Jump to content

KSP2 Social Posts


Ghostii_Space

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ghostii_Space said:

It's TikTok day y'all! 

Increase the surface details, add more ground scatter, misty wind and atmospheric light scattering effects, a few true volumetric cloud layers, the parachute landing on the ground, burn marks on the heatshield... yeah that would make for a really nice looking EA game. It's getting there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not seeing any jagged edges in this shot, so that's a big plus.  Ground textures are a bit rough, but hopefully that will change with release?  Honestly, the Kerbal and rover look really great imo.

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

Duna looks amazing!

Agreed.  Looks very nice at this distance!

Also, is anyone else as excited to see the Kerbal animations as I am?  I can't wait to laugh hysterically at Bob screaming and flailing his arms during an inevitable rapid unplanned disassembly (unless Bob is just as rock-steady as Jeb).  The animations shown off in the Kerbal feature video will add so much life to the game.

Spoiler

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ashandalar said:

New Tweet:

 

The ground textures look like 1.9, Duna looks jagged, and there is KSP 1 levels of ground scatter if it was turned down to zero. Anyone else noticing that KSP 2 is not looking as great as earlier images? The Eve video was very nice, but the scatter and ground textures looked not so good. KSP 1.12.5 scatter and ground textures look better than this. I really hope that this is at a very low setting. The only plus is that the Kerbal’s helmet has a light inside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CytauriKerbal said:

The ground textures look like 1.9, Duna looks jagged, and there is KSP 1 levels of ground scatter if it was turned down to zero. Anyone else noticing that KSP 2 is not looking as great as earlier images? The Eve video was very nice, but the scatter and ground textures looked not so good. KSP 1.12.5 scatter and ground textures look better than this. I really hope that this is at a very low setting. The only plus is that the Kerbal’s helmet has a light inside.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

Can the developers show us a high resolution? Or big rockets? Or system requirements? Or asteroids? Or a communication system? Or real gameplay longer than 30 seconds?

I imagine all of those will appear soon enough in the EA launch media in less than a month. Even if they don't, only a few community members will have to record their gameplay for us to see what the game is like before purchasing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, KSPLuster said:

image.png

honestly this needs to be pinned not even kidding, hate to ask a moderator but this really needs to be said alot more often and what is "at the best" and "just grabbed"

should state, not the moderators need to tell us each and everything, im asking so this wont be an over and over, for it to be pinned or something

also no one pinged me about this photo :( (not this one the other one)

Edited by Stephensan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, KSPLuster said:

image.png

It feels like every single thing they've shown us up to this point was "a random screen grab". It's like every single screenshot was taken in a different environment, with different settings and, most importantly, in a different build. Almost half a month until early accsess, can we see the actual game now, please? 

Edited by dok_377
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, you want to see incomplete product? Why?

I'm getting annoyed, again, the game is out in couple of days and you are going to see it ANYWAY, IN ITS ACTUAL FORM ON DAY ONE, whether you buy it or not, there will be thousands of pictures within hours after release

[snip]

Edited by Snark
Redacted by moderator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, dave1904 said:

A second screenshot with max settings would be simpler than the explanation imo but whatever.

Only if one was taken at the time.

The person in question was busy doing other stuff, and took it at random, so why would they bother?

I'd rather see more of the average or mediocre images that look nice, as they are going to be more representative of what I will see, than super polished almost 'fake' images that are only achievable on top end systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...