MARL_Mk1

Nate and team, been playing KSP1 ever since 2014 and it has continuously lived in my mind rent free. While being an adult makes you consider all possible realistic outcomes of an Early Access project the size of KSP2, it makes me genuinely happy to see that almost, if not all team members behind KSP2 are real fans and truly passionate people. Earlier this year I made the biggest and most expensive PC upgrade I've done in my years of gaming, for the solely purpose of running KSP2 as it deserves. I hereby entrust you with making this game the best it can ever be for decades to come

They are organizing a party at the bottom of the Mohole. How they are gonna get out afterwards continues to be a mistery. Maybe Matt Lowne will do something about them, maybe not.

Wonderful to see progress made across all fields. Even if it sounds doom-ish to say, I wish 0.2.0.0 had been the build KSP2 released with at EA launch. And I'll also say, it's good to show 0.1.0.0 compared, but it's only fair we also had gotten a direct comparison between 1.0.5.0, which felt like a tiny introduction to 0.2.0.0 in terms of performance improvements and I'm sure the difference gap isn't as big as with the broken mess (sorry, just being honestly blunt) 0.1.0.0 was. I'm still happy that the dev team kept their morale up and are working towards making KSP2 the best game it can be. We've seen they are all super passionate people and that keeps me hopeful. I also hope we continue to get significant performance improvements like these. They are needed by the time Colonies and Interstellar are around. All this said, hopefully docking isn't a death trap in 0.2.0.0 so I can actually complete many of the challenges posted throughout 2023 and not die from frustration trying!

It has been stated in the past that they will be physically simulated. But lets assume for a second they aren't. Every other craft mentioned suffers the same issue either way.

I don't mean that, and I think you are steering the convo in a different direction with the big parts thing. I'm merely talking about the inherent need of people to build very large crafts and colonies. Colonies in particular will get really big. We've seen modular road parts and such, so we can expect people to build big, surface outposts in the hundreds of parts count. Same goes for big orbital docks and space stations. Intercept has also glanced over the fact that high part vehicles will need to be performant by the time Interstellar is around. The question I think fits this better would be: in 3 years time, can I expect better performance from a 500 part build in KSP2 than from a 500 part build in KSP1 with a High End machine? If the answer were no, then having paid for KSP2 (Early Access or not), will have not been worth it, and console versions of KSP2 would suffer the same fate as KSP1's console edition, where they were extremely limited on the part count and performance side. People want that 'KSP1 and then some more' promise to become real, just without the inherited core problems the original game had. If the same issues persist or get worse, there is literally no point for KSP2 to exist. Big parts solve the issue in KSP2 the same way big parts would've solved it in KSP1: Not solving it.

Good job! Thought I'm expecting that in the future Intercept looks into overhauling current cloud looks to something in a middle ground between actual ones and the work you've done with your KSP1 Volumetric Clouds, in the sense that they don't need to look all that real life looking but also not as underwhelming as they currently do.

So you are saying that you'd embrace the inherited problem of big part count = massive performance loss either way as long as you got big parts to counter the issue? What would be the point of KSP2's existence then if the main problems the first game had will still be there either way with computers multiple orders of magnitude more powerful required to run it? Those are incompatible statements. If they really plan on releasing a good KSP2 experience on console we should expect no less (and so do they if they plan on making any money out of said platforms). I'm also aware that the game has a literal impossible way to determine system specs the same way traditional games do it based on the fact that you can build things that would choke a NASA supercomputer, but think for a second about the scenarios I wrote about in the first post. When colonies become a thing, people will want to build rather big things without their game feeling like KSP2's February release build. I already want to build big things and I feel like I'm being held back, since a 200 part craft in KSP1 still delivers better performance than on KSP2. And I expect this to change drastically if this game wants any chance of being half of successful as the first game was. I'm just curious about their plans on that regard because Nate has mentioned that they aim for roadmap updates not taking as long as For Science has from release to current day (~10 months). We might be looking at a Colonies update coming between June and September 24' being generous, so I'd hope for them to share their plans on further performance optmizations beyond what they are working at with the terrain system rebuild and whatnot.

