TickleMyMary Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, ShadowZone said: That's... not true. I mean... Why would lie? Also, did you really upload a video to try and prove somebody wrong about a bug they say they're experiencing? That's some 'dedication'. Here's my proof of it... Edited June 23, 2023 by TickleMyMary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BechMeister Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 Love this part - but you've kind of made it less "efficient" by putting the decorative monopropellant tanks. could you either remove the monopropellant tanks or make us able to put fuel in them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz313th Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Frida Space 2 said: but if it takes so long to fix such important and primitive bugs, then I reasonably cannot hope that the much more advanced features that have been promised will ever be implemented at an acceptable level. I just wanted to vent my feelings as I'm starting to feel irrecoverably pessimistic about the future of a game I would really love to love. Right... People should Stop listening to what the Devs are saying and just look at the results of their actions. 1) Pre Alpha EA release with many foundational problems to the most basic functionality of the software. 2) Two patches that marginally fixed some performance issues, but for the most part created even more foundational bugs. 3) Development (Coding) cadence slowed down to roughly half the rate. 4) Third patch came out and performance increased, with more added game breaking bugs. Either T2/IG want to turn this around but they can't because they don't have the skill, knowledge or the resources to do it.. Or, they don't care at this point, have decided to ride it out for as long as minimal revenue comes in, while at the same time cutting costs and laying off staff. The only reason they continue to communicate to the community, release poorly written patches and promise, is because the blind faith will support the limited revenue stream up to a certain point. The social media posts, forum posts, blogs, vlogs etc.. don't cost anything and can be done with a minimal staff. But the re-writing of broken code, the adding of content and the improvement of the product costs money and talented coders aren't cheap, especially the ones that are hired to sift through foreign code to fix a bunch of stuff they didn't write. I gave KSP2 the benefit of the doubt during the first few months, but I'm not blind and it's completely obvious that either they are, 1) Simply trying hard without the necessary resources, or, 2) Just pretending, so they can barely salvage a dying revenue stream. Rant #2 over.. Ps... I would have way more respect for the efforts of T2/IG if they just went completely silent and put their heads down and fixed this mess, to surface a year later with version 1.0 fully tested and vetted for release. The talk and BS is absolutely the fuel to my fire. Edited June 23, 2023 by Buzz313th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedderThanMisty Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 17 hours ago, James M said: What in the what?! I kinda wanna test this for myself. Could be fun A video of the phenomena was posted in another bug report here. It's pretty much exactly what I experienced, but to a lesser extreme (he didn't get suborbital again). Edited June 23, 2023 by RedderThanMisty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoSBoL Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 32 minutes ago, Buzz313th said: Ps... I would have way more respect for the efforts of T2/IG if they just went completely silent and put their heads down and fixed this mess, to surface a year later with version 1.0 fully tested and vetted for release. Well, many do appreciate that they don't go silent. So there is a solution at hand. Just surface a year later while they put their heads down and fix this mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cocoscacao Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 On 6/22/2023 at 6:35 PM, Dakota said: We'll have some updates to share tomorrow (in Nate's Dev Update) on bug fixes that slipped to v0.1.4 including trajectory changing through SoI and others. This update is coming out today? I'm just curious... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz313th Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 25 minutes ago, LoSBoL said: Well, many do appreciate that they don't go silent. So there is a solution at hand. Just surface a year later while they put their heads down and fix this mess. Yeah, I hear ya.. But's what's the point of all the talk if nothing really comes of it? What's that saying?... "Actions speak louder than words". The end result of all this "Moo with no Milk", just sets unrealistic expectations and when patch 15 comes out and doesn't address anything substantial/creates more issues, then people just get mad and the devs lose credibility. Just shut up and do the work.. Stop talking about it. We have to wait anyways, better to wait without being reminded how much everyone regrets being a part of the current KSP2 experience.. This is a joke. Edited June 23, 2023 by Buzz313th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow71 Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 On 6/22/2023 at 9:35 AM, Dakota said: We'll have some updates to share tomorrow (in Nate's Dev Update) on bug fixes that slipped to v0.1.4 including trajectory changing through SoI and others. At this point today, I am simply waiting on what Nate has to say on things. I am curious to find out why the bugs haven't been fixed, what happened to cause the patch to slip a couple days, and how on Kerbin the patch could be released with the new bugs that have been identified. I'd also be curious to see if Nate dives into why he/the company thinks the timing of the announced sale is a good thing, and whether or not it is being driven by an upcoming earnings call. I doubt he will, but it would be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strawberry Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 For drag, it was mentioned three weeks ago that “In fact, it’s been SO corrected that after we fixed it, we started to get messages from QA that aircraft felt too fast! We checked the numbers, and they’re correct.”. They were definitely aware that the changes reduced drag by a lot, my bet is that they did increase drag to compensate for the drag fix, but they eered to much on the side of caution and didnt increase drag enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aziz Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 2 minutes ago, Strawberry said: For drag, it was mentioned three weeks ago that “In fact, it’s been SO corrected that after we fixed it, we started to get messages from QA that aircraft felt too fast! We checked the numbers, and they’re correct.”. They were definitely aware that the changes reduced drag by a lot, my bet is that they did increase drag to compensate for the drag fix, but they eered to much on the side of caution and didnt increase drag enough. I mean.. simple double Whiplash - powered plane cruising steadily at low altitude at 1500m/s without right wing tells me that the QA were right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz313th Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 2 minutes ago, Strawberry said: For drag, it was mentioned three weeks ago that “In fact, it’s been SO corrected that after we fixed it, we started to get messages from QA that aircraft felt too fast! We checked the numbers, and they’re correct.”. They were definitely aware that the changes reduced drag by a lot, my bet is that they did increase drag to compensate for the drag fix, but they eered to much on the side of caution and didnt increase drag enough. Sounds to me like they didn't know how to fix it properly and just bandaided the code with a "Take from peter to pay Paul" solution. The numbers aren't even close and quite frankly I'm surprised they released that statement as it demonstrates how little the Q&A folks know about the topic. Or maybe Q&A didn't even say that? LOL, who knows. Let me remind you that all of this is kind of a moot point anyways, since the other major factor of simulating upper atmospheric drag is completely absent from the game... Aerodynamic Heating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strawberry Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 3 minutes ago, Buzz313th said: The numbers aren't even close and quite frankly I'm surprised they released that statement as it demonstrates how little the Q&A folks know about the topic. Or maybe Q&A didn't even say that? LOL, who knows. What? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutex Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 4 hours ago, ShadowZone said: That's... not true. I've experienced the bug they're talking about with various jet engines. I think by "any engine" they meant jet engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheehaw Kerman Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 7 hours ago, Margoth said: Thanks for the nice big bugfix update! After a quick test I couldn't reach orbit due to bugs so I'm still calling the game unplayable. I will submit a proper report on the worst ones a bit later. Made it to orbit three times with the patch last night. Different craft, with a range of parts/sizes. Everything went fine, no issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylvi Fisthaug Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 22 minutes ago, Buzz313th said: The numbers aren't even close and quite frankly I'm surprised they released that statement as it demonstrates how little the Q&A folks know about the topic. Or maybe Q&A didn't even say that? LOL, who knows. What? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz313th Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 21 minutes ago, Strawberry said: What? Well, when the MK1 pod doesn't exhibit any drag in the upper Kerbin Atmosphere and or accelerates, then obviously the numbers aren't correct. But I don't think this bug is that closely related to the "Drag Occlusion Fix" , since a save game state affects it's existence. What about the pod skipping off the upper atmosphere? Please stop making excuses for a department or departments not doing their job. Either Q&A missed this simple "In your face" bug, or they caught it, but the code has been so scrambled that they didn't know how to fix it, or, management didn't want to give the coders time to fix it before the 22nd. 12 minutes ago, Sylvi Fisthaug said: What? See my reply above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shdwlrd Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 34 minutes ago, Buzz313th said: Aerodynamic Heating I have to ask... Why is this such a huge priority when there are other more pressing bugs to get fixed and features to be added? KSP1 survived several years without it. Why is it mandatory for KSP2 to have it now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz313th Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 19 minutes ago, shdwlrd said: I have to ask... Why is this such a huge priority when there are other more pressing bugs to get fixed and features to be added? KSP1 survived several years without it. Why is it mandatory for KSP2 to have it now? Isn't atmospheric heating a foundational gameplay mechanic? Especially considering it limits and or defines design decisions to recover a spacecraft from spaceflight? Considering roughly one third of all planets in KSP, maybe more, will have an atmosphere and at some point we as players will be interacting with our spacecraft having to safely transit the upper atmosphere at high velocity.. Wouldn't you consider this pretty important? Furthermore, having it in game is necessary for the developers to finish writing the code that balances out all of the reentry