![]() ![]() In order to have a clearer view of what the game need in order to run, we created 2 simple lists which you can consult quickly to see if your PC gaming setup is good enough for the Kerbal Space Program. Check game system requirements for Kerbal Space Program If you really want to enjoy Kerbal Space Program at a higher level of gameplay smoothness, your system must run at with a CPU at least as good as Core i5, more than 4 GB RAM, a GPU that performs better than DX10 (SM 4.0) capable, 1GB VRAM, while the PC system is running on Windows 10 64 bit. In order to be able to run Kerbal Space Program at a minimum standard for the game, you will need a CPU ranked better than Core 2 Duo, more than 3 GB RAM, a GPU that is better ranked than DX10 (SM 4.0) capable, 512MB VRAM, while the PC system is running on Windows Vista SP1. If you were wondering "Can I run Kerbal Space Program on my PC?", we will help you to get the answer.įurther on, we will explain what are the minimum and recommended PC gaming system requirements ( otherwise known as sys req ) for Kerbal Space Program It falls under the following genre categories : Maybe in a couple of years it'll get better, but I guess I'm stuck with ksp1 until then.Kerbal Space Program thumbnail provided by publisher There is no low-hanging fruit for that, because if there was, they almost certainly have already done it, they've had years, dozens of devs and millions in dev cost. It's not like they need to improve performance by 25%, they need to double it at least. I'd be ok with bugs and missing features, but the physics and performance are the biggest things that hold me back. ![]() Based on videos the dev's put out 3 years ago, it doesn't seem like much has changed, so I really wonder how they are going to hit their timeline for feature releases (science, interstellar, multiplayer etc) in any kind of near future. It reeks of a game that the developers don't actually play much at all, so the performance and bugs don't get filtered out. It really looks like they spent more time just making KSP1 look better in some cases, but making the kraken worse and tanking performance substantially. It seems very much like an early alpha release, not a beta which is what I would consider early release. ![]() I ended up not buying after watching some of the gameplay. I only played a short period of time and very well may be steam refunding it.Įdit: in the cases where the later stages could fire (minus proper control) they were also inexplicably missing some fuel. The camera lost focus on the craft and zooming in zoomed in to a point near it, but not at it.Īll in all it was a pretty big mess and after so much development it is disconcerting that it barely works. The second stage kept just inexplicably disappearing, though sometimes the landing/return stage also disappeared. Manual controls somehow would rapidly increase in power and spin the craft wildly out of control. the autopilot lost the ability to affect attitude entirely (it would just oscillate controls leading to a net no change). Shortly after ditching The expended first stage in munar orbit, the physics kept freaking out. My craft was way overbuilt and the first stage made it to munar orbit (a medium stack sitting in two large tanks powered by a mainsail). The other graphics are a lot nicer than ksp. ![]() other than having delta V showing, the stock information (especially the orbital/map screen) seems very deficient. I’m not a fan of the low res interface (why are they taking up so very much of my 3840x1600 screen while looking super low res?). It’s “playable” on my pc, but I just made a simple three stage rocket for a Mun mission. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |