Is ksp graphically outdated or on par.

[Flixxbeatz]

Other games similar to KSP?

you're going to have to help me there

Goodluck finding another game that has realism of Orbiter, but has the sanbox feeling of Minecraft, EVA freedom of Moonbase Alpha, and the fun and flyability of space-based combat games.

*May not be accurate, but... you got the point

[Spartwo]

Given the limitation of needing to have KSP portable across platforms, the graphics are quite good with modders proving that they can be even better. When KSP 1.0 gets released, I would not be surprised to see it become available for X-Box, WII, Sony Playstation, and other gaming systems.

With Space engineers coming to consoles I sincerely hope this.

[Alshain]

Hmm, KSP on Wii U with two screens. I can dream, can't I?

[Motokid600]

This.

This is always the other side of the graphics argument. Yes, there is a lot of optimizing that needs to be done (particularly since we can't expect a 64-bit version), but PC performance is an issue that bears considering. Yes, people with hamster powered PCs still count as customers.

So do the people with powerful pc's. Thats why there has to be options. I'd hate to say it, but if KSP is released with its current level of graphical fidelity it'll take a hit score wise amongst the reviews and Squad will take a hit with their sales figures. All about that first impression on this 1.0 release. Squad needs to come out of the gate strong.

I for one don't understand why KSP can't have more levels of detail. There seems to be only two right now. Ground and scaled space. Why can't KSP work like Space Engine with its LODs? Not to that extent obviously, but why can't we get another level of higher detail past a certain altitude?

Why must the surface textures on all bodies look like complete crap?

[Randazzo]

So do the people with powerful pc's. Thats why there has to be options. I'd hate to say it, but if KSP is released with its current level of graphical fidelity it'll take a hit score wise amongst the reviews and Squad will take a hit with their sales figures. All about that first impression on this 1.0 release. Squad needs to come out of the gate strong.

I for one don't understand why KSP can't have more levels of detail. There seems to be only two right now. Ground and scaled space. Why can't KSP work like Space Engine with its LODs? Not to that extent obviously, but why can't we get another level of higher detail past a certain altitude?

Why must the surface textures on all bodies look like complete crap?

It's not quite the same. A person with a powerful PC who complains the graphics should be better can still play the game.

[Rocketfeline]

This always seemed to be a problem in ksp. Because alot of people who come from games where its sometimes stunning like Battlefield 4 or COD. They now have this sort of like forced taboo of "I must like the game if its graphically amazing". And KSP Has this fine line of cartoony art style mixed with realism. Its also very moddable which also kinda solves the problem. But for my opinion its amazing once you get in orbit and EVA. The stars,Planet,And spacecraft look amazing.

[Flixxbeatz]

That's easy to say when you've played it extensively

what about people deciding whether to buy the game when it's released?

Now that's what would draw a line between graphics-minded and gameplay-minded people (and also, those who got their interests piqued when they heard it or saw the gameplay and those who didn't).

Take me for example. The first versions of KSP I saw back then when browsing youtube looked like

, yet I bought the game because it suits my interest.

[Alshain]

It's not quite the same. A person with a powerful PC who complains the graphics should be better can still play the game.

Most games, including this one, have graphic configuration options. Adding more fidelity wouldn't prevent you from playing, it would just prevent you from playing on max settings.

[chaos_forge]

While the game is fine graphically, what it needs is polish. Things like clouds, auroras, city lights on kerbin, and planetshine should be in the stock game. In addition, the textures for stock parts should be looked at, as old parts like the RT-10 solid booster look quite shabby when compared to Porkjet's new parts. In addition to this, the game engine needs to be optimized so we don't have to wait for absolutely all the textures to be loaded into memory every time we start the game.

The graphics engine doesn't need to be updated, but I think Squad could spend an entire update just polishing the visual aesthetic of the game before making a 1.0 release.

[MartGonzo]

Now that's what would draw a line between graphics-minded and gameplay-minded people (and also, those who got their interests piqued when they heard it or saw the gameplay and those who didn't).

Take me for example. The first versions of KSP I saw back then when browsing youtube looked like

, yet I bought the game because it suits my interest.

On a personal level I don't disagree, after all I bought the game without seeing any of the graphical mods.

I'm just concerned about sales after release, I want squad to do well with this game and a little time spent on polish couldn't hurt (unless it excludes lower end computers, but as Motokid600 said, that's where options come in)

[Randazzo]

Most games, including this one, have graphic configuration options. Adding more fidelity wouldn't prevent you from playing, it would just prevent you from playing on max settings.

KSP loads every texture in the game upon execution. Fidelity settings would not be the issue.

[Renegrade]

I would not be surprised to see it become available for X-Box, WII, Sony Playstation, and other gaming systems.

The current high-end consoles lack the oomph to run KSP. Heck my i7 laptop lacks the oomph to even run 0.25, let alone 0.90.

Hmm, KSP on Wii U with two screens. I can dream, can't I?

Wii U is a 32-bit console with two gigs of RAM.. and you'll be sharing that with the OS... Squad would really have to get on top of that texture-doubling thing~

[LethalDose]

I think it depends on what you're comparing it too. In the larger picture, you could say Minecraft's graphics are "outdated", but still perfect. There's also the issue that more complicated models or higher resolution textures would further press an already limited RAM limit.

