The stages of ksp (Looking back on our favorite game.)

[daniel l.]

Hey guys i just thought it would be a good idea to show you the names for different stages of ksp development.

#1. Proto KSP

Pre 0.1

This was a very very early version of ksp built in 2010 by HarvestR to convince squad to let him make his childhood dream come true. There are no released versions of this stage.

#2. Dark ages

This was the stage in development that nobody, but squad knew about. There are no released versions of this stage.

Hence the term dark ages, Nobody but the people of squad ever played these versions.

0.1 the first major release of ksp (UNRELEASED)

0.2 The first release of spherical kerbin and a placeholder mun (UNRELEASED)

0.3 Placeholder UI and planet improvements. (UNRELEASED)

0.4 First iteration of procedural planets (Kerbin only at the time ) (UNRELEASED)

0.5 Unknown. I believe it added improvements for the planet surface topography.

0.6 Unknown. I think it carried the first space center

#3. KSP comes to light. with version 0.7.3 ksp was released to prying eyes.

#4. Early (KSP 0.8 - 0.14

The foundation for most of the things we do now, If these versions had been skipped ksp would be unplayable (No landing gear, Persistence, Efficient engines, Mun, RCS, Map view,) Without these versions ksp would literally bite the dust.

#5. Middle ksp 0.14 - 0.17

These versions added the essentials of modern ksp as well, (Without them ksp would be missing: Spaceplanes, Minmus, The entire solar system!, EVA's, IVA's, Nuclear engines, Mainsails, Large fuel tanks, and many more).

#6 Early modern ksp 0.18 - 0.20

These versions added, Removed, Replaced, Many features, They added docking, Re-entry effects, Rovers, New planets and moons, Chairs, Flags, They replaced: the textures for the old parts, the textures for kerbin, Moho (They also nerfed it!! i liked old moho it was challenging.) .

#7 Modern ksp 0.21 - Now

With the addition of career mode, Destructible buildings, New spaceplane parts, Biomes, Tweakables, Upgradeble buildings, Contracts, Science!!

I hope you like my list of the stages of ksp evolution.

Edited February 13, 2016 by daniel l.
Updated

[Motokid600]

Why does that water look so much better then what we have now?

[Rolanvorxariat]

I likey

interesting, the early .7 iteration...

I never knew about that.

[regex]

The fact that a part the community considers this to be a major milestone or laudable is really sad to me.

[katateochi]

Nice post OP, I'd hadn't seen shots of the pre-release versions before, that's really interesting.

[Norpo]

Why does that water look so much better then what we have now?

..And the first pre-releases had clouds.

[regex]

..And the first pre-releases had clouds.

That's clearly just a skybox. In space, you'd still have clouds.

[Norpo]

That's clearly just a skybox. In space, you'd still have clouds.

Ah, good catch.

[BagelRabbit]

Am I the only one who wants this side-mounted, haphazard flight bar for early Career mode? It fits with the "throwing stuff together" mentality very nicely, and it could be upgradable (with upgrades of either Mission Control or the Tracking Center).

[Bill Phil]

Am I the only one who wants this side-mounted, haphazard flight bar for early Career mode? It fits with the "throwing stuff together" mentality very nicely, and it could be upgradable (with upgrades of either Mission Control or the Tracking Center).

No, you're not the only one.

Anyhow, KSP began 2d and was remarkably simple compared to today. I'm a little interested in starting a super tiny scale solar system exploration game, with a similar lego style as ksp, but the exploration would be meaningful... Just a dream, though. Maybe I could start small, though... And do some systems engineering!

Edited February 14, 2015 by Bill Phil

[SubzeroSpartan7]

Why does that water look so much better then what we have now?

It wasn't really. That is just a texture, it didn't move, it had no effects. As a matter of fact it wasn't even a liquid, it acted just like the ground except it was perfectly flat.

[klgraham1013]

Am I the only one who wants this side-mounted, haphazard flight bar for early Career mode? It fits with the "throwing stuff together" mentality very nicely, and it could be upgradable (with upgrades of either Mission Control or the Tracking Center).

The issue is the dichotomy between the old and new parts. The old parts do resemble the thrown together look you describe, but the new parts (PorkJet, NASA) are more refined. I don't think the two styles fit together at all. I think Squad is keeping one foot in the lolKerbal past and one foot in the NASA future. All it does it make the overall aesthetic seem erratic.

I prefer Saturn V over oil drum. That's just me, though.

[moogoob]

The fact that a part the community considers this to be a major milestone or laudable is really sad to me.

Well, you are self-described as "grumpy." Do you not find explosions fun?

[regex]

Well, you are self-described as "grumpy." Do you not find explosions fun?

In a creative, educational game like KSP I find the emphasis on disaster and blowing stuff up pretty toxic and boring (why I stopped watching Mythbusters after a while, "MOAR SPLOSUONS"). In a game like EVE: Online, which is pretty much about blowing stuff up, I find explosions pretty darn awesome. I'm sure someone will step in to defend "the playstyle", but the focus on things exploding in KSP is bad for the game and its image, IMO.

