KSP2 System Requirements

[sjwt]

14 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Some posted this https://imgur.com/ss74z8H they could just as well used the 1080

  

 

A much better list, as it shows the minimum spec a lot lower then the offical minimum, but its stil scary seeing a GTX 1050 not running, but the 1050 TI gives a low price entery point. 

[Anth]

Just now, Bej Kerman said:

I feel like this should be fairly obvious to everyone at this point. This level of paranoia is just comical.

If they had just put a 1070ti  in the first place then the panic wouldnt have been so bad. The 2060RTX card is what panicked everyone.

[darthgently]

Just now, jebycheek said:

 Just look at the announcements.  these people are still not honest about  the public.All the blurred ing and muffling, As if their are  hiding a back stabbing truth.I feel like their mission is to put it on the table and leave it. 

My overall honest impression is that they know that whatever they make public will only generate more questions and hand-wringing dismay leading to more distraction from getting the game out.  Best to simply focus on coding and things related to coding.  It is easy to tell this stuff is distracting as they have devs posting screenshots etc.  It isn't like they have a fan appeasement specialist reading every new post or reply within 10 seconds.  The fact that it took a day or two for someone to deal with the specs dismay tells me they have far more productive things to do.  Nothing they say now will say as much as a working product on the market.  Like most artists, they maybe just want the thing to speak for itself.  I'm wondering how many ppl predicting that the sky will be falling will publicly apologize for over-reacting later?

[jebycheek]

3 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I feel like this should be fairly obvious to everyone at this point. This level of paranoia is just comical.

Why are you so confident about that? do they actually tells you how and why? like a short clean answer? dose this level of requirement is comic to you?

[MechBFP]

10 minutes ago, Anth12 said:

If they had just put a 1070ti  in the first place then the panic wouldnt have been so bad. The 2060RTX card is what panicked everyone.

Ya definitely. Even though it really isn't much of a difference performance wise there is a lot of history with newer gen cards using newer shaders, etc, that make old cards incompatible.

Most people aren't exactly in the loop on the technical differences with the more recent gen cards.

Edited February 19, 2023 by MechBFP

[Kerbart]

1 hour ago, GigFiz said:

Hmm. I did not know that, since the first place I saw this was here, so that is useful information, and makes a bit more sense about grumpy reactions to the initial leak without context. Although it doesn't really change that it is there for people in this thread.

Everything gets released on Discord first,  and that was just a pictures. By the time it was posted on the forum they wisened up and added some context, but by then it was already shark frenzy.

[Numberyellow]

I've been away for a long time.....but the amount of noise coming off this thread was enough to draw my attention..

lol, as if Take-Two gutting Star Theory, and driving them out of business, because they couldn't be patient, wasn't bad enough...but then we get this bloated, unoptimized monstrosity as the fruits of TT's deplorable behavior.. Yeah, this is still a solid "never going to purchase" for me.

Squad never should have sold the IP.

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, jebycheek said:

Why are you so confident about that? do they actually tells you how and why? like a short clean answer? dose this level of requirement is comic to you?

What IS comical about expecting that Unfinished graphics require GPUs built for Unoptimised graphics?

1 hour ago, Numberyellow said:

lol, as if Take-Two gutting Star Theory, and driving them out of business, because they couldn't be patient, wasn't bad enough...but then we get this bloated, unoptimized monstrosity as the fruits of TT's deplorable behavior.. Yeah, this is still a solid "never going to purchase" for me.

Oh? Can we see the crystal ball you got this info from?

[snip]

However bad KSP 2 is, KSP 1 is even worse.

Bold for extra emphasis

[Jacke]

15 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

However bad KSP 2 is, KSP 1 is even worse.

What makes you so optimistic?  Have you played KSP 2 as it is now?

I can play KSP 1.  It's a fantastic game with many features and I can mod it to be even better.  Right now it's unlikely I can run KSP 2 at all.

All of this has made me decide I need to wait to have independent reviewers play KSP 2 and report back on its actual performance and quality.

Releasing such a demanding game--even when Early Access--makes me think that there's a high chance this is the same as Odyssey but worse.  Pro's like @K^2 can provide more context, but I'm very familiar with leaving core coding tasks to late in the project.  Sometimes so late that they become hard to impossible.  Programming has had many waves of bloat getting into release products.  Saying something is "Early Access" isn't a carte blanche to not make an effort to restrict bloat in time and space demands of the code.

