Alshain

Centered with what? It's round.

That is a joke right? I ask because it feels like a joke, it's too silly to not be a joke, but it's written in a very serious tone. OMG, read the last few posts. This has been answered twice now in the last 10 posts.

It should be available when creating the game as you say, but did you know you can turn them off using Alt-F12 in a sandbox game?

What do you not get? It's an engine with 3/4 the power of the Mammoth (or 3x the power of the Vector). It fills a niche that no stock engine does. The elephants coming out of the engine is just an Easter egg/Joke and can be turned off to behave like a normal engine.

They are the same game, based on the same version of Unity, they will have similar problems. Especially the wheels, that is as system unspecific issue.

No they won't. Console users are not as patient as PC users. If you think we do a lot of bellyaching here when things go wrong, consider this... we do that because we care about the game. Console players aren't that patient, if the game doesn't work, they trash it on every review site they can and never play it again. This has largely grown from the difficulty of patching games on consoles in the past era. They pretty much view a release as the final product, they don't expect many patches to come after they purchase the game.

No. It is not stable.

The video we have seen indicate otherwise. Essentially the UI is the same, you use an analog stick to control a mouse cursor.

Thread of the Month for June and @sal_vager hasn't gotten around to updating for July yet. EDIT: Or maybe it's for July and the title got messed up. I'm not real sure but here is the thread. EDIT 2: Or based on the last few, maybe it's the threads of the past month I guess.

I have to agree the first person genre excels on the PC, at least for shooters. There is a reason console and PC players rarely get cross play ability, even when it would be possible technologically and within the same title, the PC players would dominate. As for KSP, I too think the building in the VAB on the XBox One and PS4 might be a bit annoying. I'm hoping the Wii U version makes use of the touchscreen for construction. If so, it's likely to be the best console version of KSP.

Yep, found that after I posted.

They may have decided it isn't worth it, the NX is coming next year (supposedly) so why not wait for that? Even Nintendo has pretty much abandoned the Wii U now.

I'd be more likely to believe that it would fail due to launching in a 1.1.x state than not having mods. I mean, trying to pull in a new crowd on a version as unstable as 1.1.x could be a disaster in the making. Reviews are seldom updated once written, and we have a game version where wheels can't even drive down the road, critics will eat it alive. I had not actually heard the console versions were slated for release this month, but assuming 1.2 doesn't get here first, It will be interesting to see what the console only side of the media thinks of this.

Mojang has made absolutely zero effort to combat that sort of thing anyway. That's why there are so few vanilla Minecraft servers out there. A good modded server with World Guard or Grief Prevention is pretty secure. If it were controlled client side, those mods wouldn't be able to do anything about it. From a personal standpoint, I'm less concerned about that (my servers are private, I know all the players personally) but it is an issue for some operators, so that is all the more reason to keep it server side.

I think you overestimate KSP.

Why would you say that? Servers are generally more powerful that client computers. It's not out of the ordinary at all. There is nothing you can add that will ensure proper consistency, if two clients are each in control of their own calculations, there will be conflict and that leads to the bulk of issues that you see with DMP. When one computer says it should be this way, and the other computer says it should be another way. The client renders it to the user before the server can make any corrections to sync up the clients. So ships appear to jump around, actions you take may be overridden by the decisions of another client, etc. I don't think requiring a capable server machine is anything out of the ordinary. Inevitably hosting services will pop up if you can't afford to buy a machine outright. All the calculations do not necessarily need to be handled by the server either, they just have to be delegated by the server. The client PCs could be tasked by the server for offsite calculations, but this would be done at the servers command, rather than each client doing its own thing independently. I don't know if Unity has this capability, but it is a theoretical possibility.

The discussion is comparing SSTO to Asparagus staging, the context is that we are talking about getting to orbit, not interplanetary travel. As does dropping radial boosters and a the first stage of a two stage rocket. Furthermore, an asparagus stage is massively expensive due to the liquid engine, while an SRB is cheap. Who said anything about a single tank? I said two stage rocket. My two stage rockets also shed, more than 40% of their dry mass. (Note: When I say "two stage", I mean on the center stack, that doesn't include the SRBs). No, that is the primary reason. It's massively more expensive. Not if you know how to build it right. My rockets practically fly themselves. You launch them, you set the gravity turn, you turn off the SAS and sit back a drink a cup of coffee till you reach target Ap. Also, I have a 100 ton lifter right here that does just that (note: the payload is just an example for the screenshot, obviously not 100 tons). This one costs 147,000 funds, not including the launch clamps and lighting which are recoverable and of course that is just the cost of the lifter. It's been tested to 100 tons at 100km parking orbit.

The use of asparagus declined because v1.0 aerodynamics made it unnecessary and wasteful. You don't need an SSTO, but you don't need asparagus either. A two stage rocket with any necessary radial SRBs is just fine. SRBs are cheap, in fact the decoupler you will use on them is often more expensive than the SRB, so avoid larger symmetries (8x) and instead just go with larger boosters. The upper stage engine will likely be relatively cheap as well, that just leave 1 expensive engine.

I would say neither. The infrastructure does not make the process worthwhile that close to Kerbin, it's easier just to launch fuel. ISRU is for interplanetary work IMO.

How would they be useful exactly? I mean really what would they do there? It's not like you need to explore the ocean, it's all one biome. And more importantly consistent with the request, how would a boat dock on Kerbin help them there anyway? Just because a planet has liquid doesn't mean a boat would be useful there. Just because you can build boats in the game doesn't mean they fall within the scope of the game. There are so many things that are in the scope of this game that need to be worked on. If boats ever did get a proper showing, it would mean there is nothing left to do with rockets or planes or rovers or stations or bases, and I don't see that happening before Squad calls the development done. It's what mods are for.

Umm.. two word with three letter "e".

I don't see any, every place that would be shadowed is lit by his lighting.

Possible, but I didn't see any of the same kind of shadows in that video. It only occurs when a dynamic part causes a shadow to be cast on another dynamic part. If you will notice in his first video, only the tail fin and solar panel caused it, the shadow on the ground was fine. Shadows from static models like buildings are also fine.

@thereaverofdarkness2 Here is the same effect in a completely different Unity game. Salt does appear to have some kind of smoothing that KSP does not but the effect is still there. They also have a separate setting for "Shadow Resolution" which improves the effect some as well but in all cases it's still very noticeable. I really do believe this is just how it renders shadows, but maybe Squad could still improve it a little as Salt has. However, I'm confident that is not a bug, but a lack of a feature.

I never said anything about it being GPU intensive. I said it was a limitation of the game engine casting shadows on the dynamic models.