steve_v

1.0.x: Temperature gauge memory leaks, random spontaneous overheating, ridiculous parachute bugs, constantly changing aero model. Even lousier performance than alpha versions. Big letdown from 0.90. 1.1.x Improved performance, rendered irrelevant by constant crashing on GNU/Linux. Totally borked wheels. Pretty much didn't play 1.1.x at all. 1.2.x Window resizing madness, crashing of several common window managers. CTD if pulseaudio not installed, though not mentioned in system requirements. (also on GNU/Linux), terrain seams. Despite this, the only post-beta release worthy of the name, IMO. As always, I'm hoping for a 1.3 that contains no serious bugs, and doesn't require 4 hotfixes to earn the label "release". With history as my guide, I am not optimistic. C'mon QA, prove me wrong.

Right now you really don't want the PS4 port, it's a shambles and will likely eat your saves. There are promises of new PS4 & XBONE ports... But then there have been promises for over half a year now. Maybe when SQUAD has a PS4 version that works properly it'll be available outside 'murica too. Me, I'm not optimistic. But it's a nice wish.

Much agree, hence the suggestion that it be worked into a(n existing) mod... Supporting (at least 3, to be fair) mobile apps is not something that I'd see as a priority, now or ever TBH. And besides, this "app for everything" craze annoys me - if it can be done well in a web-browser, do it in a web-browser.

And you get CRC into the bargain. If one was cunning, the details that the load game menu needs could even be rolled into a header in the file, and we could dispense with this ".loadmeta" bandaid. The standard zip format "extra" or "comment" header fields would do nicely. Indeed. This is actually better, and would have the same effect for (auto)named quicksaves as proper alphanumeric sorting. Then again, IMO the best solution of all would be a "sort by" selection in the load dialog, with both options available... The way it works now is pretty much the worst sorting I can think of, and is almost certainly some kind of default that nobody bothered to change.

I'd say an in-game plugin that serves up a webpage would be a better plan, it'd work on all platforms and be far less work than an "app". Adding some features to Telemachus might be a good place to start.

I never suggested that it was a big problem, rather my point is: It's such a trivial thing to implement, why wouldn't you do it?

The default naming scheme when using Mod+F5 encounters this, as does any custom naming that uses 2 digits. Sure, I could just work around it with different names, but that's a bunch of extraneous typing, and this is a trivial thing to implement in-game. Perhaps so, but again, it's trivial to implement. And while HDD sizes are increasing, SSDs are still expensive per-megabyte, and a career playthrough (if you don't delete saves) can easily hit 2GB+. That's enough for another copy of KSP or two. I still have my Quantum ProDrive ELS 40 MB. And it still works perfectly, despite being used as a paperweight (literally) all those years.

Can't say I've seen that particular button (but then I haven't uses KK in a long while), but from your description it would be better labelled "Kraken bait". On a more serious note, the KK thread can be found here. I'm not sure what the state of the "continuation" of the project is, but if anyone knows what's going on, that's probably the place to ask. Also, you may want to upload your logs somewhere, and post a link - that's where any relevant debugging info will be.

Short and sweet, I here suggest two falling-off-a-log easy improvements to the save game system that I haven't seen suggested before. (this seems odd, but I really haven't). #1 Natural sorting for save games in the load dialog, currently numbered quicksaves are presented as e.g 17,18,19,2,20...29,3,30 etc. this is pretty irritating when you have many saves. #2 Save game compression: My saves are around 7MB each, and this adds up very quickly. Basic gzip compression brings this down to a far more reasonable 607KB per file. Compression / decompression overhead should be minimal on a modern system (takes 83 & 24ms respectively on my machine) and have no impact on game performance if done in a separate thread. Handy, yes? Easy too?

Hmm, odd that i have never tried that. Suspect old habits from before re-root tool was a thing. Thanks.

Good, rockets (and electricians) are like cats, they hate getting wet. *resists temptation of lewd innuendo* I take it that payload is a subassembly? If so, before you save the subassembly you must make the part you want to attach it by (the octo girder I assume) the root part, then when you load the subassembly it will have an attachment node there. As for zoom: Scrollwheel or Numpad +/- on any platform, IIRC. If you have one of those strange Mac rodents with a totally inadequate number of buttons, you should probably get a better one. Macs are weird.