[Rakaydos]

In a creative, educational game like KSP I find the emphasis on disaster and blowing stuff up pretty toxic and boring (why I stopped watching Mythbusters after a while, "MOAR SPLOSUONS"). In a game like EVE: Online, which is pretty much about blowing stuff up, I find explosions pretty darn awesome. I'm sure someone will step in to defend "the playstyle", but the focus on things exploding in KSP is bad for the game and its image, IMO.

I think the focus on explosions and cartoony antics of the kerbals are a valuable way to soften the learning curve of a realistic space program. Noone wants to play "apollo 1 disaster investigation comittie" so by clearly marking failures with large, pretty explosions and simplifing the "messy part" of disaster investigation to an F3 window, Kerbal space program moves the focus way from the inevitable spaceflight tragedy you are enacting, and onto the more hopeful "Try, try again... but better this time."

[Motokid600]

Large, spectacular explosions are a part of rocketry reguardless of how realistic the implementation is. Regex is right. Explosions should not be what KSP is all about. That sets the wrong image. For one thing that's why we have Kerbals instead of actual humans. KSP deserves better then "lol explosions." Because you get that already. Again that is part of rocketry in general.

[FlyingPete]

I like the look of the old sidebar ui. I reckon this should be the display you get while the VAB is at level 1.

[IllicitMedic]

This is awesome.

[sedativechunk]

Wow, I never seen the 0.1 screenshots that far back, thanks for sharing. A flat Kerbin with blue space! I did in fact play the first free version of KSP but I never seen anything even older than that. I guess the game had to start somewhere!

It too find the sidebar interesting to say the least. With that being said, it seems kind of intrusive and covers a good portion of the screen.

[Hanuman]

In a creative, educational game like KSP I find the emphasis on disaster and blowing stuff up pretty toxic and boring (why I stopped watching Mythbusters after a while, "MOAR SPLOSUONS"). In a game like EVE: Online, which is pretty much about blowing stuff up, I find explosions pretty darn awesome. I'm sure someone will step in to defend "the playstyle", but the focus on things exploding in KSP is bad for the game and its image, IMO.

I get what you're trying to say, but if you stop to think about it, it really doesn't make much sense. I've played since .18 and not once have I ever felt like the game itself was pushing me to make explosions and catastrophe happen. It HAS been embraced by the community though as a byproduct of the learning and experimentation process, because it just is. If you don't want to focus on exploding things, that's good, and that's your thing. But if another player, or even lots of other players do want to focus on exploding things, then it's got nothing to do with you, nor your enjoyment of your own experience. It's not like SQUAD is adding weaponry, or contests for the biggest explosion or most Kerbals lost in space. It's not like they're adding just random explosions of craft as a gimmick, either. That WOULD be toxic, and wouldn't be a good game. But by the same token, as Kerbals aren't actually real, there's no reason to be so serious as to require ongoing support payments to widows and children of KIA Kerbals.

[TeddyDD]

I wish mun have a brighter texture like in 0.13

[rabidninjawombat]

It's not like SQUAD is adding weaponry, or contests for the biggest explosion or most Kerbals lost in space. It's not like they're adding just random explosions of craft as a gimmick, either. That WOULD be toxic, and wouldn't be a good game. But by the same token, as Kerbals aren't actually real, there's no reason to be so serious as to require ongoing support payments to widows and children of KIA Kerbals.

Exactly.

And this great part about KSP (and its moddablity) is there is always a mod which does pretty much all the things you mentioned if you want it.

On-topic: Nice post Daniel.L! Ive never seen a few of those screenshots!.

And the water in 7.3 looks really nice! And Palm trees! I want some palm trees!

[Pingonaut]

Very cool! I'd forgotten how different the first stages looked from the current game when it comes to terrain details. I started in .13 and the terrain and planet textures were so bright. Thanks for the nostalgia post!

[Wallygator]

I sense that explosions in KSP are like the "BOOM" and "KAPOW" in the 1960s Batman series. They should not be construed as real. KSP to me is a cartoon representation of real physics. The sad reality is that a meme has developed surrounding Kerbals and destruction. The two are not necessarily linked. Squad is making a poor decision to support contining the meme in absentia.

Just my opinion.

[Sirrobert]

In a creative, educational game like KSP I find the emphasis on disaster and blowing stuff up pretty toxic and boring (why I stopped watching Mythbusters after a while, "MOAR SPLOSUONS"). In a game like EVE: Online, which is pretty much about blowing stuff up, I find explosions pretty darn awesome. I'm sure someone will step in to defend "the playstyle", but the focus on things exploding in KSP is bad for the game and its image, IMO.

It didn't really start off as educational though right?

It evolved into an educational game, and explosions were part of it's early days. Personally I see it like looking back at an awkward youth, and smiling.

Also, the whole explodable buildings isn't just about explosions. It's added a big change to career mode. It allowed you to actuall screw up, beond just crashing the thing you were flying