A Taste of Science

[wpetula]

A very uplifting dev post. Full steam ahead to the promised land!

[Bej Kerman]

7 minutes ago, wpetula said:

Full steam ahead to the promised land!

The slime's coming home

[Stephensan]

i hope to see a devblog for each new part/generalized part sm/md/lg type deal

[Pthigrivi]

I'm pretty excited. It's been tough to play on my machine so I haven't been able to be really active here but there are the bones of a really incredible game forming up. Hopefully things get ironed out a bit before 1.3 and I can really dive in. 

Miss yall.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Pthigrivi

[GGG-GoodGuyGreg]

2 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

Not worth 50 dollars, I expected more-> Expectations based almost solely on price.

What would you rather have expectations based on if not price?

[Alexoff]

26 minutes ago, GGG-GoodGuyGreg said:

What would you rather have expectations based on if not price?

He said he was based on the YouTube bloggers' reviews, based on which it was possible to understand that the game would be terrible and not worth buying. But he liked taste of KSP2, his tastes are somewhat unusual. He does not intend to explain his words, since he does not care who understood what.

[Bej Kerman]

[snip]

4 hours ago, Alexoff said:

But he liked taste of KSP2, his tastes are somewhat unusual

Then again, your criteria of graphical problems is unusual.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Vanamonde

[RaBDawG]

4 hours ago, cocoscacao said:

No there won't be. Just bug fixes and possibly a new engine. Next update is next week. This whole thread is about it.

No next week they “plan” to tell us when to expect the next update.  That’s at least two weeks out for next update.  

[Alexoff]

27 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Then again, your criteria of graphical problems is unusual.

The graphics issues of the KSP2 are the last thing to look out for. But graphics KSP2 is more like an indie project created by a few enthusiasts.

[PDCWolf]

5 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

The graphics issues of the KSP2 are the last thing to look out for. But graphics KSP2 is more like an indie project created by a few enthusiasts.

You've probably earned the award for the absolutely worst looking screenshot, but I do agree: The game looks bad and amateur.

[LoSBoL]

[snip]

4 hours ago, GGG-GoodGuyGreg said:

What would you rather have expectations based on if not price?

You should never base your expectancies on price, you will get bitten and keep being bitten if you do. Either you do your due dillengence and look into what you want to buy, or you will keep getting bitten.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Vanamonde

[GGG-GoodGuyGreg]

23 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

You should never base your expectancies on price, you will get bitten and keep being bitten if you do. Either you do your due dillengence and look into what you want to buy, or you will keep getting bitten.

That doesn’t make a lot of sense. No matter what downside I find, it’s one thing when the game is priced at 50$ and another thing when priced at 20$. 
 
Maybe you know a downside that is not amplified by a high sticker price. 

[Alexoff]

[snip]

3 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

You've probably earned the award for the absolutely worst looking screenshot

I was surprised that I saw such a poor picture, but I set the maximum graphics settings. In one previous conversation, I wanted to illustrate the fact that if the complexities of space rocket physics can still be somehow justified, then showing such graphics in 2023 is simply shameful for big company. In KSP2, a lot of elements look unfinished and sloppy

Edited May 14, 2023 by Vanamonde

[Bej Kerman]

2 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

In KSP2, a lot of elements look unfinished and sloppy

Almost like it's an early access title.

[Alexoff]

Just now, Bej Kerman said:

Almost like it's an early access title.

No one promised to improve the graphics, most likely in 1.0 it will remain the same

[LoSBoL]

3 hours ago, GGG-GoodGuyGreg said:

That doesn’t make a lot of sense. No matter what downside I find, it’s one thing when the game is priced at 50$ and another thing when priced at 20$. 
 
Maybe you know a downside that is not amplified by a high sticker price. 

Ok, your right, you should not base any purchase descision on price alone.

[snip]

Edited May 14, 2023 by Vanamonde

[Alexoff]

[snip]

2 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

you should not base any purchase descision on price alone

Do I understand correctly that the players who bought KSP2 should be happy with the purchase, otherwise they themselves are to blame?

Edited May 14, 2023 by Vanamonde

[Vanamonde]

More presonal and off-topic comments removed. 

[RocketRockington]

My expectations were set by early reviews and a distinct air of male cow feces from all the early hype.  Which is why I refunded it after a quick confirmation of how bad it was.

My disappointment, and why I'm hanging out here, is based on my love of KSP1 and all the potential that was cut off by shutting down Squad, and all the wasted potential that was poured down the toilet by giving Uber Entertainment KSP2 to develop - and then rehiring the same project management and giving them a chance to mess it up twice/continue to mess it up.

Imagine what a competent developer - or even just another amateur but larger team could have done with the mountain of time and money Uber/Star Theory/Intercept has burnt at this point. Well, we all spent 4 years since the KSP2 announce imagining that, and here's where we are.

