Jump to content

What if KSP runs on the CryEngine?

Dimetime35c

By Dimetime35c
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Xiphos

Xiphos

Posted
Posted

I still think the average user pc isn't powerful enough to run the game smoothly as it is. Adding a game engine that supports a much much higher level of detail and physics will just hurt current users more than help. I hope in the future people will realize consoles are terrible and invest their hard earned money into a machine that can do more than just run a disk. (sadly more people just want to buy something 'out of the box' than build it themselves) I like your thought process here but it will never happen for KSP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PHENO

PHENO

Posted
Posted

I think a low level 100% custom engine would be the "best" thing for something like KSP. Lightweight minimal effort physics library on top of a very simple rendering library and LUA bindings for everything. Let the graphics card handle the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xrayfishx

xrayfishx

Posted
Posted (edited)

"My wooden laptop would fly through the roof." © DarkZenny (not a member of this forum, afaik).

As for the people complaining, this is a what if. Similar to xkcd's what if, except less funny. Besides, hopefully one day we will see KSP 2 so maybe, just maybe we can find a better game engine for that.

Edited by xrayfishx
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sethnizzle

Sethnizzle

Posted
Posted
I still think the average user pc isn't powerful enough to run the game smoothly as it is. Adding a game engine that supports a much much higher level of detail and physics will just hurt current users more than help.

That's not because KSP is some amazing technical marvel though. Its just barely optimized (to be expected as its still in development) and is held back by Unity. Unity's lack of multi thread support, (relatively) crap physics engine, and no real 64bit support are extremely detrimental to the performance of a game like KSP. The amazing part is just how much SQUAD has been able to squeeze out of the Unity engine.

So, if it was as easy as just saying "now our game runs on this engine" then picking a better engine would most certainly help. As it is though SQUAD is pretty much stuck with Unity. Perhaps KSP will be such a huge success when its finished that SQUAD will be able to license a better engine, or create their own, for KSP2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blaster

Blaster

Posted
Posted

On the topic of physics engines, World of Tanks is getting the Havok Physics Engine this year. It's gone from having no physics at all, to having its own vehicle physics implemented, now to getting Havok physics for vehicles and terrain. Big change indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
steffen_anywhere

steffen_anywhere

Posted
Posted

I know it is not going to happen, but I'm still hoping for NVidia to use KSP as a showcase for their PhysX, in which case the development would gain a hundred programmers, millions in funding and the result would be physics running properly on multicore processors and on GPUs using NVidia's PhysX technology. The graphics would get a huge boost too. This would mean that even a little slower machines (not saying horribly slow, those wouldn't be able to handle it anyways) would outperform a state of the art gaming PC running the current game...

But, as I said, not going to happen.

BTW: The meme above has so many grammar mistakes, I'm not even going to start on it. It doesn't even say the message properly LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steveman0

steveman0

Posted
Posted
That's not because KSP is some amazing technical marvel though. Its just barely optimized (to be expected as its still in development) and is held back by Unity. Unity's lack of multi thread support, (relatively) crap physics engine, and no real 64bit support are extremely detrimental to the performance of a game like KSP.

This isn't a Unity issue it really is something Squad has to do. It is absolutely possible to make a multi-threaded, 64-bit game run in Unity quite beautifully they just haven't spent time on making it happen. This is a real shame as I see it because the game could be so much smoother while able to accomplish so much more if they implemented both of these.

For reference, FortressCraft: Evolved is a Unity game which uses both multi-threading and runs in 64-bit and the things it does are incredible. It can load up 12 GB of RAM and still run smoothly as though it weren't doing anything crazy yet it does so with view distances that put any other game I've seen to shame. It really all comes down to the skills of the programmers. I'm not sure whether Squad just doesn't have the same kind of experience on their team or if they just haven't devoted the time to it to make it happen. Either way I think they are overlooking what would be the most significant improvement they could make to the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...