Hopes for KSP in Unity 5!

[Ristse]

So, ive heard that soon (Not necessarily the next update) that KSP will be updating to Untiy 5!  

So i thought, and i came up with 'I wonder what the community is hoping for in Unity 5?' 

 

2 of my biggest hopes are:

A. That the GameData folder will be able to load more than 3 GB of data per game launch (I think this is changed because of 64 bit? I'm not sure) 

B. Physics will be able to operate on more than one core on a CPU, making large ships and larger space stations much more possible! (Unity 4 can only run Physics on one core of a CPU) 

[Yellowburn10]

First off, yes, KSP is most definitely upgrading to U5 in the next update.

Second, 64 bit KSP will be able to utilize more than 3 GB of data in your computer, which will let you load in more stuff (and mod more stuff) while maintaining good FPS

I couldn't answer number 3 myself, but I have heard something of the sorts being confirmed somewhere.

[skyace65]

down the road this is what I'm hoping Unity 5 lets them do

-better lighting

-maybe some better looking water

-VR support, Exploring the mun or leaving orbit in VR would be amazing 

[steve_v]

Reasonable framerates, decent multi-threaded or GPU accelerated physics that doesn't run like a gut-shot, three-legged pig at more than 200 parts. Nothing more, nothing less. Though if history is anything to go by, I'm not particularly optimistic.

1 hour ago, Yellowburn10 said:

64 bit KSP will be able to utilize more than 3 GB of data in your computer, which will let you load in more stuff (and mod more stuff) while maintaining good FPS

64bit and physics performance are two separate issues, getting a 64bit client will do nothing to improve framerates by itself, though it should stop the out-of-memory crashes.

Edited December 15, 2015 by steve_v

[Temstar]

If performance does improve, people will probably complain that KSP runs like a dog with 1000 part rockets and wondered how they ever reached orbit with 200 parts.

Still, improved performance would be nice.

[steve_v]

25 minutes ago, Temstar said:

If performance does improve, people will probably complain that KSP runs like a dog with 1000 part rockets and wondered how they ever reached orbit with 200 parts.

Of course.

But as it stands, there's a progression in place regarding VAB/SPH upgrades that pretty much says: "200+ parts is where it's at, but you gotta spend funds to get there"... when in reality that part count makes the game engine choke on most current hardware. 30 parts in tier 1 is limiting, but the jump from 255 parts to unlimited for tier 3 is utterly pointless - the engine just can't do it without seriously tanking framerates.

I'm certainly not expecting the game to run smoothly with 1000 parts in one craft, but when the VAB says "part limit: 255" I expect the game to be able to handle 255 parts with some semblance of aplomb.

Then there's the stutter / GC pauses, the thing that sends me running to a game that has reasonable performance partway through every career I start.

Edited December 15, 2015 by steve_v

[Temstar]

It's to do with maturing as a player as well I think. When I first started my average part count was in the 400s, and that was a time when Mun was just added and the physics engine was MUCH worse than it is now. You just add all these stuff to the outside of your ship because they are nice to have and real spacecrafts probably had them. I recall when I designed my first propellant depot when docking mods came about it had more than 500 parts because I had those little ladder things all over it since I was still green at the whole EVA control thing and I reasoned real spacecrafts where you expect to do a lot of EVA would also have handholds all over.

Nowadays I don't stress about the little things so much and let my mind fill in the details, so average part count is a more reasonable 200 including the launch vehicle.

Stronger stock joints helped a lot, I recall back in the days you would have something like 30% of your part count being struts just holding the damn thing together during launch.

[Mitchz95]

What I want to know is, will I finally be able to set Atmospheric FX to full without the game crashing ever time I enter the atmosphere?

[steve_v]

1 minute ago, Temstar said:

It's to do with maturing as a player as well I think.

True, but one shouldn't really have low-part-count as a primary design consideration just because the physics engine is lousy. I sure do though, because it is lousy.

3 minutes ago, Temstar said:

Stronger stock joints helped a lot, I recall back in the days you would have something like 30% of your part count being struts

Yeah, remember it well. KJR man, KJR.

[Francois424]

My personal wishes are first and foremost 64-bits support (and it's coming woo !)

Then I'd like to be able to at least double the number of parts I can put in a spaceship.
I often build my big crafts between 400-600 parts and my latest Moho mission of 430 parts was laggy as hell, for each second that passed in-game it cost me 2.5-3sec of RL time.
I developed some tricks to keep the parts count down, but that has limits and also limits my creativity a lot.  Most often in involves creating a part to replace 10 others (such as a 1.25m RTG, larger solar panels, etc).
If the engine was able to push 500-600 parts and still be in the solid green it would be good. pushing to 1k in the green would be paradise as I only ever had to build a ship that size ONCE since I started playing in 0.22...
I've hit 800 quite a few times tho but it's not the norm.

The engine did get more laggy since 0.25 was introduced tho, I used to fly a 525 part ship and I would be in slight yellow... now slight yellow is what? 275 parts?  and my system is at least 3 times as powerful
(KSP did not care because of no multi-core support, or so I've heard).

[steve_v]

56 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

The engine did get more laggy since 0.25 was introduced tho, I used to fly a 525 part ship and I would be in slight yellow... now slight yellow is what? 275 parts?  and my system is at least 3 times as powerful

Indeed, despite marketing claims to the contrary, pretty much every update since 0.25 or so has seen a slight performance decrease here. To be expected with better aero and heating going on, but if you're going to add lag-exacerbating features to the game, methinks some optimisation is in order too.

