Search results

Which is why GTA:Sao Paulo is computationally impossible. There are just too many agents to move around. Alternatively though, they could just model the cars as static scenery really... It would effectively work out the same. :hotcool: Ahem, heh, so, Cities:Skylines, yeah. I tried the rainfall...

Yep. Pretty much. I heard somewhere that the C:S devs themselves at some point said that SimCity's shortcomings was one of their main motivations for making Skylines. Can't say if that's actually true, but it would make sense. Spite can be a powerful force behind software development. I'm...

Well, I think it's only fair that I write a special message here, where it all first started. I've stepped down as lead developer for KSP. It's been a long, amazing journey, and I have a lot of people to thank for it. But I wanted to add my special thanks here to the OF community, that was...

IDK what to make of their dropping DX9 support as a player, but as a developer, I can readily understand it. It's hard enough to maintain one set of code. Each 'option' increases the amount of work needed to maintain the whole exponentially. What with the new planets and AI and all, and SE...

There is a very low-tech, low-precision way of doing it, which for most cases might work, unless dV restrictions are a major concern. Called the 'Buck Rogers' approach by the Orbiter tutorial, the method is to simply burn when the planet rises above the moon's horizon. (assuming you took off...

Well, that sure puts things in perspective, that ship is gigantic! Cheers

I have to say, that DeltaGlider in KSP is awesome! :D :cheers: Cheers

I would argue that it's not so much the quality of the internet... it's the quality of the people in it. We have it good in our little corner here (KSP community included, ofc). It gets much worse further out. Cheers

Not getting that here... could it be an install issue maybe? Hmm, actually, you are right, after launching, I'm locked in the flight scene. It seems this one went by unnoticed. Well, no worries, we had a patch planned already, so one more for the list. :) Cheers

KSP is now a fully-released title! :blink: Holy cow, that is going to take a while to click here... Anyhow, I just wanted to drop a few lines here, not to announce, but to give you guys a huge THANK YOU!!, and give all around manly bro-hugs, fist bumps, or for the humanly uninclined, knowing...

That was this thread, around page 10 or so, heh (I was reading through the early pages the other day). Cheers

:cheers: :tiphat: Many thanks!! Cheers!

Sounds technically possible, but not much good in practice then. You'd be better off with a slower clock and a smarter architecture and/or multiple cores to raise the effective frequency to an equivalent of what a single THz unit would do... Without the complications of having wavelenghts that...

I removed the x64 branch off Steam to avoid confusion. The win64 build was outdated and unstable, so we decided to take it down for the time being. x64 is now on the backburner until a stable version comes along... That's not up to us though, so we can do nothing more than wait and see. Cheers

A lot of the tracks in the game, especially in space are from Kevin. His stuff is awesome. The other tracks are original, some by Victor (my favorite of his is the VAB jazz), and some (hopefully they don't stick out like a sore thumb) by me. :) Cheers

In other words, KSP 0.90.0 is now officially released!! :D We're in Beta guys! :cheers: Cheers!

There is no such inaccuracy, because the core postulate of special relativity is precisely that regardless of reference frames (be it solar-centric or earth-centric), C (and all other laws of physics) will be the same. From this, we must conclude that time must be variable. Cheers

Hehe, we certainly do... Hey, FTL travel only violates relativistic causality... There may be hope still. ;) Cheers

Ah I see. So this applies to photons and massless things in general. It makes sense. In the same way a non massless object cannot reach C without becoming impossibly massive and blowing up physics, it's similarly impossible for a massless object like a photon to travel at any less than C. Is...

Really? C is constant, but it is not infinite. Is it really impossible to decelerate from 1C in practice? (or well, whatever it is that we can call practice in theoretical physics). Not doubting, merely curious. :) Cheers