Jump to content
  • Opt-in Prerelease for 1.1!


    Ted

    KSP_logo_full.png.99743e7d63a15357cde91d

     

    Hi all,

     

    As I'm sure many of you read, 1.1 is to enter Experimentals this week! It's a significant update to KSP in terms of just how much has changed under the hood. We've done a complete overhaul of the user interface from a conglomerate of interface systems to Unity 5's native system. Aside from that, an entirely new system for the wheels had to be adopted due to the major changes Unity made to the native wheels system, and the list goes on!

     

    Quality Assurance is the most bare bone part of the entire testing process and is performed by around five to ten QA testers pretty much constantly. The focussed testing and efficiency mean that instead of going through the motions of the game as a normal player would, QA tends to identify areas of the new content that would usually be prone to issue and hunt for bugs there. This cuts down the time taken to find issues by a significant margin and means that the content is tested more evenly – playtesting can sometimes skip completely past some aspects of a feature. Furthermore, this method allows the testers to work closely with the developers and compare exactly what they intended to occur for specific cases, to what actually occurs – this is where QA becomes more about feedback.

     

    QA is a lot more than just finding bugs. It’s about having the knowledge of the game (especially how it works under-the-hood), the comprehension of the ideas behind the features in the game, the understanding of what a developer wants the feature to turn out like and how you can assist them in making it happen. Furthermore, it’s about condensing all of that into concise and objectively written issue reports.

     

    The QA process on 1.1 has been going for a long time, but it has been incredibly fruitful: crushing 516 issues in 107 builds! There is still more to do however, in Experimentals we hope to only increase the stability of the game, add polish to areas and carry out some bug fixing as always!

     

    The Experimental Team comprises about 100 testers. All of these testers are volunteers who contribute their spare time to playtest the game. They are normal players, sourced from the various communities via a simple application process. Often and understandably they don’t have as much spare time to devote to testing as the QA Testers and thus there are significantly more Experimental Testers ‘signed up’ than we need at any one time. This works in everyone’s favour as it keeps the activity level throughout an Experimental Phase and doesn’t put pressure on the testers while they also deal with their personal and professional lives.

     

    After we have an update go through QA, as detailed above, it is hopefully free from major issues and each feature has had any needed major improvements and refinements carried out; the update is in a feature-complete state. However, many components of a feature may still be unpolished, such as part balancing, or the performance of newer UI on different platforms. This is where Experimental Testing comes in and assists the developers in cleaning up the remaining feedback issues.

    An Experimental Testing phase typically lasts around a couple of weeks, though it is highly dependent on the number of issues that arise and how much further development is required to reach a release state. At the end of the Experimental phase, there are still a fair amount of issues on the tracker that are still open, but it’s important to note that these issues are typically minor ones, ones that aren’t in the scope of the update or simply issues that would take too much time and resources to resolve.

     

    This time around though, things will get even more interesting after Experimental testing! Given that update 1.1 will be unlike any update we’ve seen to date in terms of widespread changes to pretty much any significant and underlying system in the game we're planning to provide an optional pre-release branch of update 1.1. This opt-in branch will run for just under two full weeks before the targeted release date of the final update.

     

    The nature and extent of the changes in the update mean that many plugins and add-ons will require refactoring, updating and at the very least a recompile. Of course modders cannot do this overnight and on the flick of a switch, especially with an update of this scope. Typically a select group of particularly KSP-savvy modders would be given access to the new update to help us find bugs, but the extent of the changes this time around is such that we feel we should open it up to everyone.

     

    The pre-release branch will be opt-in via Steam only, and won't be available via the KSP Store. We really wanted to make the pre-release branch available on all distribution channels but given the frequency of builds, the size of those builds, and the necessity for everyone to be on the latest version for testing it proved to be impossible to facilitate this on the KSP store.

     

    To facilitate discussions of the pre-release branch we’ll be opening up a temporary forum for feedback. Additionally, a separate section will be made available on the bug tracker to report bugs on.

