[1.1.2] KSPRC - Renaissance Compilation: artworks remake [V-0.7 Pre Release 3]

[DasMike]

You can also do the same thing by hacking a windows install with files from unity 4.6.4 making your 32 bit install run in 64bit mode I'm sitting around 7gb physical and another 7 virtual memory. Running EVE, AVP and scatterer (untill proot is done anyway) really looking forward to using Renaissance!

Pardon me if this is off-topic, but what differentiates Unity 4.6.4 32-bit hack from the 64-bit .exe produced by Squad? I know from experience that the 64-bit .exe is rather finicky and unstable, but have you noticed significantly better performance with the hack?

Also, I'm seriously considering making a Linux partition just so I can run all of these gorgeous enhancements with my favorite mods, but I keep hearing different opinions as to the best build to use. I'm not very well acquainted with Linux, as I've only used Ubuntu, but I've read some rather favorable reviews regarding Mint.

[Sput42]

Ladies and gents... Get Linux. Just do it. My game idles at 6gb of ram usage. 32,000 MM pathches. And it does not, no matter how hard I try crash. The game has never hard crashed on me. It's incredible. I cannot wait for this Proot don't be scared to release a high quality version with higher res textures or something if you like in the future. Because Linux and my 16gb of ram will eat it up.

Just get it. Took me one good day to get Ubuntu up and running on a dual boot. Should've done it years ago.

Do it. Everyone. So Proot doesn't have to hear every other person complain there game is crashing with KSPRC installed.

Exactly this. I think I've experienced a single crash of KSP in a year, and that might have been due to whatever. The 64 bit version on Linux is rockstable.

The biggest danger of going that route is that you may actually find you like Linux in general and don't go back to Windows as often as you think you'd do

[daawgees]

Exactly this. I think I've experienced a single crash of KSP in a year, and that might have been due to whatever. The 64 bit version on Linux is rockstable.

The biggest danger of going that route is that you may actually find you like Linux in general and don't go back to Windows as often as you think you'd do

I'd like to chime in here regarding the Linux discussion. I do enjoy Linux, but I have found that the graphics just look a little different and not quite as 'smooth' as when I'm in windows. This is probably due to not understanding how to tell Ubuntu to use Nvidia drivers as opposed to those weird ones you get from the driver manager. I always screw it up somehow...if anyone has any links on this matter, that'd be awesome.

[Motokid600]

I forget exactly how I went about my driver installation. Pretty sure I just used the standard manager to install nvidias software. I was able to open the nvidia control panel and force AA, AF among all else as high as they go. It looks much better. 16xQ doesn't do as good of a job it seems in opengl then with DirectX, but it does work to an extent.

Best thing we can hope for is better opengl support with Unity5.

[Mitchz95]

I'm having some trouble with Jool's rings. They're a beautiful green color when viewed from the Tracking Station, but dark and almost invisible against the stars when viewed from the in-game map view.

View from the Tracking Station:

View from the in-game map view:

I used the stock skybox for these screenshots so the rings would be more visible, but against the dark skybox I normally use the in-game rings are practically invisible.

[HafCoJoe]

I'm having some trouble with Jool's rings. They're a beautiful green color when viewed from the Tracking Station, but dark and almost invisible against the stars when viewed from the in-game map view.

View from the Tracking Station:

http://oi57.tinypic.com/5n22hy.jpg

View from the in-game map view:

http://oi59.tinypic.com/35crbbd.jpg

I used the stock skybox for these screenshots so the rings would be more visible, but against the dark skybox I normally use the in-game rings are practically invisible.

The next release is switching to a different mod for Jool's ring support from what I understand, so the bugs/issues with them will probably be fixed in the next update. Don't quote me though xD

[daniel l.]

Whats strange is why squad never tried to make the game look good, After all it doesnt take much ram to do even basic stuff like clouds and a more vibrant skybox.

[Mitchz95]

Whats strange is why squad never tried to make the game look good, After all it doesnt take much ram to do even basic stuff like clouds and a more vibrant skybox.

It's not that they don't care how the game looks, they just stuck with the original textures and focused on improving the gameplay instead. I suspect we'll get a graphical overhaul eventually, but for now we have mods like KSPRC to make up for it.

[drswagboss]

It's not that they don't care how the game looks, they just stuck with the original textures and focused on improving the gameplay instead. I suspect we'll get a graphical overhaul eventually, but for now we have mods like KSPRC to make up for it.

Well, I mean, the VAB/SPH interiors were redone by bac9 and the entire space center as well, I agree, why can't squad just improve the skybox, maybe put in some clouds

[luxyuz]

hahaha no not a toaster... not quite sure why you're calling me deluded...

yes the game needs to be optimized, and the fact that it isn't means that packs like this will inevitably have a larger hit on performance for computers without great specs (mine aren't terrible, but they aren't great for ksp, running a lowish clock quadcore processor) and considering 64 bit is not a thing and will not be until after 1.1 outside of Linux it is rather easy to run out of memory. In fact if I try to run KSP with EVE (not the low res one, that works fine) then the game crashes while loading, considering this makes use of EVE and more I somehow think my computer would struggle a bit yes, I'll just have to do what I'm doing at the moment and pick and choose enough of bits from the pack that make the game look beautiful without taking so much that I end up with crashes or low framerates, until I upgrade my PC and can enjoy the full awesomeness of this beautiful pack

I'm sorry, I meant NO offence by "deluded".

