  Especially one like KSP where the performance is hugely dependent on what the player does.

Even if you are certain you will upgrade for KSP2, it's unwise to upgrade in anticipation of any game that isn't yet released. Wait and see what the real world performance is like and you will be able to make a more informed purchase without setting your expectations too high and getting disappointed.

[mcwaffles2003]

8 hours ago, magnemoe said:

KSP performance is highly depended on your part count. 

That's KSP, KSP 2 is supposed to fix a lot of this with LOD physics on parts, likely by segmenting large sets of parts into single part blocks. To add onto this, in a game like KSP how does system requirements even get established? every PC in KSP goes sub 30fps at 1000 parts, not saying this is definitely still the case, but KSP isn't like other games where the parameters are set, so many things can be changed that change computer performance.

 

I expect potatoes will still be able to run the game, but graphics are obviously improved in this game while CPU heavy tasks are being highly refined, so I think GPU specs will be the only real defined requirement, hence:

16 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

anything is playable so long as you lower the resolution enough

 

[The Aziz]

Define a potato. I wouldn't expect to launch KSP2 on my old machine that could - only just - handle the early versions of KSP1. And honestly neither should anyone. If you have a mid range rig from, say, 2016, you'd probably be fine. But a 10 year old potato... Not so much.

[mcwaffles2003]

22 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Define a potato.

6 year old mid range gaming laptop with 4 Gb VRAM (GTX 960 mobile?),8 Gb RAM, and 4 hyperthreaded cores.

I don't think it would be super pretty, a litlle blocky, but it would be playable.

 

I expect my Acer Nitro 5 to handle the game fairly well with a GTX1650m, 16Gb RAM, and i5-9300H

Edited October 23, 2022 by mcwaffles2003

[The Aziz]

Yeah that sounds somewhat reasonable. On low settings. Though I have seen more and more games demanding 16GB of memory, wouldn't be surprised if that was the case here as well. 

[mcwaffles2003]

8 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Yeah that sounds somewhat reasonable. On low settings. Though I have seen more and more games demanding 16GB of memory, wouldn't be surprised if that was the case here as well. 

Depends on the amount of assets being loaded in I think. Which is why establishing system requirements in this game is difficult as it depends on what you want to do. Even 16GB isn't enough in some KSP modded playthroughs...

[Rocket Farmer]

5 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

That's KSP, KSP 2 is supposed to fix a lot of this with LOD physics on parts, likely by segmenting large sets of parts into single part blocks. To add onto this, in a game like KSP how does system requirements even get established? every PC in KSP goes sub 30fps at 1000 parts, not saying this is definitely still the case, but KSP isn't like other games where the parameters are set, so many things can be changed that change computer performance.

 

I expect potatoes will still be able to run the game, but graphics are obviously improved in this game while CPU heavy tasks are being highly refined, so I think GPU specs will be the only real defined requirement, hence:

 

Hello

Its true KSP did humble the best CPUs of the time but time does march on and hardware is improving.

Expect that the game will still be CPU (not GPU) bound so that fancy GPU you have will always be idling.

Also expect that modern monster CPUs (say a soon to be released 7950x3d) will be able to tear through it.  However if you have a below mid level CPU expect performance to suffer a lot.

[HebaruSan]

If big chunks of the final game are omitted from the initial early access release, the system load may well change over time as those pieces are added. If they're still making major changes to those chunks, it may not even be possible to anticipate where things will land yet. Note especially the new parts, resource gathering, construction, and planets,  which will need to consume at least some additional RAM and/or CPU capacity.

On 10/21/2022 at 8:03 AM, Intercept Games said:

Key Features to come during Early Access:

• Next Generation Technology: As the game updates progress, players will gain access to a whole new set of next generation tools and technology including new engines, parts, fuel, and much more. This new tech will not just create novel puzzles for players to solve, but will also enable new feats of space exploration within and beyond the original Kerbolar System.
• Colonies: Brand new to Kerbal Space Program 2 are colonies.  Colonies not only pose their own physics challenges, but also require resource gathering to build structures, space stations, habitations, and unique fuel types. Eventually, these colonies become advanced enough for vehicle construction, propelling deep space exploration and beyond. 
• Interstellar Travel: Next-gen tech, colonies, and systematic resource gathering all lead to a whole new level of exploration: interstellar travel. In Kerbal Space Program 2, interstellar technologies pave the way to a host of new star systems and celestial bodies, each comprising novel challenges and harboring secret treasures. Among them: Charr, a heat-blasted world of iron; Ovin, a ringed super-Earth with relentless gravity; Rask and Rusk, a binary pair locked in a dance of death; and many more to reward exploration.