dynamics. Not having it in game when the devs are currently still fixing code in the flight model seems like an ass backwards way to do things. Edited June 23, 2023 by Buzz313th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TickleMyMary Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 On 6/22/2023 at 4:45 PM, Intercept Games said: Fixed: trees vanish before they are completely off-screen You sure about that? Still look pretty vanishy @ max settings to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aziz Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 3 minutes ago, Buzz313th said: Isn't atmospheric heating a foundational gameplay mechanic? Especially considering it limits and or defines design decisions to recover a spacecraft from spaceflight? Considering roughly one third of all planets in KSP, maybe more, will have an atmosphere and at some point we as players will be interacting with our spacecraft having to safely transit the upper atmosphere at high velocity.. Wouldn't you consider this pretty important? Ironically, before KSP2 got its early access announcement, I've seen people wanting the heating, commnet and few other stuff to be optional, only because it was like this in KSP1. Completely ignoring the fact that those features arrived years into post-availability development, literally after the game hit 1.0. 5 minutes ago, TickleMyMary said: You sure about that? Still look pretty vanishy @ max settings to me! That's just LOD. I'm pretty sure they meant occlusion culling cutting out the trees before they were out of camera FOV on the edges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shdwlrd Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 14 minutes ago, Buzz313th said: Isn't atmospheric heating a foundational gameplay mechanic? Especially considering it limits and or defines design decisions to recover a spacecraft from spaceflight? Considering roughly one third of all planets in KSP, maybe more, will have an atmosphere and at some point we as players will be interacting with our spacecraft having to safely transit the upper atmosphere at high velocity.. Wouldn't you consider this pretty important? Furthermore, having it in game is necessary for the developers to finish writing the code that balances out all of the reentry dynamics. Not having it in game when the devs are currently still fixing code in the flight model seems like an ass backwards way to do things. Atmospheric heating isn't necessary at the moment. It's more important to have a predictable atmospheric flight model to work with. Once you have a predictable flight model to work with, then add atmospheric heating. That way you're only tuning the heating once, not every time you have to change base atmospheric flight model. If you want to add the FX, sure. There better be a clear note that the FX isn't representative of craft heating though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcwaffles2003 Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 3 hours ago, regex said: More trees, my system can handle it. The pop-in is terrible. Fair enough :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbal space program Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) 36 minutes ago, shdwlrd said: Atmospheric heating isn't necessary at the moment. It's more important to have a predictable atmospheric flight model to work with. Once you have a predictable flight model to work with, then add atmospheric heating. That way you're only tuning the heating once, not every time you have to change base atmospheric flight model. Not to mention that as it stands now, compounding the failure of craft to slow down as expected in the atmosphere with also blowing them up due to overheating would just be adding insult to injury. Edited June 23, 2023 by herbal space program Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephensan Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 it seems that 1440p is the max res that the game will "allow" with the new better fps.. 4k, or 4k with DLDSR has dropped a lot of frames, nearly losing about 60-80% of its performance in most areas besides a SELECT few times it decides its ok.. most other games don't have this issue. Ryzen 5 3600, rtx 3070 OC'ed 64gb of ram. most all other games can be played at high/max settings with 4k DLDSR but with this recent 0.1.3 update it is overall worse with now mostly even with simple builds staying at 15fps and below with a few IF AND WHEN times giving you some quite amazing 60+ 100+ fps, however majority is at 15fps.. my conclusion for "want the best" looking and playing, stay at 1440p, and on kerbin turn off ground clutter stuff.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) So I finished my first 2 missions with the new patch. First of all: Has anyone figured out what that means in the patch notes: Quote Added ability to toggle visibility of some 3D map elements I couldn't find anything where I can toggle something and I did not see the lines between the intercept location and the corresponing SOI location which I am pretty sure was there in the last version. The performance seems to be better. But it degraded over time, so there are probably some issues. Both missions ("Kerbin orbin and return" and "Minmus landing and return") failed because of no drag during Kerbin entry. And in total I found 15 bugs. 4 of them are definitely old ones. 5 are new I think. The rest I am not sure if they are new. Will check the bug reports later if all of them have been reported. Some are pretty minor issues however. Most critical bugs for me are the existing bugs with decaying orbits and wrong trajectory during SOI change. And the new "no drag" issue. The rockets were pretty simple, so no complicated staging or any docking ports. In the past I also had problems there. I really hope they make a hotfix for some of the more critial issues and not wait 2 months again. Edited June 23, 2023 by running_bird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.