The game is starting to give me a headache...

[falconek]

Mordern hardware (as in typical home PC) is a joke, when it comes to physics calculations. Basically every simulation game has similar or worse performance problems as KSP... check DCS, Arma 2 and so on.

[-ELF-]

I suppose there is no need to go for eight cores. I am playing it on a dual core 2 GHz AMD CPU (mind I have Linux running on AMD+ATI graphics which is not a common task itself.) And I still think 10 FPS is playable.

I think even dual core 3GHz processor will do much of difference.

Thread derailed, actually.

On topic - even though it is announced as "scope complete" - it is not equal to "bug free", so we are just waiting for bugfixes, as for any other game released from 2010, each of them receives updates, and it is normal. They all fix bugs.

[steve_v]

So long as those bugfixes actually arrive. Which was my original point - old, unfixed bugs.

Game breaking bugs put people off games, especially new players.

KSP is great value, play time wise, but if a player rage-quits after a few hours because of poor performance and constant crashing or save-breaking bugs they'll never know that.

Also, the game should at least be playable on all supported platforms at 1.0, this does not appear to be the case for a large number of players on OSX. Unless you count crashing every 30min or less as playable.

1.03 should be fixing this, not 'waiting on a re-balance'.

Edited June 3, 2015 by steve_v

[selfish_meme]

So long as those bugfixes actually arrive. Which was my original point - old, unfixed bugs.

Game breaking bugs put people off games, especially new players.

KSP is great value, play time wise, but if a player rage-quits after a few hours because of poor performance and constant crashing or save-breaking bugs they'll never know that.

Also, the game should at least be playable on all supported platforms at 1.0, this does not appear to be the case for a large number of players on OSX. Unless you count crashing every 30min or less as playable.

1.03 should be fixing this, not 'waiting on a re-balance'.

Nothing wrong with my osx play, it never crashes, it must be something to do with your install.

[Joonatan1998]

I disable save loading but make regular backups.

And sometimes I quicly alt-f4 if I get some bug (kerbals exploding when leaving capsules...)

The bugs make playing without saving/backups near impossible. (and very dangerous, your save may get corrupted.)

[Varsi]

Compared to what Sword of the Stars 2 was at launch KSP has felt great... Had to wait a year for that one to try it again.

The thing is KSP isn't that bad for everyone. I don't have any trouble with performance (4 years old i5) with under 400 part crafts and memory leaks are a problem only after heavy modding. Might be interesting to do some sort of a survey on what sort of hardware KSP works and on what it doesn't.

[-ELF-]

I would say that bugfixes actualy arrive fast enough.

I do not recall any bugs that will be laying around unfixed since 0.20 for example. Mostly all gamebreaking bugs are fixed from previous releases, only ones from latest two are left.

I personally use quicksave for bug evasion from time to time. If you do not push the game out of the normal - do NOT build 500+parts ships, install 10+ mods or try to tear apart a kerbal with two claws - it stays stable enough.

Of course, it lacks some convenience features, but they are to come later.

Mind you - I do not call a gamebreaking bug when you right click a wheel and braking power is down to 20 from 200. It is very easy to evade. Just note that you mustn't click wheels. And it is just as easy to fix actually...

It is Linux'ed point of view. I spent about 70 hours on Linux trying to fix my not working printer, and I do not blame Linux or printer developer. It is just me, who cannot deal with it. I would probably spend more than 100 hours more fixing that, and most probably will not be able to, but it is not a point to blame anyone except me.

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

KSP? Headache? You either get used to it, or you go mad and quit. Go play something else for a while, that's what I do when the bugs get to me. SQUAD missed the ball. It saddens me. There's nothing I can do. I go play Age Of Empires and come back next week.

[DarkGravity]

Yesterday I was trying to launch up some engines/fuel tanks to attach to a "tourist" ship to go to the Mun and Minmus, and the launcher bugged. Once in orbit it was shaking all over the place, not the engines or control surfaces, but the camera shake. Then I noticed in the map that it said it was landed, even though it was in orbit. The engines/tanks, once detached were fine though. So far after that I haven't had it happen again so not sure what I did that caused it to happen. I thought maybe the game had gotten a glitch after running for a while so i closed it and reloaded but same thing.

I am using mods though, so maybe its a combination of things at specific times that causes it. Though, I was launching 2 tanks/engines side by side, so its possible maybe they had parts clipped through each other and that caused the bug. Did not have part clipping enabled though.

I have had a similar problem with certain ships when I deploy the fairing. The ship reports as landed and the blue orbit track disappears. I posted about it and was told by a moderator that this is an old bug that happens when the remnants of the fairing don't fly off to infinity but instead remain touching the ship. (This is most likely to happen if you deploy while accelerating). I think it can happen with other detachable bits, but I know for sure it happens with fairings. I was also told that the Squad person in charge of this is aware of it and that any fix will be a bit tricky. In the meantime, I just make sure not to get fairing bits caught in my rocket when I deploy the fairing.

[Arsonik]

I have had a similar problem with certain ships when I deploy the fairing. The ship reports as landed and the blue orbit track disappears. I posted about it and was told by a moderator that this is an old bug that happens when the remnants of the fairing don't fly off to infinity but instead remain touching the ship. (This is most likely to happen if you deploy while accelerating). I think it can happen with other detachable bits, but I know for sure it happens with fairings. I was also told that the Squad person in charge of this is aware of it and that any fix will be a bit tricky. In the meantime, I just make sure not to get fairing bits caught in my rocket when I deploy the fairing.

Had this happen the other day. Right after I fixed the launch clamps appearing near the craft after reaching orbit. I haven't played since then.

I've been putting up with bugs for over 1400 hours in game. SQUAD decided to call it 1.0, not me. So it is fair for my expectation to be a complete working product.

[regex]

I've had good luck with 0.90 and a full RO/RSS install on x64 Linux, rarely get any crashes and most of the bugs (and their workarounds) are problems with mods. 1.0.x with my minimal set of mods has been pretty stable on x64 Linux, no real issues.

That being said, I totally agree with the following sentiments:

;1992375']So' date=' how is it different from what Mojang or EA releases?[/quote']

SQUAD missed the ball. It saddens me.

KSP's "release" product was a real letdown at the end of the day, even if it is the best KSP version I've ever played.

Really hoping Unity 5 makes things better, but I'm not holding my breath. I'll still play KSP, but all the wasted potential in the game still disappoints me.

[asmi]

I think the root of the problem is that developers somehow got an idea that it's OK to release anything with bugs. Squad's problem seems to be that they've got used to "perpetual alpha" status, and it was helped by lots of fanboys here with "it's only alpha, deal with that" mentality. Well it's not alpha anymore - but I don't see that mentality changed...

If only I'd have a luxury of doing so at my work...

[haltux]

The problem Squad is most likely facing is that they use an engine for something it was not really made for, or at least they push it somewhere no one has pushed it before.

That was a tough choice they add at the beginning : using an engine which was not entirely suitable, or build there own engine which would have been extremely complex, and would have required very specific skills they might not have in their team.

[justidutch]

There are days, like today, where something in my brain triggers a memory of my (real-life) travels, and I realize that as annoying as bugs in my favourite software game are (and yes they are very annoying and I can believe they might precipitate headaches)…

it's a darned game that I bought with some disposable income. The fact that I even have disposable income to buy a computer game with is astounding, considering how many times I've had discussions with people on Earth who need to send their 12 year olds into the fields to work, because if they don't then the family won't have enough to eat.

Sorry for the interruption. Carry on.

Edited June 3, 2015 by justidutch

[Beowolf]

I've played this way, and also got frustrated. These days, I'll generally play career on "Hard", but manually turn revert and save back on, and only use them for KSP or mod errors...though I've had to close the game and walk away a couple of times to keep myself from quickloading after I do something dumb. And, at least once, I lost that Will roll, and cheated Jeb back to life.

Once I played an Ironman sandbox game with KAS installed, where I shipped spare parts along on every mission and the idea was, every time something broke I'd try to fix it in-flight, whether it was my error or KSPs. That was a wild ride! Some of the problems I encountered (I was building a huge Munbase in sandbox) were maddening, but I persevered until a KAS glitch eventually blew apart the whole base. That was too much to patch with digital duct tape and a backpack of spare solar cells.

[DarkGravity]

I don't like Skyrim on the hardest setting. I don't like Civilization V on the hardest setting, and I'm sure I'll never play max hard mode here. At some point play becomes work, and what is the point of that? That said, the second-hardest settings on all those games are quite fun!

[SAI Peregrinus]

Some games use tedium in place of difficulty. KSP is one. The game isn't any more difficult if you start with less funds/have to do more science to unlock parts, it just takes longer. Hard mode turns into "spend more time farming science at the KSC, doing part test contracts, etc." You still unlock the entire tech tree once you can get to Mun/Minmus. From there it's just about getting money. The actual mechanics of making and flying spaceships don't change with difficulty at all.

[boxman]

Yeah, what an awesome bug-free 1.0 release that was not. Most of those issues are literally years old, and still not fixed.

Why even put "no quicksaves" in as a difficulty option when it stands a 100% chance of eventually borking your game?

It shows that those of us who warned them about this turned out we were right about them rushing 1.0 out instead of actually testing it properly.

They should have made at least one extra beta version without adding any extra features to make sure they got rid of all known gamebreaking bugs.