If Ksp transferred to another game engine...........

[ouion]

Then what happens

Its going to be interesting and silly?

So what do you guys think if hypothetical ksp transferred to another engine.

[Varsi]

Then what happens

Its going to be interesting and silly?

So what do you guys think if hypothetical ksp transferred to another engine.

You could make it quite pretty with the cryengine at least

[Gkirmathal]

A few days ago someone on a FB KSP group, flooded his post with numerous Space Engine screenshots. My only thought was: omg, if only KSP.....

So I think we will see, sooner than later, a competition to KSP rather than them switching engines

[AbhChallenger]

Obviously this is just hypothetical. However I am thinking Source 2?

[marce]

Breaking all mods? Nah, let's stick with Unity for KSP. An engine switch this far into a project is close to impossible anyway.

However, for KSP 2 (I'm looking at you SQUAD ) I won't mind the newer mono stack of UE4, but I'm not into game engines at all so consider my opinion in this matter as naive at best.

[Randazzo]

Hypothetically, if KSP switched to engine X...

There would be a glut of hypothetical forum posts declaring that engine Y would have been the better choice.

[Barefoot Friar]

Along with a ton of former engine change advocates saying that U4 wasn't so bad after all.

[Caelib]

Then it wouldn't be KSP!

[Albert VDS]

Changing games engines isn't like swapping car engines, the latter being relatively easy.

If a game engine gives compatibility with an other engine, say Source being compatible with Goldsrc*, then it's not a huge problem.

If they are 2 different engines then there are a lot of things that need to be changed, converted or even new code written for it.

It's more like a sticking plane parts to an existing car, it wont fly without a lot of work.

*Half-Life 1 mods still need work to get it functioning on Source.

[thadisjones]

"Hey, we like how KSP has a good approximation of conservation of energy but we feel that the third dimension is just too many dimensions… we're porting to the Escape Velocity engine…"

[NovaSilisko]

Then what happens

Nothing.

Because it won't happen.

[Guest]

So what do you guys think if hypothetical ksp transferred to another engine.

Not much would really change unless Squad changed how the underlying code does its things. Well, maybe we'd have less floating point errors, but Kerbin's ocean is still a world being rendered inside another world and the code is still loading every single asset into memory. Another game engine wouldn't change that.

Unity is perfectly fine for what it does, Squad just needs to use it better. Hopefully Unity 5 will give them the opportunity to refactor how certain things are done.

[r_rolo1]

Not much would really change unless Squad changed how the underlying code does its things. Well, maybe we'd have less floating point errors, but Kerbin's ocean is still a world being rendered inside another world and the code is still loading every single asset into memory. Another game engine wouldn't change that.

Unity is perfectly fine for what it does, Squad just needs to use it better. Hopefully Unity 5 will give them the opportunity to refactor how certain things are done.

True enough, but there are things that could actually get better with other engine : we could have planets with axial tilt or surfaces that aren't as slippery as a icy road ( or even gravity behaving in mountains ). It might not be enough of a reason to change engine by itself, though

[katateochi]

There was that long awaited game (that I can't even bear to mention by name) that switched engines several times during development, wasted ridiculous amounts of money and took around 15 years to complete (and then was an utter fail, at least in my mind anyway).

Switching engine is generally a terrible thing to do.

[Superfluous J]

There was that long awaited game (that I can't even bear to mention by name) that switched engines several times during development, wasted ridiculous amounts of money and took around 15 years to complete (and then was an utter fail, at least in my mind anyway).

Yeah but when it finally came out it was worth the wait...

Anyway, switching engines is a terrible idea for all the reasons said in this thread. KSP2 (if it ever happens) can pick a new engine and hopefully start from the ground up with the devs knowing all the problems they encountered this time.

[r_rolo1]

There was that long awaited game (that I can't even bear to mention by name) that switched engines several times during development, wasted ridiculous amounts of money and took around 15 years to complete (and then was an utter fail, at least in my mind anyway).

Daikatana or Duke Nukem Forever ? Pick your poison

Switching engine is generally a terrible thing to do.

True. That is Game design 101 : NEVER change game engine halfway production. There is a 0% chance of that actually being overall beneficial

Edited March 6, 2015 by r_rolo1

[dryer_lint]

Well, first you would go to the VAB and load up your KSP craft. Then you would pull the engine off the bottom, delete it, and add a new one from the parts list. Simple!

Which engine do you guys think we should use? The Mainsail isn't bad, but maybe we could use SRBs...

okay I'll shut up now

[comham]

Hypothetically, if KSP switched to engine X...

There would be a glut of hypothetical forum posts declaring that engine Y would have been the better choice.

nailed it

[ouion]

imagine what ksp would look like if it switch to another engine.

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

imagine what ksp would look like if it switch to another engine.

It would look the exact same

Unity can do what UE4 does, you know

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

If only.

[mattinoz]

Curious....

What would be different or needs to unbroken with a different engine?

I assume most of the graphic style is a choice by the designers.

Including that retro 80's bad font that all games seem to love.

(seriously i'm surprised they haven't gone as far as untrue decenders).

Multi-tasking I can see how that would be very useful to Kerbals then again if they get that with Unity 5 surely that is a small leap (KSP 1.5 sized leap) than a different engine altogether.

For all the talk of new engine I always wonder....

What problem do you want it solve?

What opportunities do you want it make?

[TYRT]

It will take months, unnecessary imo.

[Albert VDS]

True enough, but there are things that could actually get better with other engine : we could have planets with axial tilt or surfaces that aren't as slippery as a icy road ( or even gravity behaving in mountains ). It might not be enough of a reason to change engine by itself, though

You can have those things without changing engines.

[EladDv]

True enough, but there are things that could actually get better with other engine : we could have planets with axial tilt or surfaces that aren't as slippery as a icy road ( or even gravity behaving in mountains ). It might not be enough of a reason to change engine by itself, though

Axial tilt is possible within unity it just complicates stuff in the code and surface behaviour and physics materials are possible to be inserted within the editor-it's just a whole lot of work and tweaking(not to mention some wont like it...) now unity 5.0 is a major leap forwards but unless we get physics optimisations and multithreaded physics we have no advantage for moving to UE4 (not to mention the horrible mod support which will render KSP useless in many peoples eyes) and CryEngine is build for FPS games from it's core so KSP wont benefit or even would suffer from it