Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'opinion'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP2 Dev Updates
    • KSP2 Discussion
    • KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission Ideas
    • The KSP2 Spacecraft Exchange
    • Mission Reports
    • KSP2 Prelaunch Archive
  • Kerbal Space Program 2 Gameplay & Technical Support
    • KSP2 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • KSP2 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • KSP2 Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
  • Kerbal Space Program 2 Mods
    • KSP2 Mod Discussions
    • KSP2 Mod Releases
    • KSP2 Mod Development
  • Kerbal Space Program 1
    • KSP1 The Daily Kerbal
    • KSP1 Discussion
    • KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas
    • KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP1 Mission Reports
    • KSP1 Gameplay and Technical Support
    • KSP1 Mods
    • KSP1 Expansions
  • Community
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
    • KSP Fan Works
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website


There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



About me



Found 11 results

  1. Lets see what the community has to say, with these three questions: Are you happy with KSP 2 so far? (from release to current version) Are you excited and hopeful for the future of KSP 2 and its upcoming planned updates? When the game was first released, what was your opinion of the game? (multiple choice) Not a debate and there is no right or wrong answer(s) I like polls
  2. I'm interested to see what the community thinks the timeframe will be for the future of KSP 2 and its updates There is no wrong answer! (unless you're a time traveller)
  3. So there is bugs, yea we expected some. but looking at the most common bugs raises concerns that they need to go "back to formula" see what outers think is simply a annoyance bug points to much larger issues. and there are a few "gotcha's" First off is simply user interface, how key and button input is handled. but also how it is processed. an example is when writing a ship's name, M key takes you to a map view. this shows inputs are global instead of mode specific and/or the mode swapping is not handled properly. then there is the lack of response from interface when crafts of extreme loads are being launched, lets say you get time to pass once every 10 seconds, pressing esc you wait up to 10 seconds to see map. this is first a ticking issue, shows the menu is not calculated independently and have to wait for the world render cycle to complete before it is acted upon. the menu us a slave function to rendering. this should not be so. next there is time itself. time should pass once every second, no lag or load should reduce that. any function should be a slave of time and use "time passed since last action" as part of its calculations. instead of relying on each action's output to calculate the next, formula's should allow passing of any amount of time and be able to adapt to those. an example is rotating to a position over time, instead of needing to take action at every passing unit of time, a simple formula can be used to see how far it would be towards its goal giving this amount of time passed. so if a craft would need 8 seconds to rotate from prograde to retro, and you are on 10x speed, then simply assume that in the passing of 10 seconds it made the rotation and set it as such, and deduct the propellant it would have used for that. simple this will fix rotation and acceleration not functioning over time warp of any kind. then as for physics, this should be simplified where you can pre-calculate it take the assembled craft in its current state, then do a linetrace from it from every direction, get the relevant angle of the hit and assign a value to it. do an additive overlay for control surfaces and other moving parts. now simplify it into center of drag, and center of mass use this along with speed to calculate everything else needed, bit you now get to treat it as a single part and not 100's of parts, and only needs to recalculate if the assembly changes. you can further pre-calculate each part and in the final calculation use those as an is visible basis. you're welcome. the current setup looks to prioritize visual priority of execution should be: 1 - time 2 - interface input and response 3 - control input and response 4 - vehicle movement 5 - actual rendering, here going LOD or even complete basic Low poly will be acceptable as long as time keeps passing, input responding and actions happening reliably. next assembly again looks like rendering is prioritized. it looks like everything is as movable and lighting is dynamic, this is wrong and even bad for performance. treat every placed object as static, use directional light and pre-bake light as much as possible, then calculate dynamic shadows for the single combined model. also VAB should have better uniform lighting with less shadows, it's a rocket factory after all so can assume its getting at least 4x light from each