MechBFP

No, this is Vlad confirming things without evidence again.

I am almost positive that the noodle rockets were kept in on purpose, I think it was mentioned a long time ago by someone although I can’t remember the details. I am on the fence with it, as I see the benefits and downsides of both routes.

If I had to wager a guess given current progress and previous experience, I would say that things will be a lot better in about 6 to 8 months. It is a long time, but also not really a long time given the amount of work required.

That is all fair and good, but are we really arguing that is what is causing KSP2's issues in the ESA event?

Why would you ever remove your debugging code when you can just comment it it out or use a variable to enable/disable it as needed? The only time I have ever seen someone actually remove debugging code is when they are doing assembler level code optimizations on extremely specific hardware.

That isn't necessarily true. Depends on what level of debugging they were capturing.

I feel for that coder. All I can imagine is them sitting there going "Why.... how.... what?"

From some rumblings I have heard it sounds like there is going to be some grains of truth to this prediction I made last year. Very much hope it pans out.

I have to say that regardless of the good or bad that will come and go over the months, this is going to be one very interesting ride for the foreseeable future. Congrats to everyone for making it this far, I definitely know what you are feeling right now and I hope things pan out for the best for everyone on the team and the project.

I am going to be curious if the frame rate issues/stutters are specific to certain types of hardware or if they effect everyone equally regardless of their hardware. For example it will be interesting if a player with a 2060 experiences 20 FPS in the exact same scenario as a person with a 4090.

For the longest time I thought you were a QA person who worked for Squad and posted stuff to the bug tracker as a part of your job because of how many reports you made lol.

Ya definitely. Even though it really isn't much of a difference performance wise there is a lot of history with newer gen cards using newer shaders, etc, that make old cards incompatible. Most people aren't exactly in the loop on the technical differences with the more recent gen cards.

I am confused by your post, the minimum specs are for everything on low and on 1080p.

Check https://store.privatedivision.com/game/kerbal-space-program-2 They do mention a 1070TI now as also minimum.

It should work, it is just a matter of what the FPS will be. You'll need to either try it yourself or wait for benchmarks to appear from the day 1 testers.

That is really not accurate. A 2070 is about 25% more powerful.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Without any ray tracing features it really doesn't make much sense to me unless their 1080p low settings is only going to get 30 FPS, then every frame counts.

If you are curious how your GPU might perform take a look at this: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html Specifically the "Tom's Hardware Rasterization GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy" chart. A 2060 is not super high performance. A 1070TI for example is only 4 FPS less on average in their tests for 1080p Ultra.

I sure hope that means 1080p at a stable 60 FPS. I doubt it, but I can hope!

I thought AMD had their own version of ray tracing on those cards and above, it just wasn't as good? I haven't really been following the GPU market (for obvious reason), so I actually don't know.

Given that my 1070TI when overclocked is only slightly worse than a 2060 in terms of rasterization performance I am not very concerned unless the game actually uses ray tracing as a minimum requirement. I am expecting like 30FPS though unfortunately.

I am curious what the performance will be on NVIDIA GTX 1000 series cards. I assume it will still run, given that I don't think there are any rasterization changes between that and the 2000 series?

Anything from 2019 should probably be ignored rather than taken as gospel.

Terraforming is a real pain in the butt when trying to develop LOD textures.

No, it wouldn't matter. The amount of energy needed to make such a hole would simply cause a massive crater regardless of the size of the object.