Jump to content

Update 1.1 enters experimental testing


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Thanks, I do know the difference between Experimentals and the pre-release. I was curious about Experimentals. :)

I think that was aimed more at the people screaming that they can't "play" 1.1 early with the Steam pre-release version. I'd bet any one of my left appendages that those crying the hardest are the same type that wouldn't submit bug reports. Speaking for myself, I'm terrible at that and will likely not get it. Maybe once out of curiosity, but @KasperVld , @NathanKell and @RoverDude all indicated in the last Squadcast that updates of the pre-release would be pushed often, sometimes multiple times a day. Presumably, some of the updates could even be save breaking, so from a gameplay perspective, the pre-release shouldn't be looked at as anything beyond a wide beta in the truest sense. 

Oh, and +1 to you getting in on Experimentals. I love the Pathfinder and Buffalo Rover packs. Quality work, there. I'd suggest sending Ted or Kasper an email. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't speak to update frequency this far out, but you're quite right that we might well make save-breaking changes during the pre-release period (only for those who already have and have used the pre-release, to be clear--the release version of 1.1 will be compatible with 1.0.5 saves).

This is because the upgrade pipeline checks the save's version, and the pre-release will obviously save saves with a 1.1 version string. But if the format changes midway through the prerelease...goodbye save.

 

This is just to reinforce: the pre-release is, as its name imples, not release-quality software. If you only want a stable, fun KSP experience, wait for the actual release. The pre-release is to help us catch bugs from a wider audience (and to give modders a head start on updating), not to give some people an early crack at the actual release.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NathanKell said:

We can't speak to update frequency this far out, but you're quite right that we might well make save-breaking changes during the pre-release period (only for those who already have and have used the pre-release, to be clear--the release version of 1.1 will be compatible with 1.0.5 saves).

This is because the upgrade pipeline checks the save's version, and the pre-release will obviously save saves with a 1.1 version string. But if the format changes midway through the prerelease...goodbye save.

 

This is just to reinforce: the pre-release is, as its name imples, not release-quality software. If you only want a stable, fun KSP experience, wait for the actual release. The pre-release is to help us catch bugs from a wider audience (and to give modders a head start on updating), not to give some people an early crack at the actual release.

Gotta be honest: While I'm planning to deliver feedback, the first thing I've thought was 'YAY, an early crack at the actual release'. :D

That said, I feel i've got a bit of a feel how the release is gonna play anyway, played lots of pre-release-, beta- and heavily modded games. A 2 week pre-release beta shouldn't be that shocking, and it's not like i'm really expecting to keep saves. Gonna sandbox that stuff.

Srsly, I've played Total War games at release*. There is nothing in the world of games that'll ever shock me. :>

*not TW Empire tho, that was completely broken for me the first ~3 months

Edited by Temeter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really Cool to hear!

Yeah, cant understand the whining about a bugged version, as was summed up nicely earlier - it isn't to play with, it's to test.

Somehow I think 98% of users out there think testing is glamorous, that you get to just play play play, but the reality is that one is testing, or can be testing single scenarios that may cause a bug over and over and over and over and over, well, you get the picture .....

 

If you really really want it, then jeez, go buy it agaion on steam, sign up or whatever, it's not like it's $65-99 bucks. Even if it were, it would be worth it (for the final release and any releases afterwards).

 

I'm as pumped as anyone else for the newness, but I'm not going to steam, understand the reasoning, and not signing up to test, I leave that to others.

It will be here soon enough.

Please do it before the 28th though, or some of us may be ADR1FT instead of on Kerbal hehehehe ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats Squad on reaching this milestone... It's awesome that KSP has done well enough that you have been able to continue and even expand the development effort, and brought onboard many hardcore volunteers during the v1.1 cycle, that had been extending and improving KSP on their own time.

Experimental testers: start your engines!  Don't be a rubber stamp on top of everyone's eagerness to get it out the door. The more problems you can persuade the developers are worth solving, the better everyone's experience will be. (Finding a bug is only half of the battle.)

Go Team!

Edited by basic.syntax
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does 1.1 fix the update process for those of us that wanted to give ALL the money to Squad? If so, then I will feel less offended by this Steam only tester build, otherwise it just confirms that Squad does not care about existing store customers who may have unreliable connections (CONSTANTLY dropping the MASSIVE incremental updates about half way through) or data usage limits (500MiB for a x.x.x.1 version bump!!!).

The patcher does not even need updating, you just need to bring back your Rsync server!!!

To those saying "buy it again on Steam": I will not buy this game again just to get access to a WORKING update system or betas, I really don't think what I paid in the first place was worth it given this treatment. If it is so cheap, why don't you buy it for us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You all know Squad made the prerelease available only through Steam because costs. But, instead of saying "Great! The prerelease will be out in the wild" the people complaining are just making sure Squad never does another prerelease in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NathanKell said:

We can't speak to update frequency this far out, but you're quite right that we might well make save-breaking changes during the pre-release period (only for those who already have and have used the pre-release, to be clear--the release version of 1.1 will be compatible with 1.0.5 saves).

Extremely important information: soooo glad I stumbled upon this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@KasperVld @Ted Hey guys, great news regarding 1.1.  Has the experimental team notticed a performance boost in the use of CPU and GPU resources with KSP 1.1 and Unity 5??

I'd also ask if the expermiental team has given a positve feedback on the new and overhauled features in 1.1, but I imagine you will cover this in the next DevNote, so I'll wait. :) 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HMIC said:

@KasperVld @Ted Hey guys, great news regarding 1.1.  Has the experimental team notticed a performance boost in the use of CPU and GPU resources with KSP 1.1 and Unity 5??  I'd also ask if the expermiental team has given a positve feedback on the new and overhauled features in 1.1, but I imagine you will cover this in the next DevNote, so I'll wait. :)Thanks

They are bound by NDA and shouldn't disclose info about what they are testing... especially while chance remains to significantly improve upon any problem today's build might have, rather than post about performance that could be better by the time it hits the opt-in open beta. Those volunteers won't be bound by NDA, the floodgates will open after the Experimental test pass.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, HMIC said:

@KasperVld @Ted Hey guys, great news regarding 1.1.  Has the experimental team notticed a performance boost in the use of CPU and GPU resources with KSP 1.1 and Unity 5??

I'd also ask if the expermiental team has given a positve feedback on the new and overhauled features in 1.1, but I imagine you will cover this in the next DevNote, so I'll wait. :) 

 

Thanks

While you won't be likely, as syntax said, to get more than greenlit statements cause NDA, they did say even the first, unoptimized Unity 5 port of KSP had 'surprising' performance improvements. Besiege also run a lot better with the new engine. It's not just a better use of ressources, but a more efficient physics engine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HMIC said:

Has the experimental team notticed a performance boost in the use of CPU and GPU resources with KSP 1.1 and Unity 5??

I'm also interested about the GPU side of the things. I play KSP on Linux, so OpenGL is my only option (until Vulkan support comes :D).
So, does the current version of Unity already support core profiles of OpenGL versions of 3.2 and up (or does it still use legacy OpenGL 2.1 only)? If not, will the Unity version that KSP 1.1 uses, support it?

The performance difference between OpenGL 2.1 and OpenGL 4.x is actually pretty significant (depending on how well the API is used, of course).

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, RW-1 said:

Somehow I think 98% of users out there think testing is glamorous, that you get to just play play play, but the reality is that one is testing, or can be testing single scenarios that may cause a bug over and over and over and over and over, well, you get the picture .....

It's a very common problem. Most people have no idea how to test software, or how to help developers when they provide a test version for public use. Beta-tester has become something of a synonym for someone who gets early access, and youtube is full of gaming channels broadcasting beta test gameplay because that's what subscribers want to see, and it becomes a big cycle of self-reinforcing misconception.

The reality of course is that a beta tester is only useful if they actually provide feedback. Most players in betas just work around bugs, rather than trying to figure out the exact method for causing them, because they feel a need to 'make progress' on their expendable save/character. I for one don't enjoy being part of betas (with the exception of KSP) and usually turn down any invites I may get. You only get to play a game for the first time once, and there's no sense in buffing all the shine off your new toy when it's not yet in its release form :)  That and my day job is software developer - I do enough spirit-crushing testing during the day, I really don't have a desire to do it for free in the evenings :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, eddiew said:

It's a very common problem. Most people have no idea how to test software, or how to help developers when they provide a test version for public use. Beta-tester has become something of a synonym for someone who gets early access, and youtube is full of gaming channels broadcasting beta test gameplay because that's what subscribers want to see, and it becomes a big cycle of self-reinforcing misconception.

The reality of course is that a beta tester is only useful if they actually provide feedback. Most players in betas just work around bugs, rather than trying to figure out the exact method for causing them, because they feel a need to 'make progress' on their expendable save/character. I for one don't enjoy being part of betas (with the exception of KSP) and usually turn down any invites I may get. You only get to play a game for the first time once, and there's no sense in buffing all the shine off your new toy when it's not yet in its release form :)  That and my day job is software developer - I do enough spirit-crushing testing during the day, I really don't have a desire to do it for free in the evenings :P

While not a dev, I've participated in a few testings a while back, I agree with you on all points. Which is why I'll just be waiting for mainstream release. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RW-1 said:

While not a dev, I've participated in a few testings a while back, I agree with you on all points. Which is why I'll just be waiting for mainstream release. :)

Which is exactly what I'll be doing :)

I'm very grateful to Squad and for those testers who do actually test - but my gaming time is limited and precious and I simply don't want to spend it on a throwaway career that will spoil the real career afterwards ^^;

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eddiew said:

Which is exactly what I'll be doing :)

I'm very grateful to Squad and for those testers who do actually test - but my gaming time is limited and precious and I simply don't want to spend it on a throwaway career that will spoil the real career afterwards ^^;

I don't think of it as a throwaway career, I play stock, so supposedly this time around I may upgrade without loss. If so, no biggie hehehe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, StarManta said:

I would probably put up BitTorrent links.

That's like the worst possible choice. The whole purpose of the exercise is not to let people play 2 weeks early, it's to ensure *testing*. For that, they need people to have the latest version of the game, always. Having 30 different versions with minor differences floating around the interwebs is a terrible idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Temeter said:

While you won't be likely, as syntax said, to get more than greenlit statements cause NDA, they did say even the first, unoptimized Unity 5 port of KSP had 'surprising' performance improvements. Besiege also run a lot better with the new engine. It's not just a better use of ressources, but a more efficient physics engine.

Thanks, looking forward to 1.1 on the open beta, also woking on a new project here at home and are evaluating unity 5, so opinions like this help.  Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things I'm curious about is how will Unity 5 performance be on Linux vs. Windows. I switched over to Linux for KSP due to better memory performance and utilization, and am very pleased that I have never had a CTD. I do run a ton of mods, and in Windows, it got to where every gameplay session ended when I ran out of usable memory due to the 4 gig limitations. In Linux, I happily hum along with almost 7 gigs of memory in use and rock solid stability. The only problem is I'd rather be using DirectX instead of OpenGL, and 90% of my other games aren't supported in Linux (Don't like Wine due to some stability issues). 

So, assuming this doesn't break NDA, can anyone say whether or not 1.1 runs on Windows as well as 1.0.5 currently runs on Linux, in terms of memory utilization? I'm no special pleader for this or that OS and will use whichever gives me the best performance in KSP, so this isn't meant to kick off some sort of Linux vs. Windows debate. 

Thanks!

Edited by jonrd463
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jonrd463 said:

In Linux, I happily hum along with almost 7 gigs of memory in use and rock solid stability. The only problem is I'd rather be using DirectX instead of OpenGL, and 90% of my other games aren't supported in Linux (Don't like Wine due to some stability issues).

It's been said in other forums that the OpenGL render path for Unity has been much improved for 5.  The degree of performance improvement remains to be seen (and that would still be covered under NDA) as it might not be a universal thing (ie if only shader performance has improved, KSP would only see a small improvement).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...