I can't imagine the scenario where you arrive at your 400 part orbital dock with your 200 part interplanetary tug, then switch to your 120 part lander and make a pinpoint lander on your 500 part surface colony, with all of it being physics simulated and rocking more than 30fps. In KSP1 I always felt like I had to ultra optimize on part count because performance degraded badly rather quick.

Thanks for these! And please, absolutely continue sharing some little clips

Reported Version: v0.1.5 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Windows 10 | CPU: R5 5600 | GPU: RX 6700XT | RAM: 16GB DDR4 3200 Whenever you place your craft in orbit and want to warp time in order to wait for an interplanetary transfer window, you press Esc > Tracking Station. Once you are in the tracking station, you notice that your warp arrows are still locked to the same speed limit your craft had in Low Kerbin Orbit. This requires you to instead go to the Kerbal Space Center and then get into the Tracking Station. Attached Clip:

1050 already was low-end when it was released about 7 years ago. Don't expect much out of it.

Here's the issue with your solution: It shouldn't be a problem for me to fix by buying new hardware. I can play KSP1 just fine in my 1080p 16:9 24" monitor and I don't need anything else. I need the game to be adapted and designed to be not as interface-invasive as it is. No more, no less. The art style for fonts and UI is horrendously optimized for this purpose. KSP1 didn't feature any of those and it worked fine. Flight UI is there to give us critical information. It needs to be visible and properly out of the way (or at least offering you options to get it out of the way in your own, personalized way). I hate the RCS and SAS buttons. With KSP1, I didn't even have to glance over to the NavBall to know that I had enabled SAS when pressing T, because I would see that Green button pop-in in my rear vision, and the small orientation buttons would pop in aswell. With KSP2, I've found myself many times having to direct my view over and over to the corner of my screen to check if that tiny little "RCS" letter outline changed from Dark-Blue to Light-Green. The more I think of it outside the game the worst it becomes in my head. If UI design doesn't change down the line it might actually be one of the reasons for why I stop playing the game altogether. I just need the simplicity KSP1 offered me. Quirky art styles are literally needless. Give me numbers and utilities that are direct and easy to glance over, not literally the opposite. If they had literally copied KSP1's UI I would be so freaking delighted. Hope the devs check these threads often. Not sure if they give topics like these a read every now and then.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on how oversized most UI elements are. I hate the VAB layout just because it takes away literally 1/3rd of my screen everytime I hover or right click on something. I don't need a huge chunk of my screen obscured if I wanna check the mass or the ISP of this certain part. I don't want to see the whole ass list of part categories when I right click an antenna to click 'Deploy'. Same happens with, say, the tapes showing altitude and velocity next to the NavBall. They fit the art style but they are counterproductive. The same information could be shown as a simple text line (literally just like they show AP and PE below it) and have the navball be bigger on the screen. The SAS orientation buttons should be much more compact (and for the love of god, only be shown when SAS is ON, not hang there greyed out when it's OFF). I'm positive UI will get a complete rework down the line, because there definitely is a big point to be made about how every single individual element of it has multiple flaws when it comes to user experience.

KSP2 has got still a bunch of flaws. But of them all, I'm going to point out the two that make playing KSP2 a frustration farming experience for me: 1) Pause the Game. ESCAPE. That little guy at the top left of everyone's personal computer ever since the QWERTY configuration became an international standard. THAT has been the key that makes 99,99% of PC videogames in existence to PAUSE. I can't put into words how frustrating it is to have this one special game that urges you to either press comma (repeatedly, if you are timewarping) or to physically click a button in the UI) to pause your game, instead of... Pressing Esc to pause. I want my game to stop when I press Esc. 2) NavBall Position. I admit this one slides into the subjective side a little, but here are my 2 cents. During KSP1, I never had issues controlling the orientation of my vehicle with the aid of the NavBall. It had a great position in your screen. It was aligned vertically with your vehicle, so slightly moving your eyes down for a split second was enough to get the info you needed when, say, landing a craft and wanting to know where your retrograde marker was. KSP2 went ahead and made a much smaller NavBall inside a much bigger UI item and positioned it at the bottom left corner of one's screen. As much as I try to shake off KSP1's NavBall muscle memory, I can't. Not just because I've grown used to it, but because the bottom center positioning of KSP1's NavBall was arguably better on the UX side than KSP2's Ball, which requires you to take a diagonal glance at the corner of your screen instead. In other words, my eyes spend more time looking for the same information on KSP2's NavBall than on KSP1's. Currently, the bottom center of the UI hosts the Time Warp bar. An UI item that could fit literally anywhere. I just wish that in the not-so-long future we get to either: 1. Change the position of the UI elements; or 2. A Settings toggle that allows users to set the NavBall in the bottom center of the screen. As a small note, even KSP1 allowed you to slide the NavBall around your screen. We deserve no less than that.

