radonek
-
Posts
662 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by radonek
-
-
5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
In notation. It follows the assembler abstractions very closely.
... which is why it is still relevant and useful.
-
That particular piece is based on years of personal experience. I could speculate a lot about what it really was - devs angry about this or that, T2 showing their famously gentle hand in contract terms, Squad wanting some key personel, T2 being cheap... I can speculate a lot and I quite intentionaly did not. It does not really matter. Letting go of almost complete development team at once is Incredibly Bad Idea under any imaginable circumstances short of zombie apocalypse :-) I don't know of single pm who would not move heaven and earth to avoid that. Even in company mergers people are laid out in waves to allow for training and knowledge transfer, and it's not like those are known for being painless.
So, I don't know, and don't care what led to that decision, but it was stupid decision. It's like firing a ship crew or factory workers and hiring new complement to learn the ropes on their own. Based on my experience (and yes, THIS is a speculation), it cost T2 several months of development time, on top of all the hassle with takover.
-
45 minutes ago, wumpus said:
I think the biggest reason for the "old guard" leaving is that the game (meaning the gameplay, localization is pretty critical as well) is more or less finished.
I that case they would trickle out slowly. Even when evacuating sinking ship kind of project, people tend to move out one by one, whenever their individual situation allows them to. No, this was, in one way or other, result of deliberate managerial decision that speaks of incredible amount of incompetency.
-
59 minutes ago, PunkyFickle said:
That is quite a twist. What were the reasons to that?
Hard to tell, people who know ain't telling. But we can speculate. It begun when Harvester left us. Yes, KSP father left the scene and I find it kinda sad that nobody found it worth mentioning in their "short histories". :-( I think we can now safely say that he did not want to be part of what was coming. Even if it was to be ordinary buyout. Which it definitely was not, because next (within few months I think) came Grand Developer Massacre. That was when I knew things are going downhill - no matter the reason (we did not know then), loosing almost whole team like that is among worst things that can happen to a software project. At the same tame, Squad presence on forums was taken over by nice people who, on closer inspection, did not have anything to say. That was T2 marketing taking over. Actual takeover announcement came much later.
So my take is that Squad wanted to go back to their usual business, Harvester did not like it and quit, and KSP got sold in worst possible way - Squad kept developers and T2 got the source code. Hence the lul in development (and that would be much worse if T2 did not manage to hire some mod devs who obvisouly knew a thing about the code and could pick up the pace).
-
6 hours ago, MaverickSawyer said:
Clearly you've not read other EULAs before... They're all pretty draconian. Also, this discussion has been had repeatedly, and as of yet, Take Two hasn't done anything.
Relax, quit panicking over nothing, and keep playing. If you're worried about someone stealing or selling your personal data, while complaining about it online, I guarantee you it's too late... Big Brothers Facebook and Google did that years ago.
... and this is how privacy got eroded to this point in the first place. I feel sad.
-
Eve surface gravity is slightly higher then kerbin (1.7g) so I'd say that anything that works well for you on kerbin should be at least acceptable on Eve. Or attach a big fuel tank and fill it to make whole craft weigh1.7x as much.
-
On 12/22/2018 at 2:18 AM, 53miner53 said:
I don’t know, but I think a lot of the categories should have KSP winning the awards: game of the year, labor of love, best environment, and of course most fun with a machine. I may be a bit biased in this though... it’s the only game I play from steam, other than rocket league
Lets see... Game of the year? Totally, but not really elegible since 1.0. Labor of love? That was before Take2over. Best environment? If I really thought so, KSP would not be elegible since what, 0.19? And most fun with the machine? Yes, KSP could be kinda contentender here if kOS got integrated into stock with a side dish of 0x10c. But as far as The Machine is concerned, IMO nothing comes anywhere close to Factorio, not by far.
-
Could solar and cooling arrays be undeployed? That would reduce drag quite a bit.
