Vl3d

Oh right, the good ol' RC-001S... 2 MB of memory, not enough for science. I remember. Thanks!

Can someone explain this probe core to me? Is it an OKTO2 with a conical adapter above it for the parachute? It's not very octagonal..

Yeah, KSP players are very demanding... I believe in the game and the devs. I'm sure all the graphics systems will come online until EA launch.

Still needs misty wind and atmospheric light scattering effects and a few true volumetric cloud layers.

Increase the surface details, add more ground scatter, misty wind and atmospheric light scattering effects, a few true volumetric cloud layers, the parachute landing on the ground, burn marks on the heatshield... yeah that would make for a really nice looking EA game. It's getting there.

I found the volumetric cloud!

100%, will improve I'm sure.

Pure eye candy. Would have liked to see the entry effects and the descent. Parachute is very cool! Parts look gorgeous. Not a lot of atmospheric or ground scatter. The sky's purple incidental light on the parts though.. so good.

Oh and interstellar travel is easy?

That's probably what people said about interstellar travel before someone made a mod for it. From what I gather most KSP players have not even visited other planets. So does that mean that KSP is just a game about flying on or around Kerbin? Why is it so difficult to imagine massive colonies that can start terraforming mega-projects (especially in multiplayer)? Why can't the planets atmosphere and biome be dynamic in the future?

Considering how many comments are along the lines of "KSP doesn't need graphics we can play it in the Terminal", I don't think it's a "stupid" conversation at all. Some of us want a visually impressive and modern game that's immersive for exploration. I personally really want to experience quality alien weather. What's "stupid" about that?

No one has showed you details about the game mechanics. We only get screenshots. So that's what we talk about.

Most of the game should already be built. This is not a closed-beta bug hunt. And if you don't want good graphics, why are you in this thread?

Amen!

Totally forgot about that. Devs sure (still) know how to troll us. I just don't know what to expect from the game anymore.

https://blog.unity.com/technology/experience-true-volumetric-clouds-with-hdrp-unity-20212

@t_v Do you care to share your opinion? True volumetric clouds look like this. And also look at that terrain and lighting quality!

I agree with you that gameplay, UI, IVA are all very important. But I doubt I'm the only person who likes to fly through the clouds at golden hour and visits other celestial bodies mainly to find a tall mountain and watch the alien sunset and sunrise. Why explore other planets if you can't be immersed in the breathtaking surroundings? If you can't experience what the weather is like?

This cloud is volumetric, not height map based. You can tell because the fluff is 3d instead of just a 2d surface (it has fluff over fluff). It does not have the limitation of bijective surface functions that have a single Y value for every X, Z.

I agree with you, but I don't like that wanting good visuals is frowned upon. Did you understand my point about the clouds being just a height map and not truly volumetric? Ashes of Creation on Unreal 5 is actually starting to get close to looking that cinematic. But the KSP2 trailer is a more reasonable benchmark. Some screenshots from the launch pad actually look very close to the quality seen during the rocket launch in the trailer.

I really want to start a conversation with players that have the rigs to max out the graphics and also want very high quality visuals. What do you want to see in the game from a graphics standpoint? Are you satisfied with what was shown up to this point? I think the parts currently look good, the planets look good in the show and tell videos. I'm hoping to see very nice weather visuals. Can we hope for Ray Tracing? Can we hope for good looking dynamic terrain surface (like tracks in dust and mud and snow)? God Rays? Massive scatter? True volumetric clouds (also on alien worlds)? What else should we have for maximum immersion and visual pleasure? These demo videos show what's possible in Unity.

I will avoid having a conversation on this and other similar topics about visuals with anyone not planning on playing KSP2 on Ultra graphics settings. Please play the game the way you want. I consider this thread to be for people who actually care about visual fidelity.

Yes, it's a 4 year old cinematic. And the parts look just as good in the game as in the cinematic. It's not a stretch to say that in 2-3-4 years the whole game will look as good and detailed.

Not the same type of cloud. Not the same type of implementation. True Unity volumetric clouds seem to be missing. Clearly what we're seeing are the minimum graphical settings clouds (height map clouds). They might add other types of clouds (volumetric objects) for higher specs settings.

I think the best looking clouds we've seen lately, that are an example of different artistic directions, are these. These are the clouds from the show & tell video. And these are the clouds from the trailer (which I consider the true benchmark). I can further contribute these comparison images to the discussion (KSP1 EVE Redux volumetric clouds and KSP2 screenshots). And these are just some photos I took of real life clouds. My main critique of the clouds in the KSP2 screenshots is that they look like a single continuous white terrain / height map layer with transparency gradient as a function of height. That's why the look like mountains seen from above and why they're so whispy and see-through around the edges. They are not well defined like real clouds are. I think they are not true Unity volumetric clouds, but a custom implementation. Of course everyone has their own preferences. But the takeaway is that weather visuals (not only clouds) are very important for immersion and should not be missing from the game (at least in the future).