side and from on top, this makes baking light easier. as for placement sockets, sure snapping to anything is a function now, but how about if we mid-mouse-button select something to then prioritize snapping to the object that we are focusing our view on? also you dont have to make an entire assembly as moveable to attach it, simply rendering a 2d version of it for the current view and using a depth offset, use that as a card for the moveable part, and hide the static once you render the card, then you dont even need movables. there is also collision issues with many parts, the simple solution is to do a visual interrace and get tangent at location, use that instead of collision, so a surface mount item will mount to the visual outer surface. these are just a few bug fixes and performance booster i would have looked at. again this is speculative and only the opinion of a play test, and I have no actual knowledge of how the code actually functions
  4. In my opinion, KSP2 was indeed overly optimistic with the hardware requirements. But remember: This is the first public version of the game - if a game is released in early access, people should lower their expectations to avoid what happened in the last few days. KSP2 Early Access was very overhyped, but the true launch will hopefully be not. People expect early access like it's the full game... but it's not even close. Early Access exists to find bugs and give feedback to the devs, the whole community having access to the game is not really the goal right now. Maybe in the next updates the game will have the minimum requirements lowered to the minimum. By the way, KSP2 for now has less content than KSP1 (remember there are no robotic parts) and it actually fries your PC so I don't recommend buying until at least the third update (Interstellar Travel) based on the roadmap. Summary: If you expected Early Access to be an amazing, fully-featured game, you are wrong. kthxbye
  5. So, what is your favorite ksp challenge that you have done (if any)? One of my favorites would be the Kerpollo Science Career in 9 Parts Challenge because of how it was an interesting idea for a challenge and I like doing challenges. What about you?
  6. Yesterday, i launched a scientific unmanned mission to Gilly. The mission was a sucess, and i transmitted to Kerbin science of the space over Gilly and of all of the (only) 3 biomes of that small moon. After the end of the mission, i started to think one thing: I started to think if Gilly was made propositally by the devs to make a perfect contrast with Eve. I started to think that after i see the caracteristics of Eve and Gilly. Eve is really big (is the biggest rocky planet of the game). And Gilly is really small (is the smallest body of the game, with the exception of the asteroids). Eve is the planet with the biggest gravity in the game (1.7 G). And Gilly is the body with the smallest gravity in the game (0.005 G) The SOI of Eve is big (85,109 km), but the SOI of Gilly is very very small (126 km). And the last thing: Eve have a big and thick atmosphere, and Gilly dont have nothing (obviously because of his size). So, Gilly was made to make a contrast with Eve? Let your opinion here.
  7. PLEASE READ! Do people prefer their ships painted (like Da Vinci's Combat Kit) or stock parts and colors? This is for reference when sharing craft links in this Forum.
  8. PLEASE DISREGARD, WRONG THREAD! Do people prefer their ships painted (like Da Vinci's Combat Kit) or stock parts and colors? This is for reference when sharing craft links in this Forum.
  9. I'm wanting to do an alternate 1.3 install with new mods to freshen the gameplay. I'm trying to get through the "stock" career because I barely go interplanetary before I lose interest, but I also want to start playing with new mods. Right now, I have a couple of mods I really want to try out. One is Kerbalism, and the other is The Gallileo Planet Pack. I also want to add KSP Interstellar Extended and other parts mods. So, should I go with a Kerbalism-focused install around the stock Kerbin system, or go with a new planetary system with a few realism mods added for challenge? With either choice, I might make a thread in Fan Works since career modes turn into their own exciting stories. Timely feedback would be very appreciated, including recommendations for mods or other mod sets, or any facts like if Gallileo's Planet Pack can run with Kerbalism or not. EDIT: Discovered GPP does support Kerbalism. This might make my choice simpler.
  10. After playing Career mode a lot with Quicksave/Quickload enabled, I decided to start from scratch without Quicksave/Quickload. What a change! In my experience, Quicksaving/loading makes you lazy; it makes the game more a trial/error experience than fully trying to account all the variables. And it also makes losing a Kerbal something much more emotional... like when I killed Jebediah in one of my first sub-orbital flights. What do you think? Have you given it a try this way?
  11. In advance, I apologize if you can't have that sort of stuff here.
  • Create New...