How badly do the stock planets need a retexture?

[Gameslinx]

Let me ask you - what do you think of the stock planets?

If I was to answer my own question, I would (constructively, of course!) say that they're... Not exactly in tip top condition. There are many things that can be improved about them, such as the actual terrain, the detail or how Gilly and bop look like mud balls instead of asteroids.

However this isn't just about Gilly or bop.

This thread is about how badly the planets need a makeover.

As some of you may know, I'm a planet modder. I make planets.

Now put into perspective, I would like to compare Kerbin (and also duna) with a planet I created. The reason why I am comparing two planets is because squad didn't actually 'make' kerbin. Kerbin's colour texture comes from the Libnoise first example, not squad. Now then. Assuming that duna was created by a much more skilled creator than myself, with more experience, qualifications and is employed to do exactly this sort of work, why am I able to do better using paint and Microsoft word.

I'm not joking. I made a relatively decent planet with two free programs in 2 hours. I'm not tooting my own horn or saying that squad is lazy or bad, I'm saying they could do much, much better.

I shall elaborate. Planets consist of three textures - a height, normal and colour map. The normal map is generated from the completed heightmap. The other two are created manually.

I created the height map with Paint and Paint alone. No filters, no layer system. I just used a paint brush and drew on my texture. Squad would likely use Photoshop, or gimp at the least to make their planets. Maybe even a professional drawing program. They'd certainly not fire up paint and set to work.

The colour map, admittedly, was created with Adobe After Effects, however this exact effect can also be achieved using the planet config, albeit it is more time consuming.

Here is the video where I create the planet, then I'll talk about my next point.

Now, by no means am I trying to show off. That is not the purpose of this thread at all.

If I can make a planet which looks arguably just as good, if not better than kerbin in 2 hours, squad can do the same with their professional tools and heightened knowledge of the game.

"But Linx, the planets do not have to look good, they just have to be there for us to land on"

Alright, so who goes to duna and says "actually yeah, this is a good spot I'll visit again! I love the terrain here, the colour and detail is simply breathtaking. I love this planet!"

Right. Barely anyone. Because duna is just bump after bump with no variation at all except for the poles. Not to mention that most of the bumps are procedural and not textured, which is just as easy to accomplish (as I used procedural noise mods on my planet, too)

Now then, duna is not a particularly interesting planet with much diversity except for the poles being the only difference. I would love for duna to have more colour variation, more evidence of previous water (assuming it is a Mars analogue), more pronounced terrain variation such as mountains, small cracks and such.

The same goes for other planets like Dres and tylo. They don't really look very interesting or worth exploring as they have no canyons (Dres has one, but nothing more) or defined mountains. Even Jool needs a facelift!

I'd love to also see more craters or evidence of past activity on the planets and moons to make them more diverse and interesting, not to mention that squad MUST rely less on procedural noise mods, as they make the planets and moons incredibly "samey". A balance must be achieved and at the moment, we can be safe to say that the planets are a really weak point in the game, especially since they're supposed to be a substantial goal within the game's progression.

I'd like to hear your view on this situation.

- Linx.

[Andi K.]

Why don't you make a mod for it then? The entire purpose of mods are to make the original game even better.

[DeltaDizzy]

22 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Why don't you make a mod for it then? The entire purpose of mods are to make the original game even better.

Consoles, Stock Purists, and people who don't know how to install mods or are too lazy

[LordFerret]

"No professional programs"

Define 'professional'. You mean something paid for? Gimp is free.

[DeltaDizzy]

12 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

"No professional programs"

Define 'professional'. You mean something paid for? Gimp is free.

Well he said no GIMP in the video, but I think he meant a program with a lot of features and/or a really expensive one

[Gameslinx]

54 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Why don't you make a mod for it then? The entire purpose of mods are to make the original game even better.

It isn't up to modders to develop squad's game for them.

We make mods to improve the game and build upon it, but for those who don't like using mods and in general, the stock planets are not the best looking.

