[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37142229]
4) The option to have a tiny grave stone every place a Kerbal has died. I say option because if you are like me, your launch pad would be tiles of grave stones.[/QUOTE]
Or maybe one of those fancy marble walls somewhere at KSC.
[QUOTE=Neo Kabuto;37142375]If there are achievements, I'd prefer them to not be of the "Do X a million times" variety.[/quote]
To me, an achievement is something ground breaking and rare. A "Saved the world" or "Explored the Known Solar System" fits. None of that Xbox Bullshit were you get an acheivement because you burped for 30 seconds into the headset.
The stats is just to keep track of how much time I've wasted learning to save the world.
[QUOTE=Neo Kabuto;37142375]Random mistakes would be fine with me if it's like BARIS, where parts aren't that reliable until you've researched them (or in the case of random crew failures, trained them) to a certain point.[/QUOTE]
I expect a fully trained crew not to scream like little girls because the engine is on. So yeah, once trained the random button pressing would go away too.
any idea why mechjeb turns on max warp and does nothing if i try to do land at target on mun (from mun orbit)
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37142229]
3) Random Kerbal Fuck ups. I.E. Bob, while screaming, hits a button and all the power goes out until Jeb hits the button a second time. Happens less than 1% of the time but keeps things interesting after 100 flights with mechjeb.
[/QUOTE]
I really don't like arbitrary failure rates.. I would however like dynamic pressure, speed of sound & other atmospheric effects to be simulated. That way you can't just hit full throttle, you have to consider the environment.
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;37142634]any idea why mechjeb turns on max warp and does nothing if i try to do land at target on mun (from mun orbit)[/QUOTE]
Your orbit needs to pass over the landing site.
[QUOTE=fox '09;37142734]I really don't like arbitrary failure rates.. [/quote]
For the most part I don't either, however a green crew... um... a [I]new[/I] crew lacking training and experience should have a factor in this. Kerbalnaughts shouldn't be a free resource. I want something that will reward me in the long run for training my crew and bringing them safely home from the surface of the Mun. There is, likely, a better way to implement this.
Gene Kranz also doesn't like arbitray Failure rates, but he knew how to handle them. Getting Apollo XIII home was one of the greatest achievements of the U.S. Space program. Such things could be a part of the game, even if the frequency is very small.
[QUOTE=fox '09;37142734] I would however like dynamic pressure, speed of sound & other atmospheric effects to be simulated. That way you can't just hit full throttle, you have to consider the environment.[/QUOTE]
I didn't metion these because I expect them to be. However, since it's not safe to assume... I'll make that number 6
Is there some kinda config hack to set the game speed less that 1x? It makes no sense that you can't just do it in-game. At 1/2 speed I might actually be able to see my giant rocket launching, rather than a slideshow of it randomly detonating.
[QUOTE=Morcam;37143601]Is there some kinda config hack to set the game speed less that 1x? It makes no sense that you can't just do it in-game. At 1/2 speed I might actually be able to see my giant rocket launching, rather than a slideshow of it randomly detonating.[/QUOTE]
So... you want to set the speed to that of a slide show, to avoid the slide show?
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37143655]So... you want to set the speed to that of a slide show, to avoid the slide show?[/QUOTE]
1/2 doesn't mean a slideshow
[QUOTE=st0rmforce;37142312]Trying to log in to the fucking KSP forum.
Type email and password, press enter. Unknown email address
Attempt 1 of 5
Remember which email address I registered with, try again. Invalid password
Attempt 2 of 5
Actually read the text on the screen and see I have to reset my password due to forum change.
Use the reset form, get new password. Accidentally use wrong email again
Attempt 3 of 5
Typed right email, copy/paste password from email again. Invalid password. What the christ?
Attempt 4 of 5
So confused now, that I try it one more time. Invalid password.
5 of 5 failed attempts, locked out for 15 mins.
I hate login forms, that's why I hang around facepunch. Apparently I have a username as well as an email, maybe I should be using that.
I just want some mods. Why is that too much to ask?[/QUOTE]
You have to reset you password.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37143732]1/2 doesn't mean a slideshow[/QUOTE]
Sure it does.
Half speed slows the frame rates. If you slow the frame rates lower than 32 fps then you "see" a slide show because the frames are not changing fast enough to give you the illusion of motion.
Or if he wants a "High Speed" camera effect where things move smooly but slowly, that will actually tax his video card more than x1 speed, and give him another slide show.
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37143844]Sure it does.
Half speed slows the frame rates. If you slow the frame rates lower than 32 fps then you "see" a slide show because the frames are not changing fast enough to give you the illusion of motion.