[The Destroyer]

I'm hoping for KSP to have half the improvement that Besiege got- it got MASSIVE performance increases (sometimes even going from 1 to 20 FPS!). If I can run a decently modded 200 part base without lagging badly I'll be happy.  If I can run scatterer/EVE too It will be a new golden age

[Warzouz]

I only hope for more professional and user friendly interface, better sound design and a higher part count capacity.

I hope with a more solid basis, Squad would add some more planetary bodies.

 

 

 

[Hannu2]

11 hours ago, Temstar said:

If performance does improve, people will probably complain that KSP runs like a dog with 1000 part rockets and wondered how they ever reached orbit with 200 parts.

Of course. It is one part of fun to make huge things. Actually 200 or 1000 part is not huge at all. I have made more complicated things from metal as a hobby project. There should be possible to use at last 10000 parts. Preferably several tens of thousands.

It is sad that this game does not fulfill nearly all possibilities due to lazy and/or unskillful programming. But of course, everybody have own opinions what game should be and developers try to balance between them and their own ideas. And this is very great game. In my opinion best of all, and I have also played it more than anything else.

[Hannu2]

I hope that KSP can be 64 bit and access more RAM and I believe that it is realistic hope. However, not sure. I do not expect much more. As far as I know Unity 5 can not parallelize physics of single objects (ships). Maybe we get more performance when docking two huge station blocks together but not in normal situations. Low performance is not Unity's fault, at least most of it. It is Squad's algorithms. They should hire somebody who have experience in fast physical simulations instead of eye candy guys (this is my nerdy point of view, not necessary a way to huge economical success).

[Hobbes Novakoff]

There are also going to be some graphical improvements. They will switch from rendering with...whatever they render with now to the new Standard shader, which should bring us some cooler looking parts. Also, we get reflections in cockpit windows. Which is going to look amazing. Also, we wheel get much better and realistic wheels (see what I did there...).

[Majorjim!]

Unity 5 will allow multiple craft across multiple cores. No multi core support for single craft.

[cephalo]

I hope Unity 5 has better joystick support. My joystick runs and calibrates in Windows 10, but not KSP.

[Overland]

Spline based construction for roads..rail etc I know unity supports it but in its current state KSP wouldnt do so well

Wheel physics a tad better. Ive never had any trouble with current ones but improvements always good

Stock wheelsound.. As much as I love roverwheelsound mod . Make it stock already! 

And give kerbin better sunsets not this blue sky but everywhere dark thing thats common in the near-night hours

Fix lighting so the landscape lights up with sunset and sunrise

[Hobbes Novakoff]

2 minutes ago, Overland said:

And give kerbin better sunsets not this blue sky but everywhere dark thing thats common in the near-night hours

You may want to try Scatterer:

I love these new embeds.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Hobbes Novakoff

[DuoDex]

5 hours ago, Majorjim said:

Unity 5 will allow multiple craft across multiple cores. No multi core support for single craft.

[Cetacean required].

15 hours ago, steve_v said:

Indeed, despite marketing claims to the contrary, pretty much every update since 0.25 or so has seen a slight performance decrease here. To be expected with better aero and heating going on, but if you're going to add lag-exacerbating features to the game, methinks some optimisation is in order too.

Which is precisely what is going on with U5 - Squad have added some lag-inducing features to the game and are now doing some optimization.

[steve_v]

1 minute ago, DuoDex said:

Squad have added some lag-inducing features to the game and are now doing some optimization.

Err, don't you mean: Squad have waited for Unity to do some optimisation, and are now moving to the latest engine to take advantage of it? There's a difference between "Squad doing some optimisation" and "Squad porting to new engine version, which has been optimised by others".
The way you phrase it, it sounds like you're crediting Squad for improvements in the Unity3D engine... Or can you point out some optimisation going on in Squads code that I don't know about?

[Hobbes Novakoff]

1 hour ago, steve_v said:

The way you phrase it, it sounds like you're crediting Squad for improvements in the Unity3D engine... Or can you point out some optimisation going on in Squads code that I don't know about?

How about rewriting the entire UI system?

1 hour ago, DuoDex said:

[Cetacean required].

EDIT: *Facepalm* That's a crustacean. Cetaceans are whales.

 

Sorry, couldn't resist. However, here is a Squadcast summary...

Edited December 16, 2015 by Hobbes Novakoff

[steve_v]

57 minutes ago, Hobbes Novakoff said:

How about rewriting the entire UI system?

Yeah, to take advantage of the new UI system in U5. If it was being done for optimisation reasons alone, why wasn't it re-written long ago when its deficiencies were first identified?

To quote your link (emphasis mine):

They have scrapped 90% of the UI in KSP.
Currently 3 systems. They scrapped that.
The new U5 system is so much better.

This is not optimisation, unless it so happens that the new U5 UI is more efficient, in which case credit for that goes to Unity3D.

Also, this:

is a Crustacean.

A Cetacean is one of these:

Edited December 16, 2015 by steve_v

[Hobbes Novakoff]

29 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Also, this:

is a Crustacean.

A Cetacean is one of these:

*Facepalm*

30 minutes ago, steve_v said:

This is not optimisation, unless it so happens that the new U5 UI is more efficient, in which case credit for that goes to Unity3D.

Switching to a different method of doing a thing which does the same thing but runs better is literally the definition of optimization.