Heat distortion effects.

[Greenfire32]

I don't see why people want better graphics in KSP. If you have a capable computer, just get ENB and tune it to fit KSP or sth. Sure, people with good computers would be happy to see this, but I'm playing it on a laptop and I already need to turn the graphics to almost minimum, keep the part count under 100 if possible and so on, just to be able to play.

Graphics, like it or not, is the cancer of gaming these days. Even EA used to publish good games, but now everyone just wants to create better graphics as rapidly as possible. I could go on ranting about it, but I hope my point gets through without it.

While I agree with you that graphics are starting (or have been for a loooong time) to become a bit of a problem (focus more on story please), the fact that you're trying to play KSP on a laptop is....you know...kind of a bad idea. And it's not like you choosing to have a laptop over a desktop is a bad decision on your part or anything, it's just that KSP is a game that, by design, require more resources than a laptop can generally provide.

Laptops, even "gaming" ones, aren't really built for gaming. It's just the inherent nature of the machine.

[Red Iron Crown]

Plays fine on a laptop with the graphics settings turned down. KSP is more CPU bound than GPU bound in its current state.

I think it's in Squad's best interest to keep it playable on laptops, there is a much bigger market that way.

[MR4Y]

Plays fine on a laptop with the graphics settings turned down. KSP is more CPU bound than GPU bound in its current state.

I think it's in Squad's best interest to keep it playable on laptops, there is a much bigger market that way.

But you don't have shadows with the render level below 'Simple', which makes landing really hard.

[Red Iron Crown]

I use a mod that has a radar altimeter for landing. Before that, I found it useful to put Illuminator Mk1s on the lander body radially in 4-way symmetry, the spots get closer together as you approach the surface. Has the added advantage of working on the dark side of bodies, too.

Also gives me an excuse to say "There are FOUR lights!" in my best Patrick Stewart impression.

[MR4Y]

I use a mod that has a radar altimeter for landing.

No. I'm not gonna use a mod that might introduce random bugs in the game (that will receive no support later) to fix a flaw in the game.

Essentially, the game punishes you for having low spec hardware.

[Greenfire32]

Essentially, the game punishes you for having low spec hardware.

Well I wouldn't go that far as that starts to imply that Squad has a vendetta against lower-spec machines. KSP, by nature, requires a bit more resources than most laptops can offer right out the box. Plain and simple.

Laptops can play games, but that doesn't make them gaming machines.

Know what I mean, Vern?

[Red Iron Crown]

Personally, I think the real flaw is not having a radar altimeter in stock non-IVA view.

Any non-trivial game is going to be hardware limited at some point, that's just the nature of software.

I say this as someone playing KSP on a Core 2 Duo laptop. I have to keep part counts reasonable, turn down the eye candy, and not have too many flights active simultaneously. Still beats buying a new PC.

[vger]

Ahh, please, not the graphics, I'm sure the devs will focus on the gameplay first. I would very much like to see heat distortion and burns as a feature, meaning parts can be warped by fires and damaged. No, deadly re-entry mod, real heat warping and damage and burns in the game.

There's a LOT that could still be done in the FX department to further enhance the feel and personality of each world. Dust storms, lightning, volumetric fog & clouds, volcanoes (either magmatic or cryo), sulfur rain, etc. Just going by our own solar system, even 'dead' planets without an ecosystem are often ANYTHING but static. There's shader fun to be had with things like luminescence and light refraction, "pearlized" surfaces, frost... the possibilities are endless.

And a personal wish, I'd love to see Minmus get a specular shader which causes those little points of light to interact with sunlight properly. Something sparkly, like how fresh snow looks when light hits it.

Edited March 6, 2014 by vger

[MR4Y]

Well I wouldn't go that far as that starts to imply that Squad has a vendetta against lower-spec machines. KSP, by nature, requires a bit more resources than most laptops can offer right out the box. Plain and simple.

Laptops can play games, but that doesn't make them gaming machines.

Know what I mean, Vern?

http://i.imgur.com/Uo8sWPr.png

Cause we all know, shadows are so much harder to do than real time physics calculations, procedural terrain generation and physics calculations per part, right?

[Bobnova]

Well, yes.

The CPU doesn't have to do much of anything for shadows. The CPU is what is doing all the things you listed.

The GPU has to deal with shadows. On a laptop odds are that the GPU is already tapped out by the existing polygon count. Adding shadows and other graphical effects would make things significantly worse.

[MR4Y]

Well, yes.

The CPU doesn't have to do much of anything for shadows. The CPU is what is doing all the things you listed.

The GPU has to deal with shadows. On a laptop odds are that the GPU is already tapped out by the existing polygon count. Adding shadows and other graphical effects would make things significantly worse.

The problem is that shadows are NECESSARY for you to perform certain things on the game, like knowing when to burn during landing on planets with no gravity. Yes, you can land without any shadows on, but it's at least twice as hard. I would agree with you IF shadows were just something asthetic, but they're not.

[rkman]

I suspect that something like this would have a pretty steep computational cost.

Not really, that's why it is pretty much routine in contemporary games. Besides, it would be optional.

I'm playing it on a laptop and I already need to turn the graphics to almost minimum

And to prevent you from going through that much trouble, other people also should not have the option for more/better graphics effects?

keep the part count under 100 if possible and so on, just to be able to play.

part count has nothing to do with graphics limitations, it is the physics that is the problem there.

Edited March 7, 2014 by rkman

[Alex_Leonardo]

There's a LOT that could still be done in the FX department to further enhance the feel and personality of each world. Dust storms, lightning, volumetric fog & clouds, volcanoes (either magmatic or cryo), sulfur rain, etc. Just going by our own solar system, even 'dead' planets without an ecosystem are often ANYTHING but static. There's shader fun to be had with things like luminescence and light refraction, "pearlized" surfaces, frost... the possibilities are endless.

And a personal wish, I'd love to see Minmus get a specular shader which causes those little points of light to interact with sunlight properly. Something sparkly, like how fresh snow looks when light hits it.

I still just think they should add gameplay features before graphic ones.

[Bessy]

considering the original xbox could do this and that was 2000 hardware im sure no 1 with a computer that can run xp will have a problem with this little visual enhancement

[Bartybum]

"I don't want it because I won't be able to run it" - a number of people

Then how about a simple checkbox that toggles it in the settings so that those who do want it can use it and those who can't don't have to?

[lajoswinkler]

It's happening!

http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/3asn9a/working_on_heat_refraction_for_exhaust_wip_mod/