19 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

"No professional programs"

Define 'professional'. You mean something paid for? Gimp is free.

Anything with a large amount of features, is a more accurate description. Paint and Word are the worst of the worst to use, which is why I used them to prove my point.

 

[invision]

this game definitely needs new textures

[Superfluous J]

The textures are fine. That they're all that's there is the problem.

[JadeOfMaar]

1 minute ago, 5thHorseman said:

The textures are fine. That they're all that's there is the problem.

This. I'll bark and snap at the level of detail in the stock planets too, (and I generally can easily do without visual mods) but I agre that how mucch you can do with the stock planets is more important than how they look. I watched a Twitch stream last night an the person raised a hellfire about basic things in KSP. Planting flags and mining are really all you can do to interact with planets directly... but that's straying from the topic.

The high biome counts are probably someone's wise™ decision to artificially give us more reason to interact with the stock planets. More terrain mechanics in addition to better textures would be icing on everyone's cake.

[IncongruousGoat]

I have SVE installed, so I clearly think my game needs prettier planet textures. Then again, I also have pretty much every other visual mod installed as well, so it's more likely I just think my game needs to be as pretty as possible.

For additions to stock, though? Better planet textures would be nice, but I'm not going to recommend that they be added. Doing that would take up precious dev time that could be spent on much better things. This is KSP, after all - good visuals aren't exactly the selling point here.

More to do on the planets themselves... it's an interesting thought, but again I don't think it would be the best use of dev time. In most games, the point of a journey is fundamentally to reach the destination. In KSP, however, the journey itself is the point. The destination being interesting is only good insofar as it makes the journey more exciting to undertake, and for most people more surface activities won't have that effect.

Then again, I am very much in the "leave the flashy features to the modders" camp, so take my words with a grain of salt.

[ZooNamedGames]

As part of one of the weak PC community, I have to say that the planet's are fine. Giving them consistent geometry between settings would be the biggest priority in my mind as I hate having my crafts 800m below the surface when I switch terrain settings. As to how they look? Short of an entire overhaul that improves both their visual and their realism, I don't see the point (and won't likely be able to see it ingame as I would have to disable it!).

[Mrcarrot]

I agree, the stock planets have been in need of a retexture since they came out. My main focus, however, is Jool. I can create a texture that (in my opinion) looks better than Stock Jool in ~20 minutes. Why can't Squad?

[Bill Phil]

Very.

QED

[Gameslinx]

5 hours ago, IncongruousGoat said:

Doing that would take up precious dev time that could be spent on much better things

Things we don't need like the "making his-"

It took me two hours with the wrong tools to make a good looking planet comparable or one that exceeds the other planets.

 

And a message to squad, someone has already offered to make planets for you FOR FREE. I am also willing to do this, but it seems as if you don't care at all how the planets look. They're terrible and are in desperate need of a retexture.

We don't need more parts. We need better planets.

(Also to those saying that it's about how the planets are, not how they look, remember when squad retextured some of their plane parts? Yeah. The same argument could be applied there, but we're all happy that they look better).

[ARS]

Maybe it's because KSP mainly isn't about graphic. Remember, most game that came out recently prioritize graphic first and gameplay second. KSP need intensive programming for simulating astrophysics and calculations for gravity, drag, orbit, etc. Those codes is a lot more complex than FPS hitscan code. Maybe squad doesn't have much time to make the planet texture prettier since their main focus is coding for simulation

But back on topic, as for stock planets, I agree that most planets beyond kerbin is quite dull, especially because of their simplistic texture that makes it quite jarring when being compared with kerbin. Stock planets looks like either big ball of rock/ gas with texture slapped on. Graphic mods does makes them prettier, but on low performance computer, it lags like hell that the game becomes nearly unplayable. My opinion is, in order to make stock planet much more interesting without resource-heavy graphic mods is altering their terrain layout

No, seriously. Duna would be much more interesting to visit when there's a network of deep canyons (like mars' noctis labyrinth) to explore, imagine exploring those labyrinth at night using rover. Or make a deep canyon that stretches across the equator (like valles marineris), this can make elcano challenge much more interesting (so far, the only closest thing in stock KSP that looks like this is Dres' canyon, which makes Dres as my favorite landing site)

Just a diverse variations of terrain layout can give players a lot of gameplay value. Sure, graphic mods helps a lot to make it prettier, but no matter how pretty graphic mods can alter the scenery of a planet, you're still basically strolling across flat bland surface of duna. Giving more varied terrain variations can give players more reason and incentives to start "exploring" for the sake of exploration, not just FOR SCIENCE!