     

    Please feel free to ask any and all questions you have!

     

     


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    7 minutes ago, BrutalRIP said:

    Well yeah, but technical definitions and practical reality can very well differ.  Lol

    That's why the stable is considered the 'up to date version', even though there is a half broken pre-release beta that is technically newer. ;)

    Edited by Temeter
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    40 minutes ago, Temeter said:

    That's why the stable is considered the 'up to date version', even though there is a half broken pre-release beta that is technically newer. ;)

     

    The EULA grants you the right to make a copy of the application and play it, including updates and patches. It does not mention stable, up to date, beta, release or anything else like that. 1.1 is an update, you have the right to play it once it can be legally obtained.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 hours ago, technicalfool said:

    I have a pretty good idea of what the official line will be (@KasperVld might be able to put a boilerplate post in here?), but even without legalities, there's fairly sound IT security reasons for not accepting software from just any old Joe. Or even Joes you know!

    I hope that answers questions like this. It's kind of an iffy subject and I don't want to see it go into post-zapping territory.

    More than likely wait for the Go message in Announcements, then tell Steam to download the Beta branch. This isn't authoritative, wait for official word from @Ted.

    Redistributing any build of Kerbal Space Program is a breach of the EULA and cannot be condoned. Anyone who arranges downloads or offers download links will be banned from the forums and may have their KSP license revoked for breaching the EULA conditions.

     

    P.S. don't hate on Joe, he's a nice guy, really! ;)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Squad is not interested in where you download your product from, so long as you have a legal license and the download is from a legal source, anyone caught sharing, linking or promoting open access to copyrighted material including peer2peer, direct download, or private sharing or swapping will be dealt with under our rules for piracy, which may including banning from all official services this including op in betas and revocation of license to use KSP. 

    I trust you can all refrain for going down the icy path of copyright infringement discussion.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, KasperVld said:

    Redistributing any build of Kerbal Space Program is a breach of the EULA and cannot be condoned. Anyone who arranges downloads or offers download links will be banned from the forums and may have their KSP license revoked for breaching the EULA conditions.

     

    P.S. don't hate on Joe, he's a nice guy, really! ;)

    Absolutely. Joe is a very nice guy ;) It is also very clear in the EULA that you cannot offer a copy to anyone, commercialise KSP or distribute it in any way.

    In no way am I trying to go against the EULA or infringe copyright or encourage others to do so. I would like that clear right now.

    I am interested in a specific case though, using Steam, my friend could legally share their library with me using (steam family sharing) and I could then, legally, have KSP (the application) in a folder on my computer. The EULA gives me as a license holder the right to copy `the application` (including updates) for my own use if it was legally obtained. Even without that I could also just play that copy under steam family sharing as is.

    I don`t see where any infringement of copyright happens. The copy was obtained legally, was put on my computer legally and then I copied it myself under the rights given to me under the EULA to play for my enjoyment. The term copyright simply means the right to copy, something the EULA explicitly gives a license holder as long as it is a single copy purely for personal use and was obtained legally. The EULA does not prohibit such action, in fact it expressly gives me that right.

    Am I missing something?

    If someone could point out where in the situation I describe the illegality happens I`d be appreciative.

    Is KSP excluded from steam family sharing? I know some applications are.

    If that is the case then it`s all moot and I would never consider doing it.

    again, It is very clear in the EULA that you cannot offer a copy to anyone, commercialise KSP or distribute it in any way. Such action will and should be frowned upon with the deepest of frowns...

    In no way am I trying to go against the EULA or infringe copyright or encourage others to do so. I would like that clear right now, again.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, literally uploading a copy into the interwebs for people to download is indeed something you shouldn't do, be it a private link or not.^^'

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I originally discovered this game by accident from browsing youtube vids. A mediafire link was included in the video to download version .90. After being informed that version .90 was not included in "older" versions that could be downloaded free, I did the right thing and purchased a copy from the store. In between these 2 actions, I received links to fully download version 1.0.5.1028.  Had I wanted to not do the right thing, I could have easily kept my money and been playing the game right now in it's current stable version without having spent a dime.

    What do you think is gonna be the decision for a number of people after being treated like second class citizens by Squad in this instance? You better believe the fact that they have locked out access to what will be the most recent build to half of their customers will ensure a good day for torrent apps. After people get the "beta" build for free do you really think they will go back and buy the game? LOL

    Squad basically guaranteed that their version 1.1 will be one of, if not the most "pirated" version to date.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, Elway358 said:

    I originally discovered this game by accident from browsing youtube vids. A mediafire link was included in the video to download version .90. After being informed that version .90 was not included in "older" versions that could be downloaded free, I did the right thing and purchased a copy from the store. In between these 2 actions, I received links to fully download version 1.0.5.1028.  Had I wanted to not do the right thing, I could have easily kept my money and been playing the game right now in it's current stable version without having spent a dime.

    What do you think is gonna be the decision for a number of people after being treated like second class citizens by Squad in this instance? You better believe the fact that they have locked out access to what will be the most recent build to half of their customers will ensure a good day for torrent apps. After people get the "beta" build for free do you really think they will go back and buy the game? LOL

    Squad basically guaranteed that their version 1.1 will be one of, if not the most "pirated" version to date.

    Can I have a look into your crystal ball?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, Temeter said:

    Can I have a look into your crystal ball?

    Doesn't take a crystal ball. Just a tad bit of common sense. The game was already extremely easy for someone even such as myself who is very unfamiliar with torrents and PC gaming/pirating in general to get for free. Throw in liquided off users who ARE extremely fluent at this stuff and it doesn't take a genius to figure out what that will get you.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, llanthas said:

    How about if you just choose not to be a complete toolbag and steal a $20 game.  It's their product, and they want to get it right before they release a newer, better version to you FOR FREE.   Shut up and wait.

    Except that it's not a $20 game and they're not giving anyone anything "for free" No matter how you wanna try to declassify this pre release as a promised feature during the purchase process, promise of being upgraded to the actual release version (1.1) WAS absolutely factored into that purchase price.

    Oh, and for the record, of course I personally would never dream of downloading pre release 1.1 from the flood of torrent links that will appear in any average torrent app. ;) 

    Edited by Elway358
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    JESUS GUYS.

    It's a beta. A closed beta at that.

    Why is this such a problem??? You WILL still get 1.1!! This just happens to be a closed beta test that they can't do entirely internally, so they're turning to their customers to help test out.

    Just because it's not on the store doesn't mean you don't get to have it. Literally all you need to do is convert your store key to a Steam key if you want it so badly.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    23 minutes ago, John FX said:

    Absolutely. Joe is a very nice guy ;) It is also very clear in the EULA that you cannot offer a copy to anyone, commercialise KSP or distribute it in any way.

    In no way am I trying to go against the EULA or infringe copyright or encourage others to do so. I would like that clear right now.

    I am interested in a specific case though, using Steam, my friend could legally share their library with me using (steam family sharing) and I could then, legally, have KSP (the application) in a folder on my computer. The EULA gives me as a license holder the right to copy `the application` (including updates) for my own use if it was legally obtained. Even without that I could also just play that copy under steam family sharing as is.

    Hmm, I had honestly never heard of Steam Family Sharing, but I will point out that once you buy a game through Steam, you're also subject to their terms. Do take a close look at that :)

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    30 minutes ago, llanthas said:

    And you will be upgraded to the release version, when there is one.  The current release version is 1.0.5. 

    There is no argument for complaining about this.

    As for the purchase process - did you know that there would ever be a version 1.1 when you bought the game?  Unless you bought it in the past 2 weeks, the answer is no. 

    This is a free upgrade to the game, brought to you by a company that actually, genuinely cares about their product.  Complaining about that in any way just makes one appear to be a self-entitled douche-bucket.