-
Just you wait until you see price tag on top tier facility upgrades. I tried it several times, but always ended in boring grind.
-
Also, rigid attachement should add a mass to part.
-
22 minutes ago, MDZhB said:
This stuff never relied on any kind of technical ability in the first place, its not their business model. They don't bank their success on their ability to thwart countermeasures, they bank it on users not caring enough to know or do anything about it. When resistance is put up, I highly doubt they'll do anything serious about it. They aren't exactly the NSA.
I agree with everything else, but I think you are mistaken here. Gathering and analysis is already big business and those tend to defend themselves. No need to be NSA, outsmarting average Joe will do. I am no NSA either, yet I can think of several ways how to get data out more or less covertly.
30 minutes ago, MDZhB said:Is it Gentoo? Can it play KSP?
Yeah, it is. I'm just betting there is no source mage or scratcher around to call me out :-) As for KSP, there is a steam overlay (it just pulls required libraries) and Unity works fine. Even CKAN works, though I hate Mono with passion.
-
1 hour ago, ibanix said:
Considering that protest has already caused a number of publishers to remove this from their product? Yes.
Public outrage is not arms race. I was refering to idea that this issue can be resolved by purely technical means (e.g. firewall rules). Getting rid of particular nastyware only forces adversaries to find more covert ways to gather and exfiltrate their precious loot.
1 hour ago, gpisic said:This is such an effrontery from any game developer integrating these kind of spyware and it doesn't matter if you can opt out or not.
It matters to me. I was ok with original KSP stats collection precisely because Squad was open what is gathered and how to disable it.
-
1 hour ago, MDZhB said:
I agree with your sentiment, but the fact is that every product you buy is the product of the enemy.
I beg to differ. In my country, I can buy food without fear of poisons. I can buy electric appliance without fear of hazard or fire. I can buy a car without fear of safety. I don't see why should I need be afraid of software.
"Informed users" do about as much good with software as with aforemetionables - knowing risks is nice and all, but you can't expect ordinary people to police their own particular software any more then to chemically analyze toxicity of their food.
2 hours ago, MDZhB said:You are not helpless, if you take your computing into your own hands, and make your voice heard.
I run custom built system with handcrafted kernel. You can hardly take your computing into your hands more than that, unless you are RMS. Heck, I even possess very politically uncorrect penguin t-shirt :-) But if my granny should need that kind effort to use computer (or, as of late, phone or even a lightbulb) I would consider it a failure.
-
I for one do not want to live like checking everything I buy like product of adversarial entity. It's waste of everyone's time for zero productive result. In the end, it means computers are dangerous to use for everybody outside of small group of professionals, just because environment is too toxic for, you know, the people.
6 hours ago, steve_v said:Effort would be far better spent learning how to detect and thwart this activity than getting all outraged and shouting about it. Hell, you don't even need a hat.
Do you really believe you can run this kind of arms race against companies doing this for money?
-
1 hour ago, steve_v said:
Really, I don't get all this outrage.
Simple. Lots of people just now realizing that those hairy wild-eyed hacks with tinfoil hats were actually up to something all the time.
-
7 hours ago, Zeiss Ikon said:
If you aren't averse to using mods, you can get a lot of rendezvous help from a tiny mod called Better Burn Time.
Actually, you don't need that. You just put maneuver node at rendezvous point and fiddle with it until you see same orbit as target vehicle. There, you just planned a speed-matching burn. A bit rough, but good enough to get good idea of burn time, delta-v, and target vector. I'd still do it by retro marker marker, but I come in prepared.
-
36 minutes ago, Ace in Space said:
If so, why are you protesting this one specifically?
Because KSP did not come with it, and it was one of reasons why I bought it. Because it essentially makes for a "bait-and-switch" scenario, which is probably illegal in every law framework in existence.
-
9 hours ago, Spaceception said:
I read in one of the comments that the mirror would heat up if it didn't have perfect reflectivity too. I'm sure that's true, but it wouldn't be instant, so they would probably let it get to a certain threshold before harnessing the captured energy, right?