We have little dependable knowledge of what's going on here.  We've had plenty of warnings there's something not right.  I'm going to wait.  I advise everyone else to wait too.

[Onoya]

19 hours ago, Anth12 said:

1080ti should perform better than the 2060 (minimum specs) 

2060 is causing panic because it seems faster than the 1070 when in truth they are pretty close and the 1070 should have been the minimum specs and not a 2060

my mistake, i didn't was clear XD
i meant that i was hoping to do ultra at 60 fps in 1080p with my 3060ti

[Bej Kerman]

Just now, Jacke said:

What makes you so optimistic?  Have you played KSP 2 as it is now?

I've spent long enough trying to tolerate KSP 1 that I'll be completely and utterly numb to whatever performance issues KSP 2 might have.

Just now, Jacke said:

It's a fantastic game with many features and I can mod it to be even better

It runs like a broken Sloth and said mods only compound the performance issue until you end up with a game that runs at jaw-droppingly low framerates trying to fly the sort of vessels Squad was showing in the game's advertisements. You want a self-sufficient nuclear-powered vessel? Too bad, you're going to have to build the massive structure almost entirely out of MkI fuel tanks because Squad couldn't be bothered implementing the fuel switching necessary for NERVs to run on large tanks effectively. The result? A framerate that's insulting to ENIAC. Such a basic feature missing and you've already neutered what should have been the best engine in the game. Same goes for thrust in timewarp, which, even by KSP 1's tech, should have been a basic feature. It's hard to overstate Squad's negligence, and frankly, there's no way in this world that KSP 2 is going to be any worse than KSP 1.

2 minutes ago, Numberyellow said:

let's not compare it to Sonic '06, and ET for atari...that's just straight-up hyperbole.

Frankly, Sonic '06 was probably giving it a bit much credit. So maybe you're technically correct, ignoring how you intended me to interpret this sentence.

[Anth]

KSP1 is my most favorite game of all time and I found that I actually loved bug hunting and reporting after every update. I learnt a lot on how to do good bug reports. And I was amazed how I could speed many hours just working on one bug issue before reporting it.

That being said if another game had been close to the same style as KSP1 which was better I would have jumped to that in a heart beat.

KSP1 updates felt 70%-80% done which was frustrating.

[MechBFP]

Just now, Anth12 said:

KSP1 is my most favorite game of all time and I found that I actually loved bug hunting and reporting after every update. I learnt a lot on how to do good bug reports. And I was amazed how I could speed many hours just working on one bug issue before reporting it.

That being said if another game had been close to the same style as KSP1 which was better I would have jumped to that in a heart beat.

KSP1 updates felt 70%-80% done which was frustrating.

For the longest time I thought you were a QA person who worked for Squad and posted stuff to the bug tracker as a part of your job because of how many reports you made lol.

[Anth]

13 minutes ago, Onoya said:

my mistake, i didn't was clear XD
i meant that i was hoping to do ultra at 60 fps in 1080p with my 3060ti

Hopefully it will perform that well for you. Who knows.

Depends on what you do in the game of course. And remember that the graphics card is only one part.. The CPU is also extremely important. More important probably

[Onoya]

Anth12

On CPU and ram i'm not worried, i have a ryzen 7 5800x and 32 go of ram, i was just worried with the gpu

but since ultra spec are on a 1440p screen, i guess i'll be fine, i'm on a 1080p

Edited February 19, 2023 by Onoya
Forgot to quote Anth12

[Clayel]

i could see this being useful, especially for people who want to buy the game but arent sure about the requirements

[Onoya]

This is a super idea

i would even suggest to record gameplay ( with an fps counter activated, and maybe at the beginning of the video, shows current graphics settings ), put it in youtube in unlisted video ( you need to have the link to see the video ) and share the link with the feedback you're suggesting

That way, the dev can see exactly which settings are used, how fps behave, if there is any bugs or glitchs

[MARL_Mk1]

Just now, Clayel said:

i could see this being useful, especially for people who want to buy the game but arent sure about the requirements

The idea has its roots on the fact that we still lack context behind those Requirements.

