[1.1.2][1-1-2] May 13-2016 EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements

[rbray89]

I don't recommend using non-square textures, to be honest. They are pretty badly managed by the GPU and in worst cases can be automatically converted to a square of a nearest size, thus adding dead weight without actually using it for anything useful. It would be especially a problem with enormous 8k textures many like to use with this mod. I'd recommend either to find a way to use your triplanar with a 1:1 textures, or store multiple texture types in one file.

On other subject, I think the enormous size of planetary bodies and desire of everyone to, for some reason, have completely unique clouds on every latitude and longitude (creating planet-wide texture atlas instead of a noise-based unrecognizably repeating pattern) makes the current implemementation a bit of a dead end in terms of looks. Clouds will never look good from low orbit with the current approach if raw texture will continue to be used. The problem can be solved, though, if there will be a per-pixel shader that generates visual effect (bunch of cloudy noise, for example) using the texture only as the source mask, never showing the size of actual texels. Then, as the next logical step, it's possible to ditch the source texture altogether (saving enormous amount of memory), generating the mask from few noise filters like PQS system does. Many games use a similar approach.

P.S.: I can't recommend using particle systems for volumetric clouds at all, that approach gives insane overdraw, lighting problems, and clipping problems.

That is what the detail and bump map use. This is actually quite common. Once you start getting close, the detail kicks in to make the texture have more definition.

[rbray89]

I'm getting a very large output log file generated. Just a short while it got up to 434 megabytes long.

It is being filled with this type messages...

Clouds: Offset :(0.1, 0.0)

(Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/ea95e74f6e5f192d/Runtime/ExportGenerated/StandalonePlayer/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 54)

Clouds: Offset :(0.6, 0.0)

(Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/ea95e74f6e5f192d/Runtime/ExportGenerated/StandalonePlayer/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 54)

Clouds: Offset :(0.5, 0.0)

(Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/ea95e74f6e5f192d/Runtime/ExportGenerated/StandalonePlayer/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 54)

Ah crud... missed a debug print... I'll fix it now.

[rbray89]

Ok, new release. Fixed the debug statements, changed the detail scale so the patterns don't show quite as badly.

[TNM]

autsch no, whatever you did made it terribly worse:

it takes now 700mb more memory (edit: RAM) compared to 5-3, client nearly crashed during startup (freezed for 5sec, probably loading stuff), pattern is still there too:

(6-1)

[rbray89]

autsch no, whatever you did made it terribly worse:

it takes now 700mb more memory (edit: RAM) compared to 5-3, client nearly crashed during startup (freezed for 5sec, probably loading stuff), pattern is still there too:

(6-1)

Ok, I reduced memory consumption and fixed the bump texture mapping so that it should tile like this (for real I think)

[acl8610]

The city lights seem to be floating...

[bac9]

That is what the detail and bump map use. This is actually quite common. Once you start getting close, the detail kicks in to make the texture have more definition.

Not really, the detail texture is a simple overlay that leaves the original texture resolution completely obvious and visible (not to mention that current implementation of detail texturing is introducing very noticeable tiling). It works well for stuff like closeups of concrete walls in FPS games, but not for masked clouds. Silhouette detail is the issue here, not the frequency of detail in the filled areas.

[jrandom]

This latest version causes a 1.3GB increase in memory usage and some massive slowdowns, even at the menu screen.

[Guest]

This latest version causes a 1.3GB increase in memory usage and some massive slowdowns, even at the menu screen.

I'm seeing the same thing. I've had to yank this mod to keep the game from crashing at startup now.

[DasBananenbrot]

Well those memory inrease reports kind of scare me.Until this is sorted out I will stick with v5.3

[Aknar]

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/47230747/KSP%202013-12-22%2018-09-32-67.jpg

What is the mod you are using for ressource display on the top right corner?

[scottholio]

What is the mod you are using for ressource display on the top right corner?

Here you go.

[Bothersome]

What should I change to make the clouds drift from west to east? It makes no sense to have wind patterns consistently going opposite of the planet's rotation.

I'm playing on Real Scale Solar System too, so I might need to know how to change the speed values too. Thanks.

[KyleofKerbin]

OHHHH... that explains why the newest download version says something about Volumetric Clouds!

Thanks! That helps A LOT.

[KyleofKerbin]

LOL my above post was as a reply to someone who had replied to my original post. Sorry for any confusion caused.

[Sigma52]

Well those memory inrease reports kind of scare me.Until this is sorted out I will stick with v5.3

Same here, glad i didn't jump the gun and delete v5.3 to go with the newer version.

[jrandom]

The first rule of Kerbal Club is -- always keep your previous version of mods in a safe place when installing new one!

The actual real first rule of Kerbal Club is -- always make a copy of the stock game first before adding any mods!

[MOARdV]

What should I change to make the clouds drift from west to east? It makes no sense to have wind patterns consistently going opposite of the planet's rotation.

I'm playing on Real Scale Solar System too, so I might need to know how to change the speed values too. Thanks.

Look in GameData/BoulderCo/Clouds. Edit the file cloudLayers.cfg. If you search for "speed", you will see sections with x and y values. Change the x values to negatives, and they will go west to east. I found that simply changing the signs from positive to negative gave good results. Changing that value to a larger number will make it move faster, if that's what you're looking for.

[Bothersome]

It is, I just didn't know if a negative value would work. I had already looked at them but decided not to change them because until I got word that it would be ok.

Thanks.

BTW I suppose those values are in revolutions per second?

[rbray89]

So I'm working on offering a selection between cubic and spherical mapping. This will be in the next update and should solve all the memory issues, but will of course not look quite as nice.

[MOARdV]

BTW I suppose those values are in revolutions per second?

I don't know for sure. I assumed it was movement relative to the surface, since a negative value appeared to cause the clouds to rotate faster than the surface.

[ddavis425]

Yeah sorry, I'm staying on 5-3 as well. The memory issues, floating cities, and the fact that the 8k cloud pack doesn't work with it is what is keeping me away from 6-2. Maybe your fix will help.

[NathanKell]

rbray: bac9 is talking about shader-based procedural noise, not making a single prerendered texture and using that. Totally different thing (and it's both better looking and saves on memory--especially since KSP is CPU, not GPU, bottlenecked, so shader-side stuff is comparatively cheap).

[rbray89]

rbray: bac9 is talking about shader-based procedural noise, not making a single prerendered texture and using that. Totally different thing (and it's both better looking and saves on memory--especially since KSP is CPU, not GPU, bottlenecked, so shader-side stuff is comparatively cheap).

Yeah, I just started looking into it. I'm a tad afraid it might be too expensive on the GPU. I actually moved a lot into it whenever I can, so If I can shove it in there, I will.

[rbray89]

Ok, so I updated the new release. The default is the sphere-mapped shader, with the memory intensive cubic as an option in the common-config.

As per Bac9's suggestion, I'm looking into dynamic cloud textures using perlin noise and still looking into volumetric clouds.