TheMunRules#1 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 At least we\'ll be able to do the docking soon. Here\'s the article that goes along with it: http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57411203-76/space-station-snaps-photo-of-robotic-cargo-craft/?tag=mncol;morePosts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 That\'s a high exposure photograph taken on the far side of the Earth. Why would you want KSP to look like that if your eyes aren\'t supposed to be a camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigibro606 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Looks like Coruscant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ydoow Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 That\'s a high exposure photograph taken on the far side of the Earth. Why would you want KSP to look like that if your eyes aren\'t supposed to be a camera?You\'re a high exposure photograph! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNTGODZZ Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Looks like Coruscant. my thoughts exactly tough it never will. by the time we have game engines to run graphics this good, and we have computer powerful enough to process them, ksp would be 5- 10 years dead. sorry, but its true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 That\'s a high exposure photograph taken on the far side of the Earth. Why would you want KSP to look like that if your eyes aren\'t supposed to be a camera?Because looking realistic isn\'t everything - sometimes you want some eye candy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Because looking realistic isn\'t everything - sometimes you want some eye candy.There should be a toggle in the menu of the game.[ ] realistic display Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warshawski Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 my thoughts exactly tough it never will. by the time we have game engines to run graphics this good, and we have computer powerful enough to process them, ksp would be 5- 10 years dead. sorry, but its true.Pfft, and then we\'ll all be getting addicted to Kerbal II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mincespy Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Looks like Coruscant. ...Or the Holy Terra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNTGODZZ Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Pfft, and then we\'ll all be getting addicted to Kerbal II.wow, never thought of that. though after the whole of ksp is finished, all features and updates, and the final game is released (hopefully not for at-least another year) squad and the team will move on to something else. kerbal 2 (should it ever happen) is still a looooong way off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exovian Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Look at a game like The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. It turns ten this year and still has a dedicated community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaydeeDem Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 That\'s a high exposure photograph taken on the far side of the Earth. Why would you want KSP to look like that if your eyes aren\'t supposed to be a camera?Whatever you say, VincentMcBuzzkill.Lighten up a little. Realism isn\'t everything. Can you accelerate time in real life? Do you really fly rockets with a couple taps on a keyboard? If you want a realistic flight sim, download orbiter, get into the 3d cockpit, no thirdperson allowed, and fly your rocket using only the controls in the ship. And to be honest, if you really were in space, on the far side of the Earth, you CAN actually see stars. In fact, the only reason the photograph is long exposure, is to see the stars. It even happens on Earth. You might be able to see stars on a clear night, but a camera will not unless it is a long exposure. So, in fact, REALITY, is the exact opposite of what you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OtherDalfite Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Whatever you say, VincentMcBuzzkill.Lighten up a little. Realism isn\'t everything. Can you accelerate time in real life? Do you really fly rockets with a couple taps on a keyboard? If you want a realistic flight sim, download orbiter, get into the 3d cockpit, no thirdperson allowed, and fly your rocket using only the controls in the ship. And to be honest, if you really were in space, on the far side of the Earth, you CAN actually see stars. In fact, the only reason the photograph is long exposure, is to see the stars. It even happens on Earth. You might be able to see stars on a clear night, but a camera will not unless it is a long exposure. So, in fact, REALITY, is the exact opposite of what you said.hi5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Whatever you say, VincentMcBuzzkill.Lighten up a little. Realism isn\'t everything. Can you accelerate time in real life? Do you really fly rockets with a couple taps on a keyboard? If you want a realistic flight sim, download orbiter, get into the 3d cockpit, no thirdperson allowed, and fly your rocket using only the controls in the ship. And to be honest, if you really were in space, on the far side of the Earth, you CAN actually see stars. In fact, the only reason the photograph is long exposure, is to see the stars. It even happens on Earth. You might be able to see stars on a clear night, but a camera will not unless it is a long exposure. So, in fact, REALITY, is the exact opposite of what you said.How\'s reality the opposite of what I said?? Regardless of whether you can see stars (that\'s completely irrelevant to the discussion), this photograph WAS a high exposure photo. And I don\'t care WHAT part of earth you\'re above, it will NEVER look like that photo to the naked eye... I really don\'t understand what the point of your post was... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Can you accelerate time in real life?Actually, YES, you can. Travel near the speed of light or orbit a black hole and time outside you will accelerate...By the way, I never said anything about stars in my post, so I think you\'re pulling that one from previous discussions on the forums... My post was a simple fact that this photograph is a LONG EXPOSURE photo (or high, depending on what was adjusted), and that you would never see anything like that while orbiting Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkman Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Actually, YES, you can. Travel near the speed of light or orbit a black hole and time outside you will accelerate...But you do know that\'s not the kind of unrealistic time acceleration that KPS has. In KSP, time acceleration accelerates time everywhere in the KSP universe.It\'s a game, loosely based on reality. It does not need to be hardcore realistic (there are other games/sims for that).However, i do support the request for a realistic display option, specifically wrt ambient light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaydeeDem Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Actually, YES, you can. Travel near the speed of light or orbit a black hole and time outside you will accelerate...By the way, I never said anything about stars in my post, so I think you\'re pulling that one from previous discussions on the forums... My post was a simple fact that this photograph is a LONG EXPOSURE photo (or high, depending on what was adjusted), and that you would never see anything like that while orbiting Earth.Sorry there. As an amateur astronomer I normally associate long exposure to stars. You are right that it is a long exposure, doesn\'t mean that Kerbal can\'t look like it. To be honest, the one thing out of he whole picture I would want in Kerbal would be the RCS firing. Particle effects need a serious revamp. And about your time acceleration post, I am not to sure there are many black holes between Kerbin and the Mun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Sorry there. As an amateur astronomer I normally associate long exposure to stars. You are right that it is a long exposure, doesn\'t mean that Kerbal can\'t look like it. To be honest, the one thing out of he whole picture I would want in Kerbal would be the RCS firing. Particle effects need a serious revamp. And about your time acceleration post, I am not to sure there are many black holes between Kerbin and the Mun.I agree. I\'d like to see big dramatic launches with huge plumes of fire and smoke when I take off from KSC. The RCS should look more like the OMS from the shuttle, too. Maybe when you press (.) to time-warp, your craft suddenly vibrates back and forth at the speed of light. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaydeeDem Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 I agree. I\'d like to see big dramatic launches with huge plumes of fire and smoke when I take off from KSC. The RCS should look more like the OMS from the shuttle, too. Maybe when you press (.) to time-warp, your craft suddenly vibrates back and forth at the speed of light. lolMaybe something like the warp effects in EVE Online for when you\'re time warping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMunRules#1 Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 That\'s a high exposure photograph taken on the far side of the Earth. Why would you want KSP to look like that if your eyes aren\'t supposed to be a camera?Um... because it looks cool? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Um... because it looks cool? Not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OtherDalfite Posted April 16, 2012 Share Posted April 16, 2012 Not really.'Cool' is relative. It doesn\'t pertain to just you, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentMcConnell Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 'Cool' is relative. It doesn\'t pertain to just you, you know.No?? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OtherDalfite Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Someone really needs to lock this thread. It\'s devolved to a pile of slag. It\'s full of arguing. And mainly it revolves around one person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socket7 Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 [mod]I don't think there is anything left of value to be said in this thread. The discussion of how people would like KSP to look like is fine. Disagreeing on what KSP should look like is fine. Calling people names is NOT ok.[/mod] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts