Jump to content

KSP2 Hype Train Thread

Whirligig Girl
 Share

Recommended Posts

GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

It's not clear that the OP is mainly about the initial KSP1 Early Access promotional animations and asking if we're going to see something similar for KSP2?

Like I said in my post, there are already threads to talk about that stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

Also reminder that tomorrow is ONE HUNDRED DAYS FROM LAUNCH

kerbal-space.gif

Remind me when it's 100 seconds from launch. :P

Also, for anyone who wants a countdown timer, check my sig.

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoeSchmuckatelli

JoeSchmuckatelli

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Vl3d said:

 

 

2 hours ago, TLTay said:

Hopefully the footage will be recent.

I'm a bit leery of expecting too much 'new'.  Judging from past shows, as part of a longer 2023 Preview, KSP2 will get only a short segment.  Maybe 2 minutes not counting whatever words they get from Nate.  Usually, it's a trailer.  Sometimes you get a bit of gameplay.

The team's gonna want to highlight what's possible in the game - so I'd expect a broad array of images designed to communicate what KSP2 will be to audiences that aren't 'us.'  Like the 'potential new player' person.  Perhaps a new trailer?

I'd wait for the next installment of whatever they release with an Arecibo message before anticipating a whole lot of 'hey KSP fans, here's the development update' with new stuff for us to analyze. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stephensmat

stephensmat

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Vl3d said:

If they release a trailer that's even more impressive than the first cinematic for KSP2 (music included), I'm going to be very happy.

I didn't even get serious about playing KSP1 until I saw that trailer. Don't know what's going to happen tomorrow, but I know I'll be pending the next hundred days trying to do things that might save me some space travel time.

 

The PCGamer bit is going to release about 1am my time, but all I need to know for sure is the PC requirements. (I know, not likely to happen yet).

Edited by stephensmat
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, stephensmat said:

I didn't even get serious about playing KSP1 until I saw that trailer. Don't know what's going to happen tomorrow, but I know I'll be pending the next hundred days trying to do things that might save me some space travel time.

 

The PCGamer bit is going to release about 1am my time, but all I need to know for sure is the PC requirements. (I know, not likely to happen yet).

My guess is that the minimum CPU will likely be a Gen 1 Ryzen R5/Kabylake I5 CPU and the GPU a GTX 10XX/Radeon R# 3XX/4XX for the min specs. 

Of course, they could go with the standard GTX 900 series min spec that everyone seems to slap on. I doubt a 900 series would do much though, considering how graphically intense KSP 2 seems to be. PBR shaders, volumetric clouds, custom explosions, and that's not even to mention the possibility that Ray Tracing might be in game. Of course, the graphics are nothing compared to the physics, which is of course, CPU bound, and single core bound at that. So yeah, I see Kabylake being the min. Of course, the recommended would probably be a Comet Lake processor, for that Ghz. 

Although, that is all said with the assumption that KSP 2's physics will be single-core bound like KSP 1. I haven't kept up with Unity physics, but last I heard, it didn't handle multi-core physics well. Who knows, we might get a two-core physics system and Ghz might become less of a priority with the physics engine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLTay

TLTay

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

I doubt a 900 series would do much though, considering how graphically intense KSP 2 seems to be.

Are you seeing these screenshots being posted on social media lately? For the most part it looks like a mid-2000s MMO. Featureless terrain and low quality textures on display. Intel integrated graphics might be able to cut it if you turn the clouds down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, TLTay said:

Are you seeing these screenshots being posted on social media lately? For the most part it looks like a mid-2000s MMO. Featureless terrain and low quality textures on display. Intel integrated graphics might be able to cut it if you turn the clouds down.

"Pre-Alpha" screenshots. The finished stuff is going to be way more defined. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLTay

TLTay

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

"Pre-Alpha" screenshots. The finished stuff is going to be way more defined. 

