Cool concept, but broken implementation

[SymbolicFrank]

I love the premises of KSP. But if you have even a rudimentary notion of how it all should work, it becomes very frustrating, fast.

Fortunately, modders come to the rescue! Except, that most of the mods that fix important stuff are incompatible. FAR and MechJeb? Forget about it. Yes, I tried the compatibility plugin. And it's FAR from realistic in either case!

I tried to make it all work, and played for 287 hours (according to Steam). But in the end, it's a completely broken mess.

Yes, it could be salvaged, but it's unlikely that would happen while using Unity. So I won't hold my breath.

Too bad.

[itstimaifool]

What do you think is broken, specifically? What do you think doesn't work "how it should"?

(Not that I'm going to argue and try to tell you that you're wrong, it's your opinion and you're perfectly entitled to it. I'm just rather curious and your post is rather vague.)

[Linear]

FAR and mechjeb are completely compatible.

FAR is really as close to reality as you're going to get and a engine change isn't going to change that.

I believe in a much more sim-orientated of KSP, but it's a game. It's not going t be a perfect simulator, accept it -i've had to.

Also, 287 hours? Meh.

[celem]

Mechjeb can even handle rss/ro/far/dre combos which is how i usually play. you just gotta give it the right numbers. and/or learn kOS and write your own autopilot (or borrow a script from someone).

[regex]

Nice post.

ferram4 works pretty tirelessly to continually make FAR better and more realistic, and the same goes for Sarbian and MechJeb. The two mods are compatible, as anyone in the realism community will confirm. I don't use MJ but ENG and MJ share code on a regular basis which makes things awesome for people who like all styles of play.

If you want sim, get the full Realism Overhaul suite. They've even made a career mode package for it that I hear is pretty cool, even if it's not my thing.

[Scotius]

Sure - this game needs a lot of polish. It's buggy, it can be (very) unstable and modl just love to mess things up on their own. But...does it work? Heck, yes! KSP offers a lot of fun, adventure, breathtaking views and challenge. If you want, you can do almost anything here - i've seen boats, trains, flying aircraft carriers, racecars and mechs built and operated by dedicated players. Besides imagination there is not many limits in this game. So...what exactly is not working right in KSP in your opinion?

[Kerbart]

I love the premises of KSP. But if you have even a rudimentary notion of how it all should work, it becomes very frustrating, fast.

How should it work? Like Wing Commander? Or like Elite? Or maybe even Space Engineers?

For all we know, the reason the game is not up to your standards is because your standards might be inadequate. Or not. It's hard to tell.

[Gerandar]

it works fine for a game, for a sim its lacking but its not a pure simulation game. sounds like your expectations were too high.

[Alshain]

This is a troll thread, let it die. He cited no specific examples, and basically just said "this game sucks" so it's a troll.

[problemecium]

^ seconded.

[Asharad]

287 hours

You got your money's worth.

[Vanamonde]

Please do not post personal attacks against OP, even if you disagree with him/her.

[Rus-Evo]

I dont agree with OP. The version I bought two years ago was as good as a full game for me...... And then they kept making it better!

[Hotblack Desiato]

I run a combo of near, mechjeb and deadly reentry.

usually I use mechjeb just for small annoying routine flights (ore transportation or so) or for long ion burns (create the maneuver node manually and let mechjeb execute it and handle a 3 hour burn just fine).

with very big rockets (>400 tons ssto) mechjeb fails to bring them up. I solved it by doing the launch manually for the first 25km or so, and let mechjeb take over when the critical phase is over. and once I tried landing with mechjeb. when it realized that it can't make it to the spot I marked on the ground, it happily tried to turn the rocket and burn so it can reach its target. well, turning a rocket 90° (was a smaller SSTO, which was meant to be recovered) while being at 2000m/s and 30km height is a bad idea, with deadly reentry. the rocket burned to a crisp within seconds.

so, that's the situation with playing with several mods. the modders can't always foresee which combination of mods people will be using. and for mechjeb, there is another problem. the same mechjeb-script has to deal with a small probe and with some whackjob-monster. however, most modders are really nice and if you tell them nicely about your situation, they'll help you and try to fix an incompatibility between mods.

and weirdnesses between mods can happen all the time. for example there is this new and very nice mod new horizons, which alters the kerbol-system quite heavily. and that modder added heat to some planets. for some reason, the gas giant (sonnah) with three moons (mün, kerbin and a third large object) had an heat-sphere extending a bit beyond the mün-orbit. usually heat doesn't do anything. but with deadly reentry, things kept exploding due to overheating...

Edited April 14, 2015 by Hotblack Desiato

[Vanamonde]

Some posts have been removed from this thread. For the second time, folks, the fact that you disagree with with another forum member's opinion doesn't mean it's okay to insult him/her.

[SymbolicFrank]

FAR and mechjeb are completely compatible.

FAR is really as close to reality as you're going to get and a engine change isn't going to change that.

I believe in a much more sim-orientated of KSP, but it's a game. It's not going t be a perfect simulator, accept it -i've had to.

Also, 287 hours? Meh.

FAR is a cool concept. But let's talk about Realism Overhaul instead, as it's part of that.