[Alexoff]

In fact, we were not shown the entire roadmap, after the multiplayer there will be optimization. 

And before optimization, system requirements are meaningless, a thousand details will greatly drop the FPS.

[mcwaffles2003]

1 hour ago, Rocket Farmer said:

Hello

Its true KSP did humble the best CPUs of the time but time does march on and hardware is improving.

Expect that the game will still be CPU (not GPU) bound so that fancy GPU you have will always be idling.

Also expect that modern monster CPUs (say a soon to be released 7950x3d) will be able to tear through it.  However if you have a below mid level CPU expect performance to suffer a lot.

That depends on what graphical fidelity you are looking for. I have a 1080 ti and have been able to make KSP GPU bound, but that's cause I had 64K textures running for earth. KSP 2 definitely looks like its stepping up its graphics game and running at 4k with max settings looks like it may challenge something like a 2060/1070.This isn't saying I don't believe it wont be CPU intensive, but I think with a lot of the optimizations coming it may be less CPU intensive than KSP 1 simply because it could be vastly more efficient in how it calculates things. For instance:

The original KSP engine wasn't built by people who knew things like finite element analysis,  KSP 2 is. I present this video as it shows what kind of difference can be made by comparing coding methods between an amateur and more experienced coders. Just because a game is newer doesn't mean it will necessarily run slower on the same hardware and it seems the core reason behind KSP 2's original purpose in being developed was specifically to tackle these kinds of inefficiencies. Then again many things are being added to the game which I assume will be handled by making separate threads to utilize multithreading which is why I think the amount of cores will make more of a difference in KSP2 than in KSP. 

[magnemoe]

8 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

That's KSP, KSP 2 is supposed to fix a lot of this with LOD physics on parts, likely by segmenting large sets of parts into single part blocks. To add onto this, in a game like KSP how does system requirements even get established? every PC in KSP goes sub 30fps at 1000 parts, not saying this is definitely still the case, but KSP isn't like other games where the parameters are set, so many things can be changed that change computer performance.

I expect potatoes will still be able to run the game, but graphics are obviously improved in this game while CPU heavy tasks are being highly refined, so I think GPU specs will be the only real defined requirement, hence:

Agree, I assume performance will increase quite a bit. You also have trust under warp who I assume will disable physic on vessel. 
It might be some requirement like ship has to have trust for say 30-60 seconds before you can warp. 

[Gargamel]

As I’ve said on a number of occasions, if they state the system requirements before they have then nailed down, there will be a number of upset fans.   
 

It will either be “You lied to us!  Now I have to go buy a new machine!” Or “You lied to us! I spent $800 on new parts I didn’t need!”.  So there’s no benefit to the studio to guess.  
 

They’ll announce when they have it nailed down.    Unless you’re completely oblivious to the state of your machine,  If you think you’re computer can run ksp2, then you’ll probably be fine; if you know you’re going to need a new computer sooner rather than later, then you should be setting money aside now.  

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

40 minutes ago, Gargamel said:

As I’ve said on a number of occasions, if they state the system requirements before they have then nailed down, there will be a number of upset fans.   
 

It will either be “You lied to us!  Now I have to go buy a new machine!” Or “You lied to us! I spent $800 on new parts I didn’t need!”.  So there’s no benefit to the studio to guess.  
 

They’ll announce when they have it nailed down.    Unless you’re completely oblivious to the state of your machine,  If you think you’re computer can run ksp2, then you’ll probably be fine; if you know you’re going to need a new computer sooner rather than later, then you should be setting money aside now.  

You know... I did not think about this.  Sometimes, I guess you just can't win for trying.  As mentioned, I'm fairly certain my 5600x, 16gb RAM and 3070 will be sufficient unto the task, but other's results may vary.  (Still looking at you, Aging Laptop Complainers gamers)

Perhaps they could use something, like maybe an Early Access period... or something - to identify what systems it works on?

 

I hereby yield the topic.  Thread may be closed.

 

(yes, that last must be read "cloze ed"

Edited October 23, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli