Will other bodies ever get the proceduaral craters treatment?

[r4pt0r]

In the comments of HarvesteR's blog post here he says:

In any case the Mun was the body in most desperate need of a revisit. But we'll definitely go over the other ones on later updates though.

Will that ever happen? Did it happen and I missed it?

If duna ever gets retouched I would also like a kerbal version of Olympus Mons, but maybe thats just me

[RyanRising]

I certainly hope so.

[troyfawkes]

If duna ever gets retouched I would also like a kerbal version of Olympus Mons, but maybe thats just me

Definitely not just you

[Wjolcz]

Yeah, I hope they add those on other bodies too.

[Captain Sierra]

In the comments of HarvesteR's blog post here he says:

Will that ever happen? Did it happen and I missed it?

If duna ever gets retouched I would also like a kerbal version of Olympus Mons, but maybe thats just me

If you managed to miss it then you must have terrible observational skills. Procedural cratering is not subtle.

I second the Olympus Mons. I fully expect there to be a challenge to precision land inside the volcanic crater within days of that happening if and when it does.

[jwenting]

I'm a bit on the fence about it...

While it certainly looks good, it's made the Mun a terrible place to land and especially build bases on, with not a flat spot around almost.

[katateochi]

I hope something is done to liven Duna up a bit, I much prefered the previous version of Duna to the current one. It had some nice glacial type bowls, some interesting mountain ridges and nice flat landing sites surrounded by hills (which made for interesting landing approaches see this landing). And the hills were non-trivial to climb bit later in same vid

The current version seems kinda homogenous. Procedural terrain would help, but not the same sort of craters that Mun has, that wouldn't make sense.

[RogueMason]

I hope something is done to liven Duna up a bit, I much prefered the previous version of Duna to the current one. It had some nice glacial type bowls, some interesting mountain ridges and nice flat landing sites surrounded by hills (which made for interesting landing approaches see this landing). And the hills were non-trivial to climb bit later in same vid

The current version seems kinda homogenous. Procedural terrain would help, but not the same sort of craters that Mun has, that wouldn't make sense.

200% agreed. Old Duna was just so much better than the Duna we have now.

[SmallFatFetus]

I think all the planets are in need of an art pass, and updated atmosphere color and possibly scattering?

Imagine seeing this on duna!

And this was a scatterer config for Eve that blackrack set up for me.

Woah.

On topic, I think we could use procedural craters on Tylo, Pol, Minmus, Moho, and Dres.

[Alshain]

They need to thin out the procedural craters that are created on the Mun first. I don't dislike the ever changing surface from game to game but there are far too many of them, you can't find a flat spot on the Mun anymore.

[Majorjim!]

I hope something is done to liven Duna up a bit, I much prefered the previous version of Duna to the current one. It had some nice glacial type bowls, some interesting mountain ridges and nice flat landing sites surrounded by hills (which made for interesting landing approaches see this landing). And the hills were non-trivial to climb bit later in same vid

The current version seems kinda homogenous. Procedural terrain would help, but not the same sort of craters that Mun has, that wouldn't make sense.

I couldnt agree more. The previous Duna was much more interesting.!

[J.Random]

Save-breaking changes in a "released" product? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Because hey, it was so important to leave Beta ASAP!

[OddFunction]

Save-breaking changes in a "released" product? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Because hey, it was so important to leave Beta ASAP!

Can you elaborate a bit? I read this thread twice and I'm confused as to what you mean :X

[FleshJeb]

They need to thin out the procedural craters that are created on the Mun first. I don't dislike the ever changing surface from game to game but there are far too many of them, you can't find a flat spot on the Mun anymore.

I thought it was a fixed seed, ergo they're the same every time?

[J.Random]

Can you elaborate a bit? I read this thread twice and I'm confused as to what you mean :X

Follow the link in the OP, read the article.

[Wjolcz]

Save-breaking changes in a "released" product? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Because hey, it was so important to leave Beta ASAP!

IIRC He said it would break saves, but they actually made it so it didn't and already landed vessels didn't sink or anything, if that's what you mean.

[OddFunction]

Follow the link in the OP, read the article.

Ah okay, makes sense.

Although I'm sure every big update regardless of release status is going to be save-breaking. Even if they were 'done' with the game they may randomly decide to change something big... and should they change small things, its been my experience that even 'save' friendly updates benefit from a new game. Especially Unity games, for some reason.

What would be really cool is if they bundled this all up into one package, like Upgrade 1.2 would be procedural craters, clouds, etc. It could be the 'Visual Overhaul'. Inconvenient to restart, yes, but at what threshold do we consider the new feature worth it?

[NoMrBond]

They need to thin out the procedural craters that are created on the Mun first. I don't dislike the ever changing surface from game to game but there are far too many of them, you can't find a flat spot on the Mun anymore.

Since it's procedural, a slider on game creation would be nice (perhaps split between non-atmospheric bodies which would have more/varied craters and atmospheric bodies which burn up / moderate a lot of impacts).

Then players could choose their desired level of pockness

[J.Random]

IIRC He said it would break saves, but they actually made it so it didn't and already landed vessels didn't sink or anything, if that's what you mean.

As I remember it, my polar RT relay installment blew up after update. Still, not the point. Even if something sank or spawned several meters above the surface, it was acceptable because the game was in Alpha. Breaking saves is rarely acceptable for a released product.

Regarding the "procedural" part: guys, they are procedural, but still pregenerated. They aren't random either. There is no seed saved in the game files, they aren't generated every time you start the game.

Edited June 21, 2015 by J.Random

[tater]

All worlds need this treatment.

[razark]

All worlds need this treatment.

To some extent. Those bodies with an atmosphere should have a much less pronounced cratering.

[tater]

Obviously the parameters change based upon gravity, atmosphere, and composition.

[Richy teh space man]

I think quite a few planets and moons are in need of further developing, so that they come closer to the same kind of standard. The inner planets feel fairly complete in terms of terrain and biomes to explore (one or two more biomes on Eve wouldn't hurt though). The other minor planets, Dres and Eeloo are also good in terms of surface features and biomes to explore.

Duna needs more work such as more Mars like features with additional biomes. As it is in its present state it feels a bit underwhelming (particularly as it's likely to be the first target for newer players to explore). Ike could probably do with some procedural craters on it, but is otherwise good in terms of biomes.

The Joolian system needs more biomes and craters too.

Maybe we'll see something in 1.2, after all the unity work is done..

[Commander Zoom]

all worlds need this treatment.

... except Europa Eeloo. Expect no craters there.

[windows_x_seven]

That's actually quite neat. I really hope other bodies get that feature