I really dig RO. I want it. But there are problems.

For starters, I have a video card with 4GB of video memory. So, after installing RO, choosing the smallest DDS textures and using Active Texture Management, the game has 3.46 GB memory in use after startup. Which means, that each and every scene transition will crash the game. CTD. BAM.

Further, if I install FAR and MechJeb, MechJeb is completely broken. But, fortunately, there is the compatibility mod.

Only, after you install that, the camera tends to go on a wild goose chase most of the time. You won't see your rocket. It won't be on the screen.

And you want Realistic Reentry as well, of course. But that totally screws up PhysX on powered landings in an atmosphere.

Ok, so let's talk about FAR. FAR is NOT realistic. Even when you use Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, totally realistic designs tend to oscillate and disintegrate all the time. PhysX goes out of control again. Something happens, one parameter gets a positive feedback loop and everything gets completely out of control.

- - - Updated - - -

This is a troll thread, let it die. He cited no specific examples, and basically just said "this game sucks" so it's a troll.

Really.

I did post all of this to feram, who igmored it.

- - - Updated - - -

I dont agree with OP. The version I bought two years ago was as good as a full game for me...... And then they kept making it better!

I can totally see that.

The problem is, I know how it all should work. And it doesn't.

And it won't get fixed, as long as it runs in Unity32. Although I do know about some things that could be fixed. Like the FP32 rounding errors: use a different coordinate system and change the scale instead of the distance.

But whatever.

- - - Updated - - -

Some posts have been removed from this thread. For the second time, folks, the fact that you disagree with with another forum member's opinion doesn't mean it's okay to insult him/her.

Thanks.

[nekogod]

For starters, I have a video card with 4GB of video memory. So, after installing RO, choosing the smallest DDS textures and using Active Texture Management, the game has 3.46 GB memory in use after startup. Which means, that each and every scene transition will crash the game. CTD. BAM.

The memory in use is not video card memory it's RAM and is capped at 4GB by coincidence since KSP is 32bit on windows by default.

[Columbia]

This is a troll thread, let it die. He cited no specific examples, and basically just said "this game sucks" so it's a troll.

Well, that's a bit mean to him..

Maybe he just forgot to cite examples.

[BagelRabbit]

The problem is, I know how it all should work. And it doesn't.

I'm unsure what your background is. If you're an engineer who regularly works with real-life aircraft, then I can see how you would know how this stuff works. If you've read books on aircraft design, then you probably know what you're talking about. If you just claim you know your stuff without explaining why, then I'm sure you can see why some people would wonder how much you really know.

I would also like to see pictures and other data for some of the problems you're experiencing. Some of your problems may be caused by bugs or incompatibilities between mods, but it's difficult to tell without some more detailed information, screenshots, crash logs, and other valuable information. The KSP community is actually more willing to help and friendlier than this thread suggests. We just need to know exactly what's going on inside of your computer. If we don't have that information, there's no way to diagnose and solve the problems with your KSP experience.

I'm assuming that you want help with your problems, rather than just complaining about KSP, by the way, though I can understand why others would view this thread as a "KSP Sucks!" kind of thing. If you do just intend to complain without asking for help, then this thread should probably be locked, as you've made your point here and there's no reason to keep the thread going.

Hope you understand where I'm coming from.

Best,

Upsilon

[regex]

For starters, I have a video card with 4GB of video memory. So, after installing RO, choosing the smallest DDS textures and using Active Texture Management, the game has 3.46 GB memory in use after startup. Which means, that each and every scene transition will crash the game. CTD. BAM.

Huh, NathanKell doesn't seem to have any issues running it on x32 Windows. Maybe you're adding too many parts mods...

Further, if I install FAR and MechJeb, MechJeb is completely broken. But, fortunately, there is the compatibility mod.

Only, after you install that, the camera tends to go on a wild goose chase most of the time. You won't see your rocket. It won't be on the screen.

Did you put in a proper bug report and follow all the steps or did you just complain? Modders can't fix things when they don't have proper bug reports.

And you want Realistic Reentry as well, of course. But that totally screws up PhysX on powered landings in an atmosphere.

Not aware of that mod personally. Are you talking about Deadly Reentry? Never seen any physics-related issues with it myself.

Ok, so let's talk about FAR. FAR is NOT realistic. Even when you use Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, totally realistic designs tend to oscillate and disintegrate all the time. PhysX goes out of control again. Something happens, one parameter gets a positive feedback loop and everything gets completely out of control.

Interesting. I use both mods and have never experienced this. Do you have video or screenshots of this happening? Have you put in bug reports on the issue?

I did post all of this to feram, who igmored it.

If you posted your OP to ferram4, of course he'd ignore it. It's devoid of any useful information on the subject of the problem you're experiencing and completely unhelpful. Place a proper bug report and see if he ignores it. Until then, you don't have ground to stand on.

And it won't get fixed, as long as it runs in Unity32. Although I do know about some things that could be fixed. Like the FP32 rounding errors: use a different coordinate system and change the scale instead of the distance.

