Are you excited of PBR in KSP 1.1?

[Blaf]

4 hours ago, MegaUZI said:

Is there a way to make some kind of script to put a basic form of PBR onto all parts universally (including mods) ?

I don't know anything on how this works, so this question might be stupid.

It depends what you expect as a result Please check following link: http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/pbr-conversion

It's quite descriptive and easy to understand explanation of map conversion to PBR...

[tater]

I was wondering if this was about Patrol Boat, River, or Pabst Blue Ribbon. Imagine my surprise. 

[Waxing_Kibbous]

I think the visuals will not only improve a ton- a good rendering system can make things look way better and at the same time it can be a lot easier- older render methods require a lot of cheats to look decent, newer ones can do things that look really good with only a couple of settings. Performance wise the algorithms have been improved in leaps in bounds in recent history, I don't think it will be much of an issue.

<- my avatar was rendered in Blender's Cycles renderer using only an area light and an image for the environment light, which itself didn't render hence the black BG. There are only 2 materials, a matte one and a glossy one. To make something even reasonably close in the old scanline engine would have involved a lot more work.

[linuxgurugamer]

On 1/15/2016 at 3:21 PM, qromodynmc said:

War thunder got PBR 2 patchs ago, it looked great on planes to be honest;

But pbr needs bit of work, Im not even sure it'd look different in ksp.

And you even used a picture of my favorite plane, the P-38

[Porkjet]

The visual change will be subtle. We don't magically get photorealistic assets, and dont want to. It will still be largely the same art style as before. We get some nice new subtle details tho, especially in terms of how the materials react to lighting, and reflectivity. (reflect planet from below in orbit etc )
As for converting, that's quite straight forward. Diffuse and Specular maps, if reasonably done, can be reused as Albedo and Smoothness maps, with only small adjustments required. The additional maps, metalness, and occlusion, should be easy to make from copy pasting layers from the existing source textures.

[qromodynmc]

59 minutes ago, Porkjet said:

The visual change will be subtle. We don't magically get photorealistic assets, and dont want to. It will still be largely the same art style as before. We get some nice new subtle details tho, especially in terms of how the materials react to lighting, and reflectivity. (reflect planet from below in orbit etc )
As for converting, that's quite straight forward. Diffuse and Specular maps, if reasonably done, can be reused as Albedo and Smoothness maps, with only small adjustments required. The additional maps, metalness, and occlusion, should be easy to make from copy pasting layers from the existing source textures.

I have some ideas about how they might look like, especially metal parts like engines etc.

But Porkjet, you probably know what is going on

Are you guys going to change water? Some other Unity 5 user games have nice waters, Ksp water is pretty dull and static, Im not sure but i dont think it's so hard to make decent looking water.

[Findthepin1]

28 minutes ago, qromodynmc said:

I have some ideas about how they might look like, especially metal parts like engines etc.

But Porkjet, you probably know what is going on

Are you guys going to change water? Some other Unity 5 user games have nice waters, Ksp water is pretty dull and static, Im not sure but i dont think it's so hard to make decent looking water.

Also underwater looks weird. We can see the horizon underwater and there's a big area on the seafloor surrounding your craft that is a different shade than the surrounding seafloor.

[NoMrBond]

2 hours ago, qromodynmc said:

other Unity 5 user games have nice waters

The stock Unity 5 water layer asset (shader layer) is decent from memory

In one of the example "Blacksmith" videos they showed dropping in the stock water layer, and then lighting package of Rayleigh+Mie+Height+Occlusion scattering (Unity's own atmospheric shader package is available for free in the asset store)

This doesn't necessarily mean Squad can just drop it/them in to KSP (which has some seriously different camera setup), but hopefully they're applicable or at least useful for Squad implementing them.

Edited January 19, 2016 by NoMrBond
Added link for atmospheric scattering page

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Professional Bull Riders?  Awesome!  KSP: Home on the downrange.

Seriously, though, here's some PBR eye-candy:

[legoclone09]

On 1/15/2016 at 4:35 AM, KerbMav said:

Photorealistic graphics were never planned or intended for KSP.

Cue the FASA crowd!

[Finox]

So what would a photo-realistic Kerbal look like anyway?   We've really only ever seen them in the current cartoony form.

[Porkjet]

31 minutes ago, Finox said:

So what would a photo-realistic Kerbal look like anyway?   We've really only ever seen them in the current cartoony form.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ca6x4QbpoM

[Tourist]

2 hours ago, Porkjet said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ca6x4QbpoM

On one hand, that was awesome thanks for the link. On the other hand, when I saw your post, and the link, I was secretly hoping that some KSP fans had made some Jeb and Val suits, and were playing around in a paper mache command pod. 

 

[TonyC]

11 hours ago, legoclone09 said:

Cue the FASA crowd!

I am an avid FASA user, and photorealism is nice.

Honestly though, it is possible to put a lot of photorealism in a cartoony game. KSP isn't completely cartoony right now.

[John FX]

20 hours ago, *Aqua* said:

No, a script won't really help. You essentially have to redo all textures to make use of all PBR capatibilities. Afaik the KSP devs won't do that (yet) as it's too much work.

I reckon they will do it at some point.

[NecroBones]

4 hours ago, John FX said:

I reckon they will do it at some point.

I'm curious to see what they do. And what this will mean for mod parts too. I'm not looking forward to the thought of redoing dozens, if not hundreds of textures in my parts packs. Darn those artistic sensibilities!!

 

[Hannu2]

I just hope that devs will not become inspired to such useless eye candy and use significant resources to it. Maybe in version 6.0 at about 2040 when there are hundreds of procedurally generated planets, moons and asteroids with incredible details to centimeter level, realistic physical interactions with gravitation, atmosphere, surface and fluids, millions of interesting things to find and game engine can handle 100000 part ship at 60 fps.

[Hysterrics]

On 1/15/2016 at 2:10 PM, parameciumkid said:

Exciting and then some!

Not only that, but some of the other rendering features in Unity 5 bode well for a mod I have planned. Teaser:

O_O, that looks pretty damn cool OP.

[Curveball Anders]

On 2016-01-15 at 11:34 AM, *Aqua* said:

Are you as excited as I am about the PBR in KSP 1.1?

No.

As a matter of fact I don't bother at all about how stuff looks as long as it's fun to play and I can invent totally madcap designs and somehow getting them to do something close to what I intended (or more often something completely different that I didn't intend at all ;)).

I still play nethack (without any fancy graphic UI) just because the game is so good.

Edited January 19, 2016 by Curveball Anders
Speling ond gramer

[Porkjet]

By the way, PBR lighting model isn't much more performance expensive than the old one. Not enough to make a noticable difference in framerates. In terms of graphics porformance there's actually a lot of headroom. What influences framerates most atm is part physics and planet terrain

[worir4]

19 hours ago, Porkjet said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ca6x4QbpoM

Oh, if only!

[Finox]

23 hours ago, Porkjet said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ca6x4QbpoM

No I meant an actual Kerbal, like Jeb, what would a photo-realistic Jebadiah Kerman look like?

[Porkjet]

1 hour ago, Finox said:

No I meant an actual Kerbal, like Jeb, what would a photo-realistic Jebadiah Kerman look like?

Oh, haha that's a fun question.

[Atlas2342]

[SNIP]

PS: Sorry for the necropost 

Edited May 11, 2016 by Atlas2342