![]() It's much easier to draw the sprites and load them from disk than writing code to produce them. That is why Space Invaders originally fit on 8kb chips, whereas modern recreations take up 'only' 1mb. Today's mod friendly games use a LOT of memory, simply because they are very free and open to loading in new models and so on - in the old days, graphics were produced by maths and functions, rather than loaded from PNG files. No, there is no real way to have mods that sometimes add up to 1GB of memory usage - ISAMapSat, KWRocketry et al - use 'separate' memory - KSP still needs an address to find them, and that address must be somewhere in KSP's 4GBs. What is an issue is memory, and since each thread needs to access the main memory, it's shared amongst all of them, making threads useless for that. ![]() Plugins could use separate threads, yes - but that only affects CPU usage, which is rarely an issue with KSP. Either way, I'd love to be able to utilize some of my 32GB of RAM in something other than composing music.Īlthough I'm not sure if that's easier than making KSP 64bit capable. This gives mods its own RAM and CPU usage which should improve usage from my limited knowledge of how computers work. Just have each mod run as its own process that's bridged to the main KSP process. I can see why people want to harvest resources for money and fuel, but I think it's far more interesting and challenging to earn funding and bring fuel with you.You don't even really need 64bit capability. As a result, I have never used resource mods and I don't really see the point in them being in the stock game since it parallels today's space programs. I want to make sure any bugs I come across are due to the game and not due to mods in order to try and help development. I've been making a point to play stock only (absolutely zero mods) until the game has entered a Beta state, although the line between Alpha and Beta are a bit blurred with this game as I consider it's current state to be stable enough to be considered Beta. Like a few (apparently very few) others, I believe other aspects of the game should be further developed before resources. Also, tweakables I think it's another important step towards implementing resources. We can do science, we can find the resources, but our first steps towards exploating them are very tentative so far. If KSP is semi-realistically following real life space programs.well. I don't know for what reasons but sadly yes, it's possible. The third one, unfortunately, also is possible Why? Because Squad will have a clear financial motivation to do so - and getting money from DLC could mean more free improvements for the KSP itself, just like Paradox does with CK2 or EU4.Īnyways, this is a possible option. Third of all, it'll be a guarantee of a decent resources system. It's good for us, because it means that the company will prosper and hey, who wouldn't want to buy KSP 2 in 5-6 years? Second of all, KSP is ridiculously cheap - I payed for it $16 and calculating (price/hours of fun) it was one of my best decisions ever in case of entertainment. Why? First of all, Squad will make more money. Now I know what you think:īut I actually think DLC is a great idea. ![]() Seeing how huge the resources system is and how much it could add to the game it won't be unreasonable to not sell it in a separate DLC for $5-10. OPTION 2 - RESOURCES ARE RESERVED FOR A DLCĪnother possibly option. Squad realized that implementing this would a huge challenge, much bigger than the Science system and decided to postpone it for later, say 0.25 or 0.30. What could it mean? Here are the results of my speculations: However, there wasn't any update from SQUAD on this in months. Although it's not a 4X game, adding "Exploit" to "Exploration" would open endless posibilities and would popularize ideas like in-situ resource utilization or made polar Mun base important due to the presence of ice (water -> rocket fuel and oxygen and, err, water). Well I do and I think it's potentialy one of the most crucial elements of the KSP.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |