3 ms·
From the extant details it's hard to tell if it's even a new game. The cinematic launch video is pretty funky but is clearly marked as "Not actual gameplay". T
by inopinatus 7y ago
From the extant details it's hard to tell if it's even a new game.
The cinematic launch video is pretty funky but is clearly marked as "Not actual gameplay". The press materials talk about new parts and new places to visit, all of which could simply indicate a very large expansion pack on the original. There's nothing in the accompanying "developer journey" video to suggests it's a new base game either, let alone a new engine; quite the opposite: everyone is wearing Unity t-shirts.
I'm hoping it's both, because the current gameplay vastly exceeds the game's performance envelope. In particular, the physics engine: I get 5 frames per second when docking large space stations, and KSP is running its physics engine on two CPU cores out of 10, and not even warming up a GPU.
- phire 7y ago"Not actual gameplay" might just mean it's all theoretically possible in game and rendered in-engine, but they staged everything. Or the whole trailer might be rendered in Maya.
- LoSboccacc 7y agoi find it somewhat amusing that they couldn't get smoke right even in the cinematic render. but there were a lot of large craft in there, so maybe they got a better physic engine for the rigid body parts
- Rebelgecko 7y agoThe graphics from the "pre-alpha" footage in their developer video are significantly worse than the trailer (although still a step up from KSP1)
- pageandrew 7y agoThe "not actual gameplay" disclaimer was only shown onscreen during that brief silhouette shot of the craft flying over the moon. Does it apply to the entire trailer?