Or if he wants a "High Speed" camera effect where things move smooly but slowly, that will actually tax his video card more than x1 speed, and give him another slide show.[/QUOTE]
If you really think that lowr than 32 fps looks like a slideshow, you're sorely mistaken.
Go watch a youtube video, they're all shown at 30 fps. Most TV shows at 20-30 fps.
Hell, most of the time when I'm playing games I get below 30 FPS and it isn't like a slideshow at all.
-merge snip-
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37143895]If you really think that lowr than 32 fps looks like a slideshow, you're sorely mistaken.
Go watch a youtube video, they're all shown at 30 fps. Most TV shows at 20-30 fps.
Hell, most of the time when I'm playing games I get below 30 FPS and it isn't like a slideshow at all.[/QUOTE]
20-30 FPS is also known as "low quality" and you can in fact see it when watching you tube.
32 frames per second is the rate where actual film passing through a projector gives the human eye the perspective of motion. It doesn't translate the same in a video medium. In fact more frames per second are required to give the illusion of smooth action.
One half speed would be 16.
And that my friend, would be a slide show. Maybe a better slide show than he is looking at now, but it sure wouldn't get a lot of looks on youtube.
you're all wrong
20fps is fine for tv's because of clever motion blur, but for people like me who are used to playing 60+ fps, less than 30 seems really framey
but that's irrelevant, morcam was asking about actually slowing down the timescale of the game, that has nothing to do with the fps except most likely improving it, because there's more time to do the physics calculations.
ever heard of changing the timescale in gmod so you can throw around a million boxes and not lag out
[editline]edit[/editline]
in other words: to say that going to half speed cuts your framerate in half suggests that going to 5x must increase it five fold
[editline]edit[/editline]
in fact it would be even better for youtube videos, because you could record at a lower framerate like 15fps, reducing the load on your computer, and then speed the whole video up 2x at rendering, both bringing the framerate to 30 and seeing the video in real-time
[QUOTE=krail9;37144009]to say that going to half speed cuts your framerate in half suggests that going to 5x must increase it five fold[/QUOTE]
You are correct, if you're dealing with the calulations of the processor.
Which has nothign to do with what the graphics card has to draw so that you see what you want to see.
At 5x speed things are moving "Benny Hill Style" There is actually less for the card to draw at that speed than at times one speed. There is [B]MORE[/B] for the processor to calulate due to things happening faster, but what needs to be drawn for your eyes is cut down.
At 1/2 speed there is less for the Processor to think about and calulate, but more for the card to draw.
[QUOTE=krail9;37144009]in fact it would be even better for youtube videos, because you could record at a lower framerate like 15fps, reducing the load on your computer, and then speed the whole video up 2x at rendering, both bringing the framerate to 30 and seeing the video in real-time [/quote]
This would look like utter crap. But don't take my word for it. Give it a go and see for yourself.
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37144107]At 1/2 speed there is less for the Processor to think about and calulate, [B]but more for the card to draw.[/B][/QUOTE]
how? everything just moves slower, there's nothing effecting the framerate directly
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37144107]This would look like utter crap. But don't take my word for it. Give it a go and see for yourself.[/QUOTE]
why? here's a random video I found [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL4bZtKBDSU[/url] in source there's a command called host_timescale, search that in youtube and you'll find tonnes of videos.
the premise is exactly as I said, you scale the game down to 0.5 speed, then you record yourself doing everything in slow-motion. you take the video and scale it up 2x, the final footage showing your actions in 'normal' speed, with double the framerate you originally recorded in.
In this video you can see that the recording is quite smooth, probably more smooth than this guy could have recorded normally, and also has the side-effect of him having a really good reaction speed since he's doing everything in bullet-time
[QUOTE=krail9;37144227]how? everything just moves slower, there's nothing effecting the framerate directly[/quote]
Read your own quote again, and think about what is being done. Movement is what your graphics has to draw. The slower something moves in animation the more frames that have to be drawn to make it apear that something is moving slowly. The end result is that his video card still chokes because it couldn't handle the frame rate to start with. In animation speeding up time reduces the needed frames, slowing it down increases them.
As for the video, I'll have to watch it when I get home. I don't have access to youtube at work. It sounds interesting because the last time I tried something like this it looked like crap on a stick. Athough I won't rule out that I'm inept.
EDIT: Turns out I am inept at posting... had to fix that quote mess...
well how about I put it like this.
lets assume the framerate is fixed, like at 10fps or something arbitrary
each 100 milliseconds, a new frame is rendered. if the timescale is 1x, then that represents 100ms of movement and action in the game (eg the ship moves 1 meter).
if the timescale is 0.5x, that 100ms frame 'gap' represents 50ms of gametime (eg the ship moves 0.5m)
which would be more taxing on the gpu? in this simple situation of a constant ship movement, there's no reason why either moving 1m or 0.5m should be easier to render, hence changing the timescale shouldn't effect the framerate
however, as a general rule, it could be assumed that (in our fixed framerate example), more 'things' (such as collisions) will typically happen in a longer time interval, hence reducing the time inverval between each frame (0.5x speed) could cause each frame to be easier to calculate
Why are we discussing video encoding in the Kerbal Space Program thread?
[QUOTE=woolio1;37144489]Why are we discussing video encoding in the Kerbal Space Program thread?[/QUOTE]
because I also want warp modes lower than 1x :v:
[editline]9th August 2012[/editline]
sorry for the derail though
[QUOTE=krail9;37144482]well how about I put it like this...[/QUOTE]
I will do my best to explain.
[QUOTE=krail9;37144482]If the timescale is 0.5x, that 100ms frame 'gap' represents 50ms of gametime (eg the ship moves 0.5m)[/QUOTE]
The game, if it had an option for 0.5, would have to "Show" you this movment. Lets assume that it would show you this in as high speed film would, like all that old footage we see of Apollo XI launching. The frame rate we see is smooth, there is no "Slide show." Game time is progressing at half normal speed but we see more things happening. The U S A on the side of the rocket slowly climbs past the camera. In effect we are seeing twice as many frames as we would at 1x speed. IF we viewed the same action in x2 speed, the rocket is out of camera in a flash and we barely saw U S A slide past.
To keep with your example, every 100ms we would see a frame.
The whole scene, at x0.5 speed, would require 20 frames. (Number out of nowhere, just used for the example.)
At x1 speed we need 10.
At x2 speed we need 5.
Now, the GPU has to draw those frames. The CPU has to calulate the physics and the program code. At 0.5, there is less for the CPU to do, but the work load on the GPU is high. At x2 there is more for the CPU to do, but now less for the GPU to do.
In most cases, when you get poor frame rates in a video game the issue starts with the GPU. (Then ram, and then the CPU. Or teh CPU first when you don't have a descrete GPU.) By slowing things down you are making more work for the GPU, not the CPU. For our chum to see less "Slide show" when he launches his rockets, he needs to speed up time, not slow it down.
[quote]Why are we discussing video encoding in the Kerbal Space Program thread?[/quote]
I dunno, but you make an excellent point. Let's all just assume I'm wrong and get back to flying rockets. Flying rockets makes me happy.
I'd rather be happy than right any day.
nevermind you're both talking about two different things
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37144719]To keep with your example, every 100ms we would see a frame.
The whole scene, at x0.5 speed, would require 20 frames. (Number out of nowhere, just used for the example.)
At x1 speed we need 10.
At x2 speed we need 5.
Now, the GPU has to draw those frames. The CPU has to calulate the physics and the program code. At 0.5, there is less for the CPU to do, but the work load on the GPU is high. At x2 there is more for the CPU to do, but now less for the GPU to do.[/QUOTE]
major logical fallacy here, we just assumed that the framerate was fixed so even though you need twice as many frames to render the same scene at 0.5x, you do it in twice the time
hence the amount of processing power used at any given time for drawing frames (i.e. performance) does not change
the revised statement is then
[QUOTE]At 0.5, there is less for the CPU to do, but the work load on the GPU is [B]the same[/B]. At x2 there is more for the CPU to do, but now the workload on the GPU is [B]the same[/B].[/QUOTE]
-Snip-
Stopped.
[QUOTE=Zakhodit;37144831]You seem to forget that, no matter what you set the time warp too, the real world still passes by one second at a time. If the rocket launch sequence is looked at in two seconds:
At 0.5 the GPU draws 10 frames in that time.
At 1 the GPU draws 5 frames in that time.
at X2 the GPU draws 3 frames in that time. (rounds up too keep it looking smooth.)[/QUOTE]
I realized a few minutes after my post that you were arguing something else sorry
Can you guys just stop, please.
I would love lower timescales for video purposes, higher frame rates can make videos look terrific. I would like to do some slow motion captures, ie of this (watch your sound, it may be too loud)
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCLo8R6LctY[/media]
I made a satellite using the Prometheus solar rover thing so my Kerbals could come home from their mapping missions.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/CfQWa.png[/img]
You guys are lucky. My PC since I was a kid has always been like a generation behind, so I played most of my games on 20 fps. If I was lucky I could get 30 fps when I looked towards a wall.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