I imagine what happened was Nate gave T2 the same snow job he gave the fans - about how he's an huge fan, that Uber is totally committed, that the project is going well, that morale is high - yadda yadda yadda.  Which it turns out is what he says about every project he's connected with.  That he's still giving now.

Edited May 15, 2023 by RocketRockington

[Spicat]

4 hours ago, Alexoff said:

No one promised to improve the graphics, most likely in 1.0 it will remain the same

They did, on the discord and they also mentioned it in the graphics dev diary:

On 3/10/2023 at 10:00 PM, Intercept Games said:

I might be biased, but from orbit, Kerbol’s planets look incredible. Our art team did a fantastic job. From the surface the game is still quite pretty, but the terrain itself just doesn’t have the consistent visual quality we want yet. While trying to build that ground up to our visual ambitions, we added more features than the previous PQS architecture can support. It wasn’t until the ramp up to EA that it became understood just how far past the limits of the tech we had reached.  

On 3/10/2023 at 10:00 PM, Intercept Games said:

Another area that will see a major shift in visual quality and performance is bringing the game up to Unity’s modern renderer, HDRP (read more about HDRP here if you’re curious, it rocks). The main benefits we get from HDRP are a more optimized render engine, which means faster framerates, and a more flexible shader model, which means more effective dev team efforts. It’ll also make it easier for visual mods to be built. As a sidenote, despite how much we love you modders, this change will definitely break most visual mods (sorry modders, sometimes we must hurt the ones we love). 

These in-progress changes will allow us to build more scientifically grounded yet fantastical worlds for the Kerbals to explore for years to come.  

[PDCWolf]

17 minutes ago, Spicat said:

They did, on the discord and they also mentioned it in the graphics dev diary:

All of that is referring directly to the terrain though. Terrain isn't just the problem. The pop-in is nasty, the trees all mush into a thick green soup almost indistinguishable from the ground save for the shaded sides, the ground is very reflective, bloom blinds you, the jaggies cut your eyes, and everything that's supposed to be anything other than metal or grass looks extremely dull and cartoony. None of that has been addressed past excessive culling of ground objects on that blog you link, which was done for performance only.

[Spicat]

54 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

All of that is referring directly to the terrain though. Terrain isn't just the problem. The pop-in is nasty, the trees all mush into a thick green soup almost indistinguishable from the ground save for the shaded sides, the ground is very reflective, bloom blinds you, the jaggies cut your eyes, and everything that's supposed to be anything other than metal or grass looks extremely dull and cartoony. None of that has been addressed past excessive culling of ground objects on that blog you link, which was done for performance only.

They want to improve the visual of the terrain, so still sound like a graphics improvement to me (and a lot of people, me included, want them to improve the ground because it's the biggest flaw of ksp2 graphics).

Also HDRP is not just about the terrain and performance but affect all graphics (lighting, clouds...), link mentioned in the dev diary.

If you want something more general, they did promise visual improvements. Source from kerbal space program 2 steam page:

Quote

How is the full version planned to differ from the Early Access version?
The 1.0 version of KSP 2 will include significantly more features than the Early Access version, such as what you see on the roadmap plus other items added along the way. This includes:

• More parts and the opportunity for more creative builds
• More star systems and hidden anomalies
• Improved quality of life and onboarding to open up the vast beauty of space to even more players
• Continued performance improvements and visual updates

They are already doing some improvement, with the fog we saw in patch 2 and the planet shine in patch 3. Those are minor but at least it indicates their will to improve graphics.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Spicat

[Alexoff]

1 hour ago, Spicat said:

They did, on the discord and they also mentioned it in the graphics dev diary

maybe in 1.2, in 2123...

[PDCWolf]

51 minutes ago, Spicat said:

They want to improve the visual of the terrain, so still sound like a graphics improvement to me (and a lot of people, me included, want them to improve the ground because it's the biggest flaw of ksp2 graphics).

Also HDRP is not just about the terrain and performance but affect all graphics (lighting, clouds...), link mentioned in the dev diary.

If you want something more general, they did promise visual improvements. Source from kerbal space program 2 steam page:

They are already doing some improvement, with the fog we saw in patch 2 and the planet shine in patch 3. Those are minor but at least it indicates their will to improve graphics.

Ahh, that's better. Still a bit too general of an a statement, but better.

[Strawberry]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

All of that is referring directly to the terrain though. Terrain isn't just the problem. The pop-in is nasty, the trees all mush into a thick green soup almost indistinguishable from the ground save for the shaded sides, the ground is very reflective, bloom blinds you, the jaggies cut your eyes, and everything that's supposed to be anything other than metal or grass looks extremely dull and cartoony. None of that has been addressed past excessive culling of ground objects on that blog you link, which was done for performance only.

Didn't they show us improved planetshine in 1.3? Considering we've already got several graphics changes such as improvements in clouds and scattering I think its fair to say we will continue to get them throughout updates.