Well, it's very efficient process, so it would melt your generic mirror prety fast. But that is just engineering problem, and I'm sure anyone with technology to fool around black hole also knows a trick or two with optics.
-
Yes, it's definitely plausible. There is also second kind of singularity bomb - black holes evaporate, losing mass and releasing it as energy. It's a very slow process at stellar-sized black holes, but it gets faster as black hole gets smaller, exponentially. Terminal phase is so fast it makes for a huge explosion.
-
4 hours ago, LoSBoL said:
The EULA isn't important, Take 2's privacy policy however is. And everybody jumping the EULA bandwagon neglects reading the privacy policy. There you can find as to how, and why certain information is gathered, and what's it used for. Reading that sheds light on the EULA and then the EULA starts making sense.
Here's a link to Take 2's privacy policy.
Yeah, reading that show clearly why are people so angry. Such blatant statement of total disregard of privacy is hardly going to win positive reaction. From anyone who took time to read it anyway.
-
I am not happy about T2 fiasco either, but copying pre-made review? Man, people nowadays are lazy to even get angry properly…
-
where did you install and what is in your $PATH?
ed: sorry, its %PATH% on windows
-
Fullscreen or windowed? Have similar problem in windowed mode, switching from maximized state and back fixes it.
-
I also do this all the time, but it need a bit more infrastructure and planning to use effectively.
- As mentioned, early landers are bound to get obsolete. So do not bother with reuasble desing for few early landfalls. Instead, use them to gather less accessible science (from poles, will come to that).
- Take your time with design. If it's to be reused, it worth to take time perfecting stability, CoM alignment, RCS placement… IMO key part here is the engine - reusing also gives you chance to perfect your landing technique, and decent TWR is key to that.
- Go wide. Wide base is great for lander stability, but people tend to avoid it because it's harder to pull up from kerbin. However, if you are after reuse, it is definitely worth it to invest into it, event if it means tricky and inefficient launch.
- Once you can build a reasonably good lander, put up support station with the lab, bunks and fuel at low orbit. And because you taken care of poles already, you can place it at equatorial orbit to make rendezvous easier. Have it at decent height so that phasing from low parking orbit does not take forewer and you can use higher warps. About 30km worked well for me at Mun.
- Lab is not strictly needed if you have scientist in crew to reset experiments, but I have it anyway.
- Do not go overboard with spare fuel - hauling in more is easier then flying in modules. Be generous with docking ports - in long term, mun/minmus station needs one for fuel tanker, one for crew rotation vehicle, at least two spares for future expansion and of course something for the lander. Be careful where you put them, they will see a lot of traffic, so putting them close to delicate equipment is not a good idea.
- Have a relay antena or pilot on station. If you are quick, descent and most of ascent can be made with direct visibility to station. This may not help much routing the connection, but it can help a lot with early low-power antenas.
- I also find it useful to have one tiny fuel tank for precise dosage when transfering small ammounts of fuel, ie. to deorbit useless parts.
- Deploying a new lander is a chance to visit places… add some additional drop tanks to visit biomes that require larger inclination changes.
- Obviously, you will need a tanker ship to top up fuel. It begs to do this as carefuly as others, but in my experience is not worth it. With all precious science invested into lander, you will want to upgrade it's design anyway.
- While it's perfectly reasonable to offload surplus fuel prior to departure, resist temptation to combine the crew rotation vehicle with full-blown tanker.
Yes, space stations have other uses then just contract targets. This way, you can easily harvest a lot of science, train a crew and practice rendezvous/docking in stable scenario. Downside is that it moves from more complicated navigation (direct polar missions) to simpler ones (ascent to equatorial orbit).
Should the reskin of the mk1 lander can have a redesign to the lk lander?
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
Why should I want to recreate failures of the past? Hell, why should I want to recreate past successes? Making my own mistakes is what I love about KSP.