The "Full art pass" thread

[Norpo]

As I've commented before, the different art styles in the game are like some sort of archaeological dig.Off the top of my head:

• Old stock style (that **** parachute that still hasn't been redone, you know the one)
  
• Pre-enlightenment (bad) NovaSilisko
  
• Post-enlightenment NovaSilisko (rare, still not very good)
  
• Original C7 aerospace mod (mostly purged)
  
• Slightly redone C7 Aerospace (being purged)
  
• Porkjet Sedimentary layer
  
• The Claira Conglomerate layer
  
• Boundary Armalcolite-Cordite #9 (BAC9) layer (KSC and island base mostly)
  
• The Roverduderation layer (cylindrical bays, upcoming dishes etc)
  
• Internite (Current Mk1 cockpit, temporary mk3 cockpit that never saw the light of day, linear RCS/monoprop engine)
  

-source: reddit

The art in this game, is quite frankly, all over the place.

Fix it.

-Sincerely, everyone.

Far less snarky version:

The game lacks a consistent art style. While this may add a certain "charm" to the game, and making the general theme of it "it has no theme", it certainly doesn't look good. Examples include, but are not limited to:

• Kerbodyne parts when compared to fuel tanks, engines, and decouplers of other sizes
  
• Roverdude made parts (resource parts, new antennas) compared to literally every other part
  
• Spaceplane parts vs rocket parts, perhaps intentional, but the spaceplane parts look far more sophisticated/advanced
  
• The toroidal aerospike engine looks a little off compared to the rest in my opinion
  

And a few of the planets *cough cough Dres* look more cartoony than the rest. It simply doesn't have the fine detail that Eve, Kerbin, Duna and Jool have, IMHO.

While I do like the cartoony theme of Kerbal Space Program (the visual enhancement packs are too realistic for me), some things like atmospheric scatter, and some clouds would go a long way to making the game look nicer. I think devoting an update to simply adding better graphics, and code optimization would be great, especially because the game is being ported to consoles.

Examples of mods making the game look nicer:

Parts -

Vens Stock Revamp (makes parts look better, "20% cooler as they tumble into the ground")

Tantares- doesn't revamp old parts but is a nice art style and tries to be "stockalike"

Planets, and spaaace -

Atmospheric scatterer

Environmental Visual Enhancements

Again, "cartoony" is okay, "cartoony with some realistic parts thrown in" isn't. And things can still look cartoony with atmospheric scattering

Edited September 13, 2015 by Norpo

[clivman]

Stock revamp makes it look so much nicer, and it fits in better with the new parts.

[passinglurker]

IMO ven's style is so good it raises the bar above what most modders are willing to try. I think tantares would be a better example of a fitting style (NovaSilisko seems to think so)

I hate my parts. Hate them. I never managed to really finalize in my head how I wanted the style to look until it was too late, really. The Tantares pack is, artistically, the closest thing I think. As mikegarrison says, you can witness the different geological layers of the game's art style as different artists made their mark. It's... messy.

[Bill Phil]

Stock revamp just looks great. I think the guy who made it deserves quite a bit of money.

I would certainly welcome clouds with open arms. However, it's not quite the highest priority.

[waterlubber]

I...don't like stock revamp.

*raises heat shield*

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Agreed.

[passinglurker]

I...don't like stock revamp.

*raises heat shield*

*raises own heatshield in phalanx formation along side.*

here is how I see the split in opinion.

Anyone who doesn't know how to make parts: Vens revamp give me the biggest the shiniest the best and no I won't install a mod for that I only use stock... for some reason...

Anyone who does know how to make parts: Not Vens revamp oh god I can't compete with that.

one of the pillars of this game is its modding community stock should be consistent and needs a revamp to be efficient yes but the style should be accessible and emulatable to modders of varying skill levels

[tater]

I'm tater, and I approve of OP's post.

I understand that stuff comes from different companies. I get that. I'm fine with all the parts by a given manufacturer having an affinity, and slightly different from their competitors. But even within that, so many rocket parts are just awful.

[passinglurker]

I'm tater, and I approve of OP's post.

I understand that stuff comes from different companies. I get that. I'm fine with all the parts by a given manufacturer having an affinity, and slightly different from their competitors. But even within that, so many rocket parts are just awful.

Yes I agree they should be revamped and given similar levels of quality and realism(or lack thereof depending on your perspective), but like you say there should be some divergence to distinguish manufacturers or part roles where it makes sense.

Diverging a little from that tangent I'm afraid that an official art revamp will only lead to flame wars and controversy. looking at what's been happening recently it's almost like every new part squad reveals or revamps is thrown back in their face no matter the level of quality because it "isn't the right color", or "looks to simple", or "looks to busy" for one community faction or another. I think people should be more grateful for what they are getting and if it doesn't suit them the game is moddable for a reason. What color a part is isn't a detrimental gameplay flaw that squad should be expected to fix so the old "I shouldn't have to install mods" excuse shouldn't apply here.

[TyrannoFan]

Yeah, I don't mind the parts looking very different and having distinct styles depending on the company, but they just look bad in their current state and some just lack detail. It's not just problems with the aesthetics; the Mk1 Pod doesn't even adhere to the size standards we now have.

[Bill Phil]

*raises own heatshield in phalanx formation along side.*

here is how I see the split in opinion.

Anyone who doesn't know how to make parts: Vens revamp give me the biggest the shiniest the best and no I won't install a mod for that I only use stock... for some reason...

Anyone who does know how to make parts: Not Vens revamp oh god I can't compete with that.

one of the pillars of this game is its modding community stock should be consistent and needs a revamp to be efficient yes but the style should be accessible and emulatable to modders of varying skill levels

The reason I like Ven's Stock Revamp has more to do with the array of parts then their looks. For example:

Tankbutt-less engines. These are actually really useful. I could use a skipper on 1.25 meter tanks.

0.625 meter tanks. There's a larger selection of these. That's just awesome.

I believe the Poodle is changed as well...

There are other things, but to me it's just a more practical set of parts conpared to stock.

They're also aesthetically similar to stock, but look much more refined and crisp, and are more aesthetically pleasing than the stock parts (IMO).

To each his own, though.

[RyanRising]

I...don't like stock revamp.

*raises heat shield*

I used to like it, but no more. I can hardly say I prefer the mess that is the stock parts, though.

I wholeheartedly agree that this game could benefit from a full art pass, and not just spaceplane parts. It definitely wouldn't hurt for planets to be improved in this respect as well.

[Alshain]

My favorite part in Ven's is the LES Decoupler. It's brilliant, and you can hide radial parachutes underneath it as well as a docking port.

I'm against atmospheric scattering if it makes Kerbin look like Degobah as Scatterer does though. Kerbin should not be all fog.

Edited September 13, 2015 by Alshain

[clivman]

My favorite part in Ven's is the LES Decoupler. It's brilliant, and you can hide radial parachutes underneath it as well as a docking port.

I'm against atmospheric scattering if it makes Kerbin look like Degobah as Scatterer does though. Kerbin should not be all fog.

Not in scatterers new update.....

[Rath]

I dont mind parts looking diffrent unless they come from the same company, but I do mind bad, lo-res, clunky, or just plain ugly (not 'Space' ugly but rokomax ugly) parts

[nothingSpecial]

I'm okay with most of the 1.25m rocket textures, but the models are... oh come on, they have ribs everywhere. Is it aerodynamic?!

Rockomax rocket parts are boring. Half cylinder, cylinder, two cylinders, ORANGE.

On the other hand, I don't really like payload bits. RCS tanks (inline ones) and batteries are too dark-n-messy to use with anything except maybe probes. Scientific experiments are too sticky... but this can be really good. Had not gotten to ISRU stuff yet.

So. I know, different manufacturers and all, but can they look good to be used together, please? Is it too much? Or please make it possible to use different existing styles on most parts. I sometimes tweakscaled larger 1.25m tanks to 2.5m (and smaller 2.5m tank to 1.25m), and they blended good. And I doo like clumsy rubbish style of some early rockets.

Okay, noone will do it. But at least make them less disturbingly distinctive, please.

Edited September 13, 2015 by nothingSpecial
forgot final "please"

[Damien_The_Unbeliever]

I'd be the first to admit that my aesthetic senses are quite dull - but for me, the most important thing about the parts is what they can do and where they can take me. I don't care all that much what they look like. If everyone favours consistency above all else, why not just have them all complete white, featureless blobs?

[Norpo]

Just a question, what do people think about giving some of the planets an art pass as well? Dres, and Eeloo right off the top of my head seem less detailed than say, The Mun. Drastic variations are nice, but at least to me Dres' variations are too drastic: (Left: Mun, Right: Dres)

Maybe Dres could do with a complete re-imagining altogether, right now it's just "another boring grey rock". Maybe some more massive canyons, making them Dres' primary features, and a recolouring (Eve is purple, so maybe to continue with the trend of "weird colors", Dres could be yellow?)