I'm sure I've seen some improvements on topography yes. Hope it's not placebo because when recording the videos on my previous message above I totally noticed an improvement on how the Mun's surface looked from certain altitudes. Again, it might just be me not having played KSP2 in a bit, but I'd bet on some changes.

I'm pleasantly surprised by the performance improvement we've seen in 1.0.5.0.! I'm gonna leave a couple videos here as reference. Both are different clean new saves on 1.0.5.0, maximum graphic settings. Atmospheric scattering looks incredibly better, and so does cloud shading and clouds in general. More nice to the eyes. Also noticed that their ghostly movement is basically gone! (like, in the recent past when you moved the camera you could see the clouds lagging behind a little), they feel solid now. Can't wait to see Blackrack improve upon it. First video is based around KSC and general Kerbin performance. I can say that most of the performance losses when looking down to the ground are mostly gone (only tested in Mun and Kerbin, but wanna play more now that performance is good!). I'm sure they'll be able to optimize everything even more, but it feels really good. Second video uses this craft , 100 parts, for a normal mission to (fail) land on the Mun. In past patches, using a 100+ parts vehicle would drop me to the 20s fps. Keep in mind that recording eats about 3-4 fps from my general framerate. Also wanted to check how many bugs I would find on such a trivial mission, and so far only got one (added the 4 solar panels to AG1, only 2 of them deployed, the other 2 were unresponsive). For performance reference sake, my PC specs are: AMD Ryzen 5 5600 Sapphire RX 6700XT 16Gb DDR4 3200 SSD Install Just to add a bit of contrast, this is a comparison I made back in the release of 1.0.1.0., comparing the Early Access release build performance with 1.0.1.0. (Graphics were on Medium, clouds were on Low, same PC) Even if it looks like Intercept is taking their time, 1.0.5.0. gave me some hope they can pull it out. Please, lets let them cook.

Nice

Since some of the members of the KSP team are reading this... could we get the small showcase video Nate played on stage uploaded to YouTube please?

I'm kinda impressed that this issue was brought up by a community member rather than the dev team itself, considering the issue would show itself by the time KSP2 wouldn't open up anymore due to Win Registry becoming bloated. How come no one at QA or other departments never stumbled upon it before? Not trying to sound mean, just genuine curiosity, since I guess they are the people that must play KSP2 the most at this current moment in time Good job regardless on pushing the fix asap!

For some reason TUFX HDR isn't doing it for me, the blue artifacts are still there

"You’re also probably not going interstellar on methalox" Nertea you should know us better. Interstellar on decouplers only is just a matter of time.

Give us Autostrut back. Period. I can't believe I'm actually reading that.

Hi Nate. Hope your day is going well. Two straightforward questions: 1) It is cool that we can press 'F2' and take HUD-less screenshots, but given that it's the most basic way of taking screenshots, and that many of us players enjoy taking the best pictures possible of our crafts: Does KSP2 plan to implement a fully fleshed Camera Mode in which we can change settings such as Focal Lenght, DoF, Focus, Tilt, Filters and most of the other cool options that modern games nowadays implement in their Camera Modes? 2) Does Intercept consider the future implementation of upscaling techniques such as AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution and/or NVIDIA's DLSS?

I want them to work as I fancy. I like to pitch with them. It's KSP after all. Problem is, I can't just invert it, because roll, which works fine, gets inverted too, and completely messes up controls even more...

What could be causing this? Moving your wings along the longitudinal axis will change how your wings Pitch Up/Down, no matter what you tell the vehicle to do...