Any "true" QCore CPU should handle this game just fine. My old i5 2500k shows 80% usage on just one core, and the rest sit at 10%, and to make matters my R9 270X never passes 40% usage.

64bit support imo should have been fully implemented before 1.0 already, you can't possibly play without mods and have as much fun.

About using mods, I use crap loads of mods (50 maybe) and run the game in OpenGL I'm usually at 2Gb Ram and almost never crash.

If your computer is low in performance you can always just enable the less intensive eye candy.

Well, usually the reason for performance problems in KSP isn't the GPU, it's the CPU due to single-threaded physics calculations. All those pretty shaders and visual effects should not make your GPU scream at all.

RAM usage is a different beast, as of course all those fancy textures will take their toll, however a better computer won't help you there as long as you're limited to 32 bit on Windows. It may rather be worth it to install Linux alongside your main OS and then play the 64 bit version of KSP without ever having to worry again about running out of RAM...

Exactly what you said. Single thread physics is killing the game performance completely. They NEED to fix this ASAP!

As for eye candy goes, every GPU in the last 5 year can handle it, its the amount of memory that is the issue.

Ladies and gents... Get Linux. Just do it. My game idles at 6gb of ram usage. 32,000 MM pathches. And it does not, no matter how hard I try crash. The game has never hard crashed on me. It's incredible. I cannot wait for this Proot don't be scared to release a high quality version with higher res textures or something if you like in the future. Because Linux and my 16gb of ram will eat it up.

Just get it. Took me one good day to get Ubuntu up and running on a dual boot. Should've done it years ago.

Do it. Everyone. So Proot doesn't have to hear every other person complain there game is crashing with KSPRC installed.

I'm so jealous of this! But I can't Linux (noob)

Whats strange is why squad never tried to make the game look good, After all it doesnt take much ram to do even basic stuff like clouds and a more vibrant skybox.

My guess is they are not very talented at it and never hired someone to do it. And because the game has issues, they focused on features rather than eye candy.

Edited June 9, 2015 by luxyuz

[kizz]

My guess is they are not very talented at it and never hired someone to do it. And because the game has issues, they focused on features rather than eye candy.

I'm like to respectfully disagree. The standards set in stone upon the original release of this game many years back are the reason for it's issues today. It was designed to be playable on as many computers as possible.

These guys chose 32bit because Unity wasn't working well with 64bit. As well it allowed almost any OS from XP on to support it.

The dev team is extremely talented to be able to pull what they have from the Unity 4 engine. With Unity 5 on the horizon, we are going to see a vast improvement in the game stability and visuals. It will also accelerate the development of multiplayer.

You should never bite the hand that feeds you.

[Proot]

I'm like to respectfully disagree. The standards set in stone upon the original release of this game many years back are the reason for it's issues today. It was designed to be playable on as many computers as possible.

These guys chose 32bit because Unity wasn't working well with 64bit. As well it allowed almost any OS from XP on to support it.

The dev team is extremely talented to be able to pull what they have from the Unity 4 engine. With Unity 5 on the horizon, we are going to see a vast improvement in the game stability and visuals. It will also accelerate the development of multiplayer.

You should never bite the hand that feeds you.

Agree.

KSP it's done to run in a plugged stone. It's a great thing and a very clever choice, IMHO. KSP has a great, great potential as educational tool but, even in USA (a supposed country with "high standards"), the computers in schools and other educational centers are not precisely "updated" to run new-gen games. Imagine the rest of the world.

So make the game playable even in a very old laptop is a clever way to acces to the educative computers, at the whole world.

Maybe Kerbal Edu and the "comercial" game should be graphically divided to give KSP new eye candy? Maybe, I don't know rly. But that is another (off)topic, and it's obvious that it must be harder and more expensive than have just a single graphic line for both products.

EDIT: and don't take me wrong, I wish to have the better possible graphics in KSP. Squad I'm very available as 2D artist!

Edited June 9, 2015 by Proot

[TheCrazyHeadGamer]

What graphic mod do you guys use waiting for the new KSPRC ?

[Motokid600]

What graphic mod do you guys use waiting for the new KSPRC ?

The old KSPRC. Lol. I just dropped it in last night, made sure not to overwrite the major plugins and it worked. Can't use that sharredassest, but other then that .90 KSPRC works like a charm.

Atleast it does on Linux. 16gb of ram just eats it up.

[drswagboss]

The old KSPRC. Lol. I just dropped it in last night, made sure not to overwrite the major plugins and it worked. Can't use that sharredassest, but other then that .90 KSPRC works like a charm.

Atleast it does on Linux. 16gb of ram just eats it up.

The UnityAssetExplorer v1.4 can change it, I can post it here if that's alright with you proot.

[Motokid600]

It's for the sunflare, right?

