









I have treid downloading and playing the game different times but was left with It crashing in the landing everytime.
Tried every possible solution but failed.
So i concluded that my Computer wasn't compatibile with my AMD components.
But now two or three months have passed and i have noticed updates on the sub reddit.
Are there amy updates regarding compatability?
Need to give the re-entry module RCS, but I'm satisfied with it so far
Made a replica of vostok, first rocket which isn't Gemini titan adjacent, what do you all think?
I just downloaded the KSA pre-alpha, and installed it, but now that I am trying to launch it, it just doesn't work. at first, it looks like it is loading the game perfectly, with an icon appearing in the taskbar, but then, after a few seconds, nothing. I have uploaded a video so you can get some details.
edit : I looked into the possibility of it being due to windows security but no, it's not as I have completely disabled the Antivirus and the issue persists. Though it might be because of transfer queues, idk what that is but it says I dont have dedicated transfer queues on the logs.
edit 2 : I found why it doesn't work, it's just because I am playing it on my old laptop that doesn't have any VRAM and uses Intel IG, so my computer can't launch the game engine.
A few years back, Felipe made this post about a new approach to wobble physics he had for KitHack Model Club which sounded like a big improvement over KSP's approach. I haven't heard anything about it since, so I was wondering if anyone has played and followed KMC to have a sense how successful this was. Also, has anything has been said about the approach KSA will use?
I'm sure some aspects of this have been discussed, but I wanted to get some of my own thoughts down after talking about it in a recent thread. KSP based its progression around contracts. This worked fine enough. You are given a contact to put a kerbal in orbit, you do it, and get money. This however leaves something to be desired in my estimation, both gameplay wise and realism wise. My proposal - have more granular milestone steps.
The game progresses with a tree based progression. Each node on the tree is a program - think of Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Ranger, Mariner, etc. When you complete a program, you unlock following programs, and sometimes branching paths. Each path follows a general focus, such as crewed spaceflight, earth orbit satellites, and deep space probes. You can work on multiple programs at once, and they could even benefit each other, like a lunar orbiter scouting crewed landing sites.
Each Program is made of individual missions (Explorer-1, Explorer-2). Each mission brings you closer to the ultimate goal of the program. For the first crew spaceflight program, you might conduct a launch escape system test > Launch an uncrewed suborbital mission > Then a crewed one > Fly an uncrewed orbital mission testing out your spacecraft, and demonstrate full control in orbit and can support an astronaut for a day. After you finish the final mission of the program, in this case a crewed orbital mission, you receive a big reward and unlock the next program(s). You'll also be given the opportunity to fly bonus missions to accomplish new tasks: stay in orbit for longer, achieve a more precise splashdown, etc.
While progressing through the game, you get options to customize your playthrough. With each program, you get to name it, choose mission logos (maybe even draw basic ones in-game) , and name individual missions. Said customizations could then appear on spacecraft and other things in-game. Players would also have the opportunity to create custom programs with custom missions, allowing organization of missions not fulfilling existing tasks.
Following your flights, you can go to a space agency history page, where it lists your space agency's past programs and missions. Each mission will be summarized, with important stats listed, including which astronauts flew on each mission. The page would also have a filter function, allowing you to see all missions to a specific location, or something like what astronauts have the most flight experience.
This setup could help multiplayer. You could have a player with another space agency, and you link your program for a crewed lunar landing together - Then one player provides one aspect of the mission, like the primary crew vehicle, and the other the lunar lander. Then once the final mission in the program is completed both players complete the program in the progression tree, and some division of the completion reward. Players could play cooperatively within the same agency, with one player conducting crewed spaceflight missions, and the other doing planetary science.
Competitive multiplayer could be about competing to get to each milestone. When a space agency reaches a milestone, it could reduce the scientific reward other players get for that milestone. This would be slightly mitigated by giving each other player a small bit of science, as though the other space agency is sharing their findings - but not enough to replace what the science reward would've been. The players can offset this though by say, landing on the Moon in a more risky, but scientifically interesting place - or they can specialize in an area of progression the other agencies aren't focusing on. It would thus allow for various strategies, and give a sense of urgency.
======
Ultimately this system accomplishes more realistic and more gradual progression that has you test individual systems before going to big missions, and the mission customization tools give you some fun personalization to make each playthrough feel more unique to you. These are only my rudimentary thoughts, and I'm sure there's a lot to improve and expand upon. I hope that the devs are considering similar ideas to this and will consider my suggestions as well.
I'm trying to screen-record in space at 15° FOV for a compressed look. However, as I zoom out and move away from Earth, the planet abruptly turns dark. Could the devs smooth out this transition, or maybe implement it like Space Engine where objects naturally fade to tiny white stars at distance?
After zooming out beyond a certain distance
Zooming out further makes the planet abruptly darken
When zoomed out, the Moon becomes a tiny star point first.
Zooming out more, both planets turn into tiny star points
Also, a camera mode would be nice. I'd love to see one added to the game, with easy exposure adjustments. Currently the exposure is basically HDR, but for us screenshot junkies, having manual exposure stops like S and A modes in photography would be awesome. I'll include two comparison shots from Space Engine to illustrate.
The exposure editor at the bottom right is currently set to HDR mode
It would be great if we could also choose and switch filters during screenshots, and add film grain and some noise, like the Cassini imagery.
This is a pan shot from Cassini
Although this is a spaceflight game, I think it's absolutely stunning – it's practically a space simulator. So I hope these additional features, while maybe not essential, can be added to truly enhance the gameplay experience. Finally, I wish the development team a speedy completion. Thanks for all your hard work, you wizards! Keep it up!!
Which is your favorite? Mine definitely the fixed launch positioning!
And: do you like these kind of videos for individual patches, or is it too much?
The weather nerd in me loves sitting in orbit and enjoying the view
New KSA update released today, Version 2026.8.19.5261
Enjoy
Warning, if you love kittens do not open this.
I heard the game is amazing but I cant play it because my PC is not a good one.
my babies neptune and saturn look so so so so so good, neptune is a little uninteresting right now, but it looks awesome anyway, and SATURN those fucking rings make me drooooool
How do you add more than one engine into the slots? even with x2/x3 or x4 symmetry for each plate it only wants to put one engine in the centre. any help would be great!