Edited September 13, 2015 by Norpo
Changed picture of The Mun to one with white background, like Dres

[waterlubber]

I'm okay with most of the 1.25m rocket textures, but the models are... oh come on, they have ribs everywhere. Is it aerodynamic?!

Rockomax rocket parts are boring. Half cylinder, cylinder, two cylinders, ORANGE.

On the other hand, I don't really like payload bits. RCS tanks (inline ones) and batteries are too dark-n-messy to use with anything except maybe probes. Scientific experiments are too sticky... but this can be really good. Had not gotten to ISRU stuff yet.

So. I know, different manufacturers and all, but can they look good to be used together, please? Is it too much? Or please make it possible to use different existing styles on most parts. I sometimes tweakscaled larger 1.25m tanks to 2.5m (and smaller 2.5m tank to 1.25m), and they blended good. And I doo like clumsy rubbish style of some early rockets.

Okay, noone will do it. But at least make them less disturbingly distinctive, please.

I love the ribs. They add detail and aesthetics to the rocket. Don't like 2.5m rockets, other than the jumbo. Maybe make em all different solid colors (i.e blue green yellow orange)

[klgraham1013]

As stated in previous posts. This is a "lego" style building game. In my opinion, every part needs to look good attached to each other. Someone should be able to look at a craft you made (not made by a fictional manufacturer) and see it as one consistent construction. Not some hodgepodge of unrelated parts.

To reiterate, your Mun Rocket Mk1: Pro Edition isn't a Rockomax / Kerbodyne / C7 hybrid. It's a rocket made by you; by your space agency, who has hired outside companies to manufacture individual parts according to your specifications. The visual consistency should reflect as such.

Edited September 13, 2015 by klgraham1013

[regex]

VSR is superior to stock. The funny thing is that it doesn't do much, if anything, to Porkjet's parts; they look almost the same.

It is my opinion that an art pass should attempt to bring all parts to the same level of quality and general aesthetic as Porkjet's. Too many of them look bulky, dirty, or like junk (not in the "your model is junk" sense, but actual junk), not at all fit for use in space. That needs to change.

[Wjolcz]

As stated in previous posts. This is a "lego" style building game. In my opinion, every part needs to look good attached to each other. Someone should be able to look at a craft you made (not made by a fictional manufacturer) and see it as one consistent construction. Not some hodgepodge of unrelated parts.

To reiterate, your Mun Rocket Mk1: Pro Edition isn't a Rockomax / Kerbodyne / C7 hybrid. It's a rocket made by you; by your space agency, who has hired outside companies to manufacture individual parts according to your specifications. The visual consistency should reflect as such.

So much this

[clivman]

They need to make the textures look better and then let us choose between them, keep the color schemes

[klgraham1013]

I'd also like to give a shout out to Necrobones suite of mods. Some great improvements on stock parts as well as some additions.

[Plume & Akakak]

The art in this game, is quite frankly, all over the place. [...] The game lacks a consistent art style.

Sounds exaggerated to me. Someone with a vague knowledge of KSP would probably recognize each and every part as belonging to the same game.

Vessel parts and environment considered, the overall visual aspect of the game is consistent in its minimalist form. (Some celestial bodies are still less detailed than others, true, I know.)

As a side remark, it is generally when people start using visual mods in games that things can get all over the place. Boosting the graphical rendering of a single element or giving it any peculiar touch the modder was focusing on is usually what makes a game's visual style lose its cohesion. Highly detailed or manga-ish eyes on the face of a Skyrim character often look out of place. It is something I regularly observe when I see screenshots of KSP in which visual mods have been used. An emphatic lens flare or a richer space tapestry can look incongruous.

And combining various mods often leads to something far more disarranged than the stock game is.

But after all, why not. KSP is a sandbox, anything goes.

As stated in another post, slight differences in designs and "wrinkles" are inevitable in long term-developed games like KSP. It's quite the norm today, with all the content additions that are here to expand their lifespan.

I'm not sure KSP is at the point where it needs a World of Warcraft Old World type of revamp to be compelling.

As stated in previous posts. This is a "lego" style building game. In my opinion, every part needs to look good attached to each other. Someone should be able to look at a craft you made (not made by a fictional manufacturer) and see it as one consistent construction.

Ok for the Lego comparison. But what are the standards for "looking good" or being "consistent" ? That's treading on dangerous ground, IMO.