KSP is a game that could choke a i9 and 4090 if you added ENOUGH parts. Unlike traditional games, there is not a ceiling of lowest performance, but a "keep adding parts until it crashes" sort of environment. A true sandbox.

We know that Minimum Specs ask for an i5 6400, 12gb RAM and a 2060 for 1080p Low, but under which conditions? Under which scenarios, vessel part counts and locations was it concluded that said system was the minimum you should have for the game to... run?

Was it with a full KerbalX on Mun's surface at 60fps? Was it with an Interstellar ship on LKO in one of their dev builds with unreleased content trying to aim for what said specs would be in a few months? Was it just to load KSC with a Thumper, Mk1-3 and a Parachute at +30fps?

I know for a fact that many people will try KSP2 on way, WAY lower spec systems than the minimum that is shown officialy.

I can't think of any other way to test the real minimum/stable requirements than to get together and do a proper Community Vibe Check to that first Early Access build.

 

3 minutes ago, Onoya said:

This is a super idea

i would even suggest to record gameplay ( with an fps counter activated, and maybe at the beginning of the video, shows current graphics settings ), put it in youtube in unlisted video ( you need to have the link to see the video ) and share the link with the feedback you're suggesting

That way, the dev can see exactly which settings are used, how fps behave, if there is any bugs or glitchs

I like this. Although recording video might induce an inherent performance loss to an already low spec system

[SSTO Crasher]

Something to look at might be the files for KSP1 and 2, if we know what glitches ksp 1, we can test that exact craft in ksp 1, by further experiments we can determine what the slow down is, and the devs can make it possible to remove or tone down that, my PC runs ksp1 fine but gets SHREDDED by Astronomer visual pack 

[jebycheek]

Yep.it's going to be really useful to everybody.

[Onoya]

Just now, MARL_Mk1 said:

The idea has its roots on the fact that we still lack context behind those Requirements.

KSP is a game that could choke a i9 and 4090 if you added ENOUGH parts. Unlike traditional games, there is not a ceiling of lowest performance, but a "keep adding parts until it crashes" sort of environment. A true sandbox.

We know that Minimum Specs ask for an i5 6400, 12gb RAM and a 2060 for 1080p Low, but under which conditions? Under which scenarios, vessel part counts and locations was it concluded that said system was the minimum you should have for the game to... run?

Was it with a full KerbalX on Mun's surface at 60fps? Was it with an Interstellar ship on LKO in one of their dev builds with unreleased content trying to aim for what said specs would be in a few months? Was it just to load KSC with a Thumper, Mk1-3 and a Parachute at +30fps?

I know for a fact that many people will try KSP2 on way, WAY lower spec systems than the minimum that is shown officialy.

I can't think of any other way to test the real minimum/stable requirements than to get together and do a proper Community Vibe Check to that first Early Access build.

 

I like this. Although recording video might induce an inherent performance loss to an already low spec system

You're making a fair point about performance loss while recording. Unless i'm wrong, there is several recording/replay software that doesn't take any load on the pc ( such as the instant replay of Geforce experience ), and even without speaking of that, if we record, it will be useful to put in the feedback how we recorded, so devs knows

[Anth]

54 minutes ago, Onoya said:

On CPU and ram i'm not worried, i have a ryzen 7 5800x and 32 go of ram, i was just worried with the gpu

Nice thats almost the same performance as my i9 9900K. Should be ample.

[intelliCom]

19 minutes ago, Onoya said:

i would even suggest to record gameplay ( with an fps counter activated, and maybe at the beginning of the video, shows current graphics settings )

That would contribute to greater GPU usage, which could create a false idea of framerates. Needs to be recorded by the player.

Though someone recording one example wouldn't hurt.

Edited February 19, 2023 by intelliCom

[jebycheek]

6 minutes ago, Anth12 said:

Nice thats almost the same performance as my i9 9900K. Should be ample.

Waht about this one:i7-12700h   RTX3060laptop

I was hoping a decent sized colony when i first bought this.

Edited February 19, 2023 by jebycheek

[18Watt]

Several posts in this thread have been edited or removed by the moderation team.  

This thread's topic is KSP2 System Requirements.  Please keep the discussion on topic.