Given the feature set the game is releasing to early access with, I'm not sure the benefit of the doubt is warranted. I guess we'll get to test the pre-alpha game in 2.5 months, so we'll see...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t_v

t_v

Posted
Posted (edited)

What I’ve seen is the same surfaces looking vastly different across clips. What I’m assuming is that for the show and tells and feature videos, the devs film on max (or close to max) settings, which includes dense normal maps for terrain, higher polygon count, materials and reflections, whereas for the Twitter screenshots, we are seeing what the average buyer would see on their slightly higher-than-average laptop and medium settings

Edited by t_v
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stephensan

Stephensan

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TLTay said:

Are you seeing these screenshots being posted on social media lately? For the most part it looks like a mid-2000s MMO. Featureless terrain and low quality textures on display. Intel integrated graphics might be able to cut it if you turn the clouds down.

the fps and visuals state has been highly varied i would say based on the knowledge we know these videos are the closet to "new" we have, but is still missing certain graphical settings

 

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=32

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=35

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=65

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=102

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=182

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=258

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=524

but the issue is things like ground scatter, small objects is not in the game as of what we know, however PBR for ground is there, which still shows its in development, but even with just the PBR for the ground textures show at least that you will require a discreet GPU or a ryzen Igpu..

 

and just by looking even these videos are rather "old", so the screenshots are really not meant to look the best, just some teaseing.. there is alot to do before EA, so i assume ground scattering/small ground objects will be added soon, but some planets will most likely not have them due to what they are made of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stephensan

Stephensan

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

August 2021

 

 

I showed a video clip of ground scatter/small objects existing,

https://youtu.be/XAL3XaP-LyE?t=35

 

also i had stated

"and just by looking even these videos are rather "old", so the screenshots are really not meant to look the best, just some teaseing.."

it shows at hand that i seen this. I even gave a reason that these videos are rather old even nate said some of the stuff shown has been changed already, compared to the newest version. it also shows it does not give any the smaller rocks being shown, only very few, "larger rocks" compared to what was shown back in 2021 august which showed tons of large rocks, small, and tiny rocks for 100's of meters away.

it would still seem that it would be missing most of the small objects/ ground scatter compared to the 2021 video. and is still around the ksp 1 version of "rocks and scatter" amount.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magnemoe

magnemoe

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, GoldForest said:

My guess is that the minimum CPU will likely be a Gen 1 Ryzen R5/Kabylake I5 CPU and the GPU a GTX 10XX/Radeon R# 3XX/4XX for the min specs. 

Of course, they could go with the standard GTX 900 series min spec that everyone seems to slap on. I doubt a 900 series would do much though, considering how graphically intense KSP 2 seems to be. PBR shaders, volumetric clouds, custom explosions, and that's not even to mention the possibility that Ray Tracing might be in game. Of course, the graphics are nothing compared to the physics, which is of course, CPU bound, and single core bound at that. So yeah, I see Kabylake being the min. Of course, the recommended would probably be a Comet Lake processor, for that Ghz. 

Although, that is all said with the assumption that KSP 2's physics will be single-core bound like KSP 1. I haven't kept up with Unity physics, but last I heard, it didn't handle multi-core physics well. Who knows, we might get a two-core physics system and Ghz might become less of a priority with the physics engine. 

Minimum CPU spec probably depend a lot on your scope.  as in how high part count you play with,  are you flying around with small probes or capsules or are you building giant ships and collonies. 
Recommended specifications will probably be able to handle stuff we seen in videos like huge space station in Jool orbit with the starship and the colonies. 

Graphic spec  also depend on  graphical settings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoldForest

GoldForest

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, TLTay said:

Given the feature set the game is releasing to early access with, I'm not sure the benefit of the doubt is warranted. I guess we'll get to test the pre-alpha game in 2.5 months, so we'll see...

Of course things won't look that good in pre-alpha or even alpha. Look at KSP 1. It went through 2 or 3 graphical updates until it reached its state today. I have no doubt KSP 2 will do the same. You can always update the art style. You can't really update code that's been set in stone down the line, so the gameplay needs to come first. And I said "finished" product, as in the release after early access. Lot of time to improve graphics.

1 hour ago, magnemoe said:

Minimum CPU spec probably depend a lot on your scope.  as in how high part count you play with,  are you flying around with small probes or capsules or are you building giant ships and collonies. 
Recommended specifications will probably be able to handle stuff we seen in videos like huge space station in Jool orbit with the starship and the colonies. 

Graphic spec  also depend on  graphical settings. 

Hence the CPU choices. Kabylake and Zen1 Ryzen are decent CPUs. Not the fastest, but a good speed still. 

As for GPUs, true, but even min quality has a minimum limit.

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...