    Sure did. I was informed before purchase by squad staff about 1.1 being released soon as the "actual" full release version and that I could rest assured that I would be upgraded to that version as part of my purchase.

    -snip-

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 minutes ago, KasperVld said:

    Hmm, I had honestly never heard of Steam Family Sharing, but I will point out that once you buy a game through Steam, you're also subject to their terms. Do take a close look at that :)

     

    Steam say that up to ten people can share your entire game library through the scheme. Only some games that require a key or similar are excluded.

    It seems to be one of those things where if you are not opted out, you are opted in. If Squad don`t want to be part of the scheme maybe they should think about it a bit...

    EDIT : It seems that the people who share your library get their own copy of the game and have their own saves etc so they pretty much have their own copy to play without ever purchasing it.

    Edited by John FX
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    45 minutes ago, Elway358 said:

    You better believe the fact that they have locked out access to what will be the most recent build to half of their customers will ensure a good day for torrent apps. After people get the "beta" build for free do you really think they will go back and buy the game?

    If they want a version that isn't full of potentially save-breaking bugs and other inconveniences, then they'll buy it.

    Edited by KerbalSaver
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    28 minutes ago, John FX said:

    Steam say that up to ten people can share your entire game library through the scheme. Only some games that require a key or similar are excluded.

    It seems to be one of those things where if you are not opted out, you are opted in. If Squad don`t want to be part of the scheme maybe they should think about it a bit...

    EDIT : It seems that the people who share your library get their own copy of the game and have their own saves etc so they pretty much have their own copy to play without ever purchasing it.

    It's not that easy. ;)

    I'm actually using the sharing in-house. There are three huge limitations:

    1. You can not play shared games in offline mode.

    2. You can not play shared games from an account as long as the real owner is playing one of his games.

    3. Shared accounts need steamgard protection.

    Basically you have to be online and the guy lending the game can't play any steam game as long as you access shared software. So it's not like you just copy games onto another account or anything. Also can't do it with strangers, because you need to do additional steamguard verification for every pc, which would be a huge security risk doing it outside of a very close circle of family or friends.

    Edited by Temeter
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 3/4/2016 at 11:26 PM, Temeter said:

    You mean motivating people to buy their game through an indirect source that results in less revenue?

    No. They're gaining revenue. I'm honestly surprised no one noticed that. Additionally, they're also expanding their beta pool than what it was in prior versions. Back when the game was in its infancy, beta testers were considered high-end individuals and more often than not were hired/volunteered on by/to Squad. I know, I knew several of them. Back then, they also recognized and supported the modding community in an open fashion. I wouldn't say anything has changed right now, and I wouldn't call this decision an appropriate or a negative one. In fact, I think it's a very mature business decision, something that I had yet to see from Squad since their decision to go to Steam. 

    But enough of my knowledge of how Squad and, more specifically, Harvester gets his/their money. 

    I think everyone pitching a fit is missing a good point here. Squad has opened the doors to people who would often not be able to participate. Furthermore, their trying something new (not completely new, as it's still an old process) to make up for what could be a lack of support from their tester community (if applicable). I think it's a very wise decision. I'm very surprised more people don't support it. All anyone has to do is buy the Steam version of the game. It's been on sale for several times, and I (among those who have it) supported the game by buying it. All you're doing is giving back, if you want to look at it like that. Additionally, you'll be given a chance to reap a reward also. 

    Maybe Squad needs the extra bucks. They are trying to develop and maintain a game here. I'm unsure if they still pay their testers and staff (moderation excluded), but if they do they'll need revenue for that. Their primary source of revenue might not be enough, and it might be different from last when I was privy to it. All in all, it's just another business move, with rewards, risks, and a more open-door policy to community involvement.

    I'm not really seeing any problem here.

    Edited by Drakomis
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 minutes ago, Drakomis said:

     They're gaining revenue.