[Guest]

Wel-l-l... from where I'm at, the whole game could use a re-skin, or put another way, Stock Visual Enhancements ought to be just... stock. I'm sure it would help move more copies as visuals are an important part of bringing new people on-board. However, it is always a matter of priorities and available resources. Perhaps SQUAD doesn't have anyone working on the dev team who is really into improving visuals. Perhaps they feel there are other, higher priorities.

For example, making a game that's so mod-friendly that it's possible to make a whole new planet in less than two hours using MS Paint and MS Word. From where I'm at, that right there is pretty remarkable when you think about it.

[Gameslinx]

1 hour ago, Brikoleur said:

Stock Visual Enhancements ought to be just... stock

 

1 hour ago, ARS said:

Graphic mods does makes them prettier, but on low performance computer, it lags like hell

I don't mean scatterer or EVE (those lag). Higher res planet textures will use more RAM (most people have 8 or even 16 now. Ksp uses 3, stock) but won't impact performance much if at all.

[KerikBalm]

meh, that texture looks better than I expected from the start, but how does it look on the surface compared to kerbin?

Its not uncommon for a planet to look great from orbit, and then be rather meh upon landing (particularly if its a big planet/you're playing on a scaled up system).

Also, scatterer and eve alone make stock planets look much better.

I think this looks just fine:

 

I think this looks great:

Spoiler

 

But up close... it can be rather... meh... depending one where one lands, and what the scale is...

Spoiler

 

[Gameslinx]

42 minutes ago, KerikBalm said:

meh, that texture looks better than I expected from the start, but how does it look on the surface compared to kerbin?

Its not uncommon for a planet to look great from orbit, and then be rather meh upon landing (particularly if its a big planet/you're playing on a scaled up system).

Also, scatterer and eve alone make stock planets look much better.

I think this looks just fine:

 

I think this looks great:

  Hide contents

 

But up close... it can be rather... meh... depending one where one lands, and what the scale is...

  Hide contents

 

Exactly. Better terrain is needed. Check some of my screenshots from the surface on my GPO thread or AfK thread 

[klgraham1013]

If only there was a way to have good gameplay...and good art...in the same game.

[Curveball Anders]

36 minutes ago, klgraham1013 said:

If only there was a way to have good gameplay...and good art...in the same game.

I'd most likely turn the art down to get even better gameplay

 

[Alpha 360]

Could you show me a bit more how to make a planet. Its a fantastic speed-run, but I would like a little bit more information on how to build a planet. I need to work on code and building a planet sounds like a nice challenge for me.

Happy Explosions!

Edited February 22, 2018 by Alpha 360

[Gameslinx]

16 minutes ago, Alpha 360 said:

Could you show me a bit more how to make a planet. Its a fantastic speed-run, but I would like a little bit more information on how to build a planet. I need to work on code and building a planet sounds like a nice challenge for me.

Happy Explosions!

The White Guardian has created some (relatively outdated) tutorials which do still work on how to get a basic planet up and running. I have agreed to expand upon these with videos in the future.

[Alpha 360]

Could you hand a link to one of these videos? I'm working on a little side project to keep my mind busy. 

Edited February 22, 2018 by Alpha 360

[Gameslinx]

Just now, Alpha 360 said:

Could you hand a link to one of these videos? I'm working on a little side project to keep my mind busy. 

I haven't made them yet. I'm planning to. I made another speedart video a while ago using the proper tools, which i shall link.