Not sure what you're talking about here. RO/RSS/FAR works perfectly fine for plenty of people running x32 Windows, or x64 Linux, or whatever. Certainly using doubles for physics calculations will help quite a bit, but the mods are playable as they stand.

[SymbolicFrank]

The memory in use is not video card memory it's RAM and is capped at 4GB by coincidence since KSP is 32bit on windows by default.

The memory management is unified. It's all managed by Windows, in the same virtual memory space.

Yes, you can do that better, in multiple ways, but they didn't.

[AlexisBV]

The problem is, I know how it all should work. And it doesn't.

(snip)

But whatever.

Thanks.

This kind of attitude is not helpful. No one "knows how it all should work". But if you do, feel free to write your own mod to replace all those that are allegedly broken. I can already see your fingers twitching to type that the underlying framework is broken and so on and so forth, so essentially that everything is hopeless and we should all just delete the game, at least until it has been validated against actual flight test data, which I assume will be provided.

On the other hand, please keep in mind the intended scope of this software. For most of us, it provides a customizable balance between cartoonish entertainment and reasonable realism. If, despite all the possible mods, it is inadequate for your needs, then so be it. Just remember that even real full-flight simulators aren't representative of real aircraft in all possible flight conditions. It's all about the scope. And they cost $15M.

I'm afraid the OP adds nothing of value to the community, though I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

[SymbolicFrank]

I'm unsure what your background is. If you're an engineer who regularly works with real-life aircraft, then I can see how you would know how this stuff works. If you've read books on aircraft design, then you probably know what you're talking about. If you just claim you know your stuff without explaining why, then I'm sure you can see why some people would wonder how much you really know.

I would also like to see pictures and other data for some of the problems you're experiencing. Some of your problems may be caused by bugs or incompatibilities between mods, but it's difficult to tell without some more detailed information, screenshots, crash logs, and other valuable information. The KSP community is actually more willing to help and friendlier than this thread suggests. We just need to know exactly what's going on inside of your computer. If we don't have that information, there's no way to diagnose and solve the problems with your KSP experience.

I'm assuming that you want help with your problems, rather than just complaining about KSP, by the way, though I can understand why others would view this thread as a "KSP Sucks!" kind of thing. If you do just intend to complain without asking for help, then this thread should probably be locked, as you've made your point here and there's no reason to keep the thread going.

Hope you understand where I'm coming from.

Best,

Upsilon

Yes, that makes sense.

I did try to explain to feram & co, but the only reactions were like your typical helpdesk ones: did you follow the procedures to the letter?

So I experimented to find out what cause the problems, and posted those findings. I did not get any reactions from the team.

As for my background: I'm an autodidact, very smart, and I mostly do project management, programming and R&D. I don't have a university degree, so most people proclaim that I only think I'm smart, but that they know better.

But I tend to ask specialists interesting and difficult questions, which I generally have to answer and prove myself. So the easiest thing to do is just ignore me.

EDIT: While I could fix it all myself, it would take me years to do so. I'm not that motivated.

- - - Updated - - -

Huh, NathanKell doesn't seem to have any issues running it on x32 Windows. Maybe you're adding too many parts mods...

Did you put in a proper bug report and follow all the steps or did you just complain? Modders can't fix things when they don't have proper bug reports.

Not aware of that mod personally. Are you talking about Deadly Reentry? Never seen any physics-related issues with it myself.

Interesting. I use both mods and have never experienced this. Do you have video or screenshots of this happening? Have you put in bug reports on the issue?

If you posted your OP to ferram4, of course he'd ignore it. It's devoid of any useful information on the subject of the problem you're experiencing and completely unhelpful. Place a proper bug report and see if he ignores it. Until then, you don't have ground to stand on.

Not sure what you're talking about here. RO/RSS/FAR works perfectly fine for plenty of people running x32 Windows, or x64 Linux, or whatever. Certainly using doubles for physics calculations will help quite a bit, but the mods are playable as they stand.

I did post all this (except for the screenshots) in the respective threads. And how much video memory does NathanKell have?

I hear this a lot from developers: "Well, it works for me!", and it irritates me a lot. It's one of the most useless things you can say. Because nobody cares if it works for you. They care if it works for them.

Edited April 15, 2015 by SymbolicFrank

[Greenfire32]

I don't think that KSP is, at its core, "broken," but rather just "not what it could be."

As an experience, it's very fulfilling and fun to play. However, there are a lot of things that it should be doing now, could be doing in the future, and should have been doing a long time ago.

So in my mind it isn't "broken," but rather just a "work in progress."

[regex]

I did post all this (except for the screenshots) in the respective threads. And how much video memory does NathanKell have?

Is your video memory shared because that might be the problem. If so, you might consider another series of mods.

Also, I had a look at all of your posts on this forum and literally none of them have followed the bug reporting guidelines. If you think you're above them, good luck with the self-trouble-shooting.

I hear this a lot from developers: "Well, it works for me!", and it irritates me a lot. It's one of the most useless things you can say. Because nobody cares if it works for you. They care if it works for them.

Well, if it works for the developer in a clean environment then the problem obviously lies on your system, which means you need to help them narrow down the issue. Without good, solid debugging information there is nothing the developer can do for you.