    When you build a big post around a singular statement, please at least explain it first. I'm not really seeing how getting a smaller percentage of a sum creates more revenue.

    Edited by Temeter
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, Temeter said:

    When you built a big post around a singular statement, please at least explain it first. I'm not really seeing how getting a smaller percentage of a sum creates more revenue.

    Well, allow me to explain it. I use Supply and Demand as an example. As we both probably know, supply and demand works off two basic principles:

    1. The manufactured supply of a product

    2. The demand for that product.

    Now we can go for hours just explaining this fact, but let's leave it at our basic, common sense understanding. Applying this to gaming, and the industry as a whole, and we got a foundation for understanding each other here. Moving on, Squad has produced a product which is supposedly in demand by a specific portion of the population. Their move is extremely strategic (whether knowingly or not) in the way that it requires the populace who wishes to participate to buy their product from a source of hard revenue (in this case, a platform such as Steam which will provide a source of revenue). There are two reasons for this, and I've honed my reasoning down to one probable explanation. I believe that this move was done to emulate similar companies who wanted to gain a minor revenue boost, such as companies who provide games with add-ons or, more specifically, Activision or EA. While their model is more Draconian, it works, and if we can move that model over to what Squad has done, we can see that not only have they ensured that the product will be in demand, but it will be desired after.

    In short, I don't anticipate nor predict a big boost from this move. What I do predict is a good source of short revenue to assist with what I could only believe to be a desire to gain additional cash flow - for a short period. I also believe this to be a test of some sort, to see if it would work. Obviously the community backlash will hamper any future decisions on this part without serious debating on behalf of the staff, but regardless like most companies who provide an excellent product, they have the advantage. And Squad knows it. This is why I believe they made this decision, because they knew peoples love for the game would outweigh their dislike for the decisions.

    This is my view on why it is an excellent business move. It will provide revenue. People will buy it from steam specifically for this. There will be a short gain in profit. These are certain. What I don't know is what will happen in the future because of this, or what the backlash (however minor or major) will do for future business decisions. Overall, I think it's a rather mature and safe decision.

    Have I adequately answered your question now? :)

    (As a bonus explanation, it could all be because they got really tired of doing private beta testing or - the horror! - paying people to test the game and provide feedback. I mean, seriously, KSP has a wide community of players who stream their product for free advertising. They gain cash flow, yadda yadda, this and that. So maybe it's all because they got tired of having too few people test it or something. Eh...it's all a guess anyway.)

    Edited by Drakomis
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    24 minutes ago, Drakomis said:

    A very long post

    Wow, haha! No, I can assure you that the decision to publish the pre-release on Steam only was made purely on practical concerns. Sales play no role there.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    35 minutes ago, Temeter said:

    It's not that easy. ;)

    I'm actually using the sharing in-house. There are three huge limitations:

    1. You can not play shared games in offline mode.

    2. You can not play shared games from an account as long as the real owner is playing one of his games.

    3. Shared accounts need steamgard protection.

    Basically you have to be online and the guy lending the game can't play any steam game as long as you access shared software. So it's not like you just copy games onto another account or anything. Also can't do it with strangers, because you need to do additional steamguard verification for every pc, which would be a huge security risk doing it outside of a very close circle of family or friends.

    That makes it more understandable.

    So there is nothing stopping me from getting my friend to come over, verify I am someone he wants to share his library with and when he is not playing a game on steam (he only rarely plays), I could bugtest 1.1 and help bugtest.

