Patch 1.4.3 to be released next week!

[GDJ]

Okay everybody, I know that alot of us are eager for the update but bottom line is that it will be released when it's released and not before.

Arguing about the minutia of CNC codes, machine codes, conspiracy theories, customer relations/satisfaction, etc. isn't going to make it come any faster nor will negativity. 

Give it a rest already. It will come. It may not come as fast as we all want, but look at it this way:

The delay just might mean more bugs squashed.

[silverfox101]

 

Edited April 22, 2018 by silverfox101

[Greenfire32]

1 minute ago, silverfox101 said:

That's just my opinion off course. You do have one option, you can choose not to read it. 

There's a certain irony to this...

I, for one, welcome the delay. Fix those bugs.

[steve_v]

1 minute ago, Greenfire32 said:

I, for one, welcome the delay. Fix those bugs.

As do I, if I assume that that is what they are doing... As opposed to tweaking the new and unasked for content while the base game remains borderline unplayable.

[silverfox101]

That's what we all want at the end of the day and that's what will make people happy, but I say let people have a rant if they are unhappy about something it will happen just as will the praise and thanks when the bugs are fixed. Non of it is personal.

P.S

Got my flight stick set up, its great. 

[steve_v]

22 minutes ago, silverfox101 said:

P.S

Got my flight stick set up, its great. 

Haven't got my flight stick set up, because Unitys joystick support on GNU/Linux is still completely FUBAR. Apparently I am going to have to wait for some future (or never, as it's sounding like) patch after this one before basic usb-hid input functionality is restored.

 

22 minutes ago, silverfox101 said:

what will make people happy

What will make me happy is the ability to play the game (preferably with the DLC), with landing legs that don't explode and a joystick that works. Like in 1.3.1.

Edited April 22, 2018 by steve_v

[LoSBoL]

27 minutes ago, steve_v said:

As do I, if I assume that that is what they are doing... As opposed to tweaking the new and unasked for content while the base game remains borderline unplayable.

Ehm... Alternative launch sites have been frequently asked for. I'd rather have it bug free in 1.4.3, then wait for yet another 1.4.4 update and wait again for mods to catch up. But that's just me. 

[steve_v]

Just now, LoSBoL said:

Alternative launch sites have been frequently asked for.

Nobody I am aware of asked for them to be rolled into (and hold up) a critical bugfix patch.

[Kwebib]

Pardon my ignorance, but the landing leg bug can be fixed with a MM patch. What about the fairing bug? Aren't those the biggest bugs people are concerned with?

[LoSBoL]

1 minute ago, steve_v said:

Nobody I am aware of asked for them to be rolled into (and hold up) a critical bugfix patch.

Well no, off course not, why ask when we've got an announcement of 1.4.3 which is going to contain an extra launch site. Just glare thru the thread and see how many people say 'cool! Another launch site!` in this thread, hardly an unwanted feature... 

[silverfox101]

@steve_v I cant help with that I'm afraid I have not been involved in Linux for years and years. I don't want to rub salt in the wound but I am loving playing KSP with a flightstick .

I can finally get back to X Plane again now.

Edited April 22, 2018 by silverfox101

[Flayer]

Do people just have super high expectations? So much complaining in this thread, sheez. I just bought the expansion for 15 dollars because I saw they were going to add some things to it and don't wanna miss out on that action. I can deal with a little delay though. I've spent like 3k hours playing this damn game, it's about time I throw some more cash at them. I should probably donate to some modders too if I had any sense.

Yeah, 1.4.2 was buggy for me. I skipped 1.3 cause of KSP-fatigue and some mods weren't being updated or had some other issues. I'd also skipped one version or another because my OS was using some old libraries and I couldn't be arsed to update. That's just always been Kerbal, sometimes it's on them and sometimes it's on me. I don't know why some people think it's any different now then it was in the past. It's certainly not the end of the world in any case since I could always just use one of the other versions that work fine (like the one I paid for so long ago).