I think the models and textures are fine compared to modern games, because they do what they need to do: Allow the player to differentiate various parts without requiring too high a floor for graphics cards.

However, the water looks like crap and Kerbin needs clouds and cities. Those omissions make it "outdated".

[Motokid600]

KSP loads every texture in the game upon execution. Fidelity settings would not be the issue.

Wha? You can adjust the resolution of the textures right now if your hurting on memory. What KSP needs is a higher level of adjustment. The surface textures desperately need higher resolutions. But like you said the people with potato pc's will need options to lower said resolution.

[Spartwo]

Wii U is a 32-bit console with two gigs of RAM

I play with that...

[Alshain]

KSP loads every texture in the game upon execution. Fidelity settings would not be the issue.

Your assuming that would be the case for all types of textures. They could easily make clouds load based on a setting, it would require a game restart, but other than that, easily easily done. Not so easy for entire planets or parts that must be available regardless of settings.

Wii U is a 32-bit console with two gigs of RAM.. and you'll be sharing that with the OS... Squad would really have to get on top of that texture-doubling thing~

Well the game is a 32-bit game and it can fit in 2GB shared with the OS. Might have to trim a little bit, but not much. Mostly, you would likely start by compressing textures a little more heavily. You get a visual loss, but it works for Active Texture Management.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Alshain

[Technical Ben]

With a HD texture pack (not necessary) and a atmosphere + water pass on the shaders and this game is brilliant for it's scope and design. What other fancies do we need, we already got re-entry heat!

[Renegrade]

I play with that...

I feel your pain, man.... :C

If and when you get a system upgrade though, don't scrimp on RAM. Any RAM unused by applications is re-tasked for drive cache in modern OSes (Windows, Unix-derivatives such as Linux, *BSD, MacOSX), making second loads of any data from disk blazingly fast. Even SSDs.

Well the game is a 32-bit game and it can fit in 2GB shared with the OS. Might have to trim a little bit, but not much. Mostly, you would likely start by compressing textures a little more heavily. You get a visual loss, but it works for Active Texture Management.

Yeah, they'd definitely have to squish 'em textures. But then there'd also be no room for anything EVE-like or such...and teh ugly!

I've noticed that current KSP tends to like to default itself to half-texture size, and I always set it back... the half-size ones look kinda awful to me (although not as bad as the pre-18 graphics)...

(by the way, I'm with you and the others on the PlanetShine/clouds/weather stuff. KSP could use some of that)

[keeper]

i think the graphics are fine, mighty fine.

I've been playing this game for donkeys but my little bro walked in on me a couple week ago and told me ksp looks like PS2 graphics.

My jaw hit the floor, astonished he was sent away and I was left alone to reflect.

You know when you like a game, and the graphics just cant be any other way. Its like that.

Im not saying, imagine battlefield 4 in the minecraft engine or visa versa but seriously, with the part counts that only stack and stack and fps gets worse and worse, along with textures and whatnot, if the graphics were to change, what would you do?

I am very much liking the mod that adds clouds, and dust and what not on planets and moons but i have too many mods already.

The graphics are mighty fine

[merendel]

Nah, the graphics are fine, the lack of polish is not. Clouds, weather (storms, fog, dust storms, etc.), planetshine, better skybox, lens flares, auroras. All of these things are provided by mods but should be stock. A little polish can go a long way.

The problem with adding that to stock is it would leave very little room for other mods. Untill we either have a stable 64 bit windows version or a more streamlined asset loading system that does not require every texture to be loaded to memory all at once I dont think it would be a good idea to add all of the beautification mods to stock. Polish needs to happen on the back end before we can afford to spitshine the the appearance.

[Sirrobert]

That's easy to say when you've played it extensively

what about people deciding whether to buy the game when it's released?

When I show the game to friends, they say 'wow you build a space station, that's so cool'

My roommates sometimes come in and watch me launch a few rockets, or land on the Mun, they think it looks cool

[MartGonzo]

When I show the game to friends, they say 'wow you build a space station, that's so cool'

My roommates sometimes come in and watch me launch a few rockets, or land on the Mun, they think it looks cool

That's good to know, the stock graphics weren't an issue for me when buying the game either, but I read a lot of comments on youtube channels like gamespot and it's fairly common to see comments saying things like "These graphics look like ****" so presumably it's a factor for a lot of people.

[Sirrobert]

Yea, but this isn't a game where graphics are important anyway. There are people that buy games for graphics, but there are also plenty of people that buy them for gameplay (those still apriciate good graphics, but simply as the cherry on the cake).

KSP is a game for the second group

[Starwhip]

Nah, the graphics are fine, the lack of polish is not. Clouds, weather (storms, fog, dust storms, etc.), planetshine, better skybox, lens flares, auroras. All of these things are provided by mods but should be stock. A little polish can go a long way.

That's a lot of polish...

[Coam]

I prefer the views to the graphical quality in itself.

It's no space-engine, but there are still some remarkably pretty views in KSP. I still notice how pretty Kerbin can be when making the first suborbital flight of a new save, or how tiny it looks when you're out at the Mun or Minmus. This would probably be similar even if the graphics were far less detailed.