I vote Yes. Procedural parts already work well where mods have provided them. Any procedural parts will reduce part count, and anything that saves memory or improves the performance of the lousy physics engine is a win. As well as that, procedural tanks reduce the horrid "stack of barrels" aesthetic, and procedural wings make aircraft look like aircraft, without ugly Z-fighting where wings are clipped to make clean lines. That said, I'd not want all parts to be procedural, personally I'd say tanks, structural components and wings for sure, and possibly a few other bits like batteries (and please, please integrate realchutes). I don't see any advantage to procedural engines, solar panels, radiators, etc. though, that's just removing the need to make design decisions. Besides, scaling parts with detailed structure will look hell-ugly.

Well, my 386 was pretty old when I got it... But yeah, you're probably prehistoric. The question is: Which hurt more, hitting the floor or having to get those punchcards back in order? That's gotta sting. Effort put men on the moon, among other things.

Works fine, until you try doing math reliant on that timing... Ahh, runtime error 200, I remember you well. This kind of thing was actually pretty common, to the point that there was software (moslow?) that existed only to burn CPU cycles, so those old apps wouldn't divide by zero.

Lucky you . First machine when I was 13 IIRC. 386 from hand-me-down bits. Hercules mono display & 4MB RAM. Blasphemy! Borland Pascal is where it's at. The first thing I was told when I received that PC (in a beer crate) was "Don't learn BASIC, it'll teach you bad habits", here, have some books. Sounds familiar, though in my case there were no arduinos to be had, so "own devices" led to somewhat more nefarious pursuits...

No, I am trying to tell you that game development is hard work, requiring a significant investment in time and/or money. Apparently you don't want to hear this. As you have missed the basic message "Hire some coders, or lean to code yourself" has clearly been missed, I find that hard to believe.

On "you" I have insufficient data to comment. But your attitude to this task clearly is broken if you expect to make a game without learning how to make a game... Sharing your plan has been suggested, and you said "NDA". Several engines have already been suggested, but you haven't asked for any information on any of them. Places to get engine-specific advice have been suggested, and you simply ignored it. Learning a programming language has been suggested, yet all you have to say on that is "too hard". Pick a game engine, find out what scripting language it uses, learn that, then you can rough out a prototype. Show people that prototype and you might just get some on board. At the very least show them a detailed plan, without this NDA BS. If you're not willing to share your plans, and you're not willing to make a start yourself, why even ask in the first place? It really doesn't sound like you are serious about this.

I'll second that, from what I've seen UE4 is pretty nice to work with. Though I haven't done much more than fiddle with it so far...

Overview of this thread: Help me make a game. What have you got so far? An Idea. No code? No details? No. You'll need to write some code. Can't. So learn. Too hard. Much like the last one.

It's this "most of all" bit: IMO, bugfixes and performance come first. Quality over quantity.

Indeed, I fail every day. What I don't do is complain about it. Right now, this isn't a discussion, nor is it a 'roast'... What it's rapidly turning into is a sob-story, because no matter the answers you put everything in the most negative light possible. Any sugestion is met with "can't". You want discussion or consolation? I regret getting involved in this misery already, and as such, I'm out. When you're ready to change "can't" to "try", and "do it for me" to "how do I", let me know.

Opinions are free, so are ideas. If you want it to be worth something, you have to make it into something tangible. Knowledge is readily available: There are zillions of books on computer programming, pick one and knuckle down. If you want recommendations on a good one, ask. Advice is also readily available. Experience, on the other hand, is not something that is handed to you - you must earn it by doing. If at first you fail... there's some experience.

In fairness, the console port did turn out to be a disaster, as foretold. I'll just sharpen my pitchfork for the MLP war...

If it's not worth it to you, why would it be to anyone else? First, do. Then you'll know if it was worth it. Step one is learning a programming language. So, what have you created? I'm not seeing much here.... I'd be willing to help out with a game, but I see no game. Just a vague "idea", and one you're apparently not willing to work on realising yourself.

Because "it" has no substance to work on. The "idea" is something like 1% of the work to make a viable game. If you want to make a game on zero budget, as Shpaget said, you will have to learn to code it yourself. This is not a trivial task, which is why it's extremely unlikely anyone will do it for you for free. Everyone needs to eat, good games take years to develop. Years working for free = starvation. The same way as everyone else, learn. If you want to make a game, you will need to learn the skills required. There are no shortcuts.