    So out of curiosity how would the `must be online` bit work for a game like KSP which does not check that when you run the executable directly?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Drakomis said:

    Well, allow me to explain it. I use Supply and Demand as an example. As we both probably know, supply and demand works off two basic principles:

    1. The manufactured supply of a product

    2. The demand for that product.

    Now we can go for hours just explaining this fact, but let's leave it at our basic, common sense understanding. Applying this to gaming, and the industry as a whole, and we got a foundation for understanding each other here. Moving on, Squad has produced a product which is supposedly in demand by a specific portion of the population. Their move is extremely strategic (whether knowingly or not) in the way that it requires the populace who wishes to participate to buy their product from a source of hard revenue (in this case, a platform such as Steam which will provide a source of revenue). There are two reasons for this, and I've honed my reasoning down to one probable explanation. I believe that this move was done to emulate similar companies who wanted to gain a minor revenue boost, such as companies who provide games with add-ons or, more specifically, Activision or EA. While their model is more Draconian, it works, and if we can move that model over to what Squad has done, we can see that not only have they ensured that the product will be in demand, but it will be desired after.

    In short, I don't anticipate nor predict a big boost from this move. What I do predict is a good source of short revenue to assist with what I could only believe to be a desire to gain additional cash flow - for a short period. I also believe this to be a test of some sort, to see if it would work. Obviously the community backlash will hamper any future decisions on this part without serious debating on behalf of the staff, but regardless like most companies who provide an excellent product, they have the advantage. And Squad knows it. This is why I believe they made this decision, because they knew peoples love for the game would outweigh their dislike for the decisions.

    This is my view on why it is an excellent business move. It will provide revenue. People will buy it from steam specifically for this. There will be a short gain in profit. These are certain. What I don't know is what will happen in the future because of this, or what the backlash (however minor or major) will do for future business decisions. Overall, I think it's a rather mature and safe decision.

    Have I adequately answered your question now? :)

    (As a bonus explanation, it could all be because they got really tired of doing private beta testing or - the horror! - paying people to test the game and provide feedback. I mean, seriously, KSP has a wide community of players who stream their product for free advertising. They gain cash flow, yadda yadda, this and that. So maybe it's all because they got tired of having too few people test it or something. Eh...it's all a guess anyway.)

    Don't hate me, but I got the feeling you are having too much fun writing to actually make any sense. They got a very stable business around KSP, for everything we know, there is just no point in any of this.

    We got already a good explanation, the logistics. No point in trying to analyse Squad as a business (which we don't actually know much about).

    4 minutes ago, John FX said:

    That makes it more understandable.

    So there is nothing stopping me from getting my friend to come over, verify I am someone he wants to share his library with and when he is not playing a game on steam (he only rarely plays), I could bugtest 1.1 and help bugtest.

    So out of curiosity how would the `must be online` bit work for a game like KSP which does not check that when you run the executable directly?

    Steam shouldn't differentiate. Since you can start KSP without steam, it should be no hindrance at all. Tbh, you could also just log into your friends account on your pc and then copy the download somewhere on to your hard drive (in that case you dont get updates tho).

    Just mind you need email confirmation for his account to be used on your pc.

    Edited by Temeter
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So for giving Squad all the money, rather than letting Valve have a pretty generous share, we get:

    • A broken, for nearly/over? a year, patcher. Leaving anyone with a limited download allowance or unreliable connection stuffed.
    • No access to pre-release versions.

    I deeply regret buying direct when you treat your customers like that. Especially since all you need to do to fix that patcher is to fix your Rsync server!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, Drakomis said:

    ...paying people to test the game and provide feedback...

    The only people paid by Squad are those with yellow names on the forums (though some of the senior moderators may get paid too, but not to my knowledge). Most of the QA team and all of the experimental team are volunteers. In fact, it was only very recently that two of the QA team got hired as full time testers.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, John FX said:

    That makes it more understandable.

    So out of curiosity how would the `must be online` bit work for a game like KSP which does not check that when you run the executable directly?

    My guess, and I could be totally wrong, as I haven't played a game through the share option, is that if you have a share from a "family" member, the executable for the game is locked in some way, so that if you are not online, or your "Family" member is playing the game, the executable won't be allowed to run, separate from steam, and/or while offline. It would require an active connection to steam. Additionally, if you start it up while online, then disconnect I would think it would stop running, but as I said that just a guess.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments

×
×
  • Create New...