[drswagboss]

It's for the sunflare, right?

Yes, it is.

[Motokid600]

Now I could've sworn that RealSolarSysyem pluggin provided got rid of the white horizon. Is there anything that can be done to remedy that? I feel like a fool for asking. So many times in the past I've answered the same question with "you have to use Proot's rss plugin" well...

[luxyuz]

I'm like to respectfully disagree. The standards set in stone upon the original release of this game many years back are the reason for it's issues today. It was designed to be playable on as many computers as possible.

These guys chose 32bit because Unity wasn't working well with 64bit. As well it allowed almost any OS from XP on to support it.

The dev team is extremely talented to be able to pull what they have from the Unity 4 engine. With Unity 5 on the horizon, we are going to see a vast improvement in the game stability and visuals. It will also accelerate the development of multiplayer.

You should never bite the hand that feeds you.

For a game that is in development for so long and still looks like it is and to just use 1 of my 4 CPU cores, I will not wait standing up.

I'm sure talented people like Proot and many others will use U5 to improve even more KSP and should get paid by squad for implementing the mod in the game, like other cases in the past.

Agree.

KSP it's done to run in a plugged stone. It's a great thing and a very clever choice, IMHO. KSP has a great, great potential as educational tool but, even in USA (a supposed country with "high standards"), the computers in schools and other educational centers are not precisely "updated" to run new-gen games. Imagine the rest of the world.

So make the game playable even in a very old laptop is a clever way to acces to the educative computers, at the whole world.

Maybe Kerbal Edu and the "comercial" game should be graphically divided to give KSP new eye candy? Maybe, I don't know rly. But that is another (off)topic, and it's obvious that it must be harder and more expensive than have just a single graphic line for both products.

EDIT: and don't take me wrong, I wish to have the better possible graphics in KSP. Squad I'm very available as 2D artist!

I understand not everyone has a powerful computer to run a pretty game, or even a toaster to run a physics educational program. From a marketing pov making a game that runs on toasters makes it possible to get to a broader audience and sell more. But then if the objective is targeting a broader audience, why does the game runs like crap looking like crap? And what about the performance issue (just using 1 cpu core and less than half gpu power).

This forum holds some of the best talent and creativity I've seen and all the mods here proved long time ago that KSP doesn't need to look like crap.

"Oh but if we add more sparkling stuff some people will not be able to play the game!" -That's what the Graphical Options menu was invented for! If we can add mods why the hell not having the option to turn them off on toasters?

I do hope they hire you or someone to redo the graphics in KSP Proot, this game still has a long way to go to be perfect.

For me KSP 1.0 is still BETA THAN EVER and should be v0.95

Edited June 11, 2015 by luxyuz

[shaw]

I don't see how choosing Unity would make game possible to run on crappy machine. Why a custom game engine wouldn't allow this?

It's not difficult to make a game engine run well on Windows, Linux and OS X assuming you plan that when you start writing it. You have OpenGL on all platforms, OpenAL for sound, SDL for window creation & input. I/O and networking API are almost the same across these platforms (POSIX), timer and multithreading can be made through SDL (but not especially effective/accurate) and even if you implement them natively, it's not a big deal, especially since Linux and OS X both share POSIX API.

Other engines also mostly work on all platforms and probably provide even better performance per CPU/GPU power. The advantage of Unity is that is has very low learning curve, it's simple to start with it, you already have a lot of building blocks you need to create a new game. It a great engine for beginners, but if you want to create a huge beast and squeeze all juice from your machine, it's a bad choice. Just look at KSP, how many limits it puts on the game. With a custom engine Squad could integrate a better physics engine, like Bullet, use all CPU cores for physics calculations, possibly use double precision to resolve all sorts of physics glitches, fix 64bit Windows port, make graphics run much faster etc. However, they'd need much more manpower, cost of development would be significantly higher and initial development, before they publicly released KSP would probably take a few years longer which means ... KSP likely wouldn't exist right now.

[McPoisoned]

Any updates or new teaser screenshots Mister Proot? Im way too hyped for the new version!

[Proot]

Pretty busy IRL right now.

A small sneak about terrains:

With the new EVE the 8K texture limit seems not important anymore...

Approximation to Bop... (full screen to see what I'm talking about)

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited June 12, 2015 by Proot

[HafCoJoe]

Pretty busy IRL right now.

http://i.imgur.com/3mLp1Ca.jpg

A small sneak about terrains:

With the new EVE the 8K texture limit seems not important anymore...

Approximation to Bop... (full screen to see what I'm talking about)

http://imgur.com/a/bWoT2

Wait a minute... does that mean people can make 16K cloud textures?!?

[taro8]

I installed parts of this mod that should be compatible with 1.0.2, but now when I click on tracking station the map dosent load, game is not really frozen as it responds more or less where my cursor is (tooltips and such). Is the first map run supposed to take some time with ATM? Or is it something really really wrong. Everything worked before I started toying with KSPRC.

Edited June 12, 2015 by taro8

[McPoisoned]

Thoose Textures just look way too good!

Taro8, have you installed all the updated mods seperatly (KSPRC is a pack not really a mod)?