It's crazy to think you should expect everything to always work for you for the tiny investment you made. I'm sure they'd gladly give you your money back if you just recently bought it and found out it doesn't work for you and you wanted to return it rather than wait for a fix. In fact I think that's Steam policy.

[silverfox101]

@GDJ 

 

Edited April 22, 2018 by silverfox101

[klgraham1013]

7 minutes ago, Flayer said:

It's crazy to think you should expect everything to always work

So...it's okay that an update broke a core part of gameplay? (Landing on foreign bodies using landing legs?)

To each their own, I guess.

[StrandedonEarth]

Not sure if I posted this in this thread or not....

[LoSBoL]

20 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Not sure if I posted this in this thread or not....

SNIP

There, I fixed it for you 

 

 

Just fooling around, I'm exited for the 1.4.3 Patch, I can wait... until Tuesday 

[passinglurker]

How long it takes doesn't matter there are other games to play. What does matter is that it is done right and done well.

EDIT: Jesus calm down apologists crowd Squads still not off the hook for being artless QA cutting crap and causing this problem in the first place

Edited April 23, 2018 by passinglurker
will the usual apologists please stop liking this...

[Skystorm]

@steve_v Here is the module manager patch I used to fix some of the landing legs.  Haven't had a single problem with them since.

@PART[landingLeg1] // LT-1 Landing Struts
{
	@crashTolerance *= 10
}

@PART[landingLeg1-2] // LT-2 Landing Strut
{
	@crashTolerance *= 10
}

@PART[miniLandingLeg] // LT-5 Micro Landing Strut
{
	@crashTolerance *= 10
}

Paste that into a file with a *.cfg extension and put it in your gamedata directory.

And I'll go ahead and re-post the module manager patch for the 5m fairing sizing issues here as well.

@PART[fairingSize4]
{
    @MODEL,1
    {
        @scale = 4,4,4
    }

    %rescaleFactor = 1

    @node_stack_interstage01a = 0.0, 2.17, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2
    @node_stack_interstage01b = 0.0, 2.27, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 

    @node_stack_interstage02a = 0.0, 4.17, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2 
    @node_stack_interstage02b = 0.0, 4.27, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 

    @node_stack_interstage03a = 0.0, 6.17, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2 
    @node_stack_interstage03b = 0.0, 6.27, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 

    @node_stack_interstage04a = 0.0, 8.17, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2 
    @node_stack_interstage04b = 0.0, 8.27, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 

    @node_stack_interstage05a = 0.0, 10.17, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2 
    @node_stack_interstage05b = 0.0, 10.27, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 

    @node_stack_interstage06a = 0.0, 12.17, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2 
    @node_stack_interstage06b = 0.0, 12.27, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 
}

Paste that into a file with a *.cfg extension and put it in your gamedata directory.

[DoToH]

8 hours ago, Kerbart said:

What an adorable analogy. So cute.

I'm glad you like it

 

8 hours ago, Kerbart said:

So yeah, this kind of behavior isn't really that special

And that means I'm not allowed to complain?

 

8 hours ago, Kerbart said:

Don't be a whiner.

OK, you're right. After all, I didn't pay 40€ for KSP plus 15€ for the DLC.

[Vanamonde]

8 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

...Just glare thru the thread and see ... 

Everybody's glaring in these threads already. That's the problem. 

Please don't attack each other over differing opinions. Insulting other people is not going to win them over to your point of view. 

[Terwin]

20 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

Imagine if a machined piece changed shape massively based purely on who was using it and on random other factors and that you had to find the root cause in the tooling, and you'd get somewhat close to the issue at hand.

Have you ever had a real Heisen-bug?  one that changes when you turn on logging?

My first one was in school when we were writing a OS as a team project.  No one realized the memory location we were writing our log messages to was actually over-writing part of the code...

 

14 hours ago, DoToH said:

- My car has no windshield
- Uh... Sorry.. our QA missed that, please forgive us.
- Please, install the windshield ASAP
- No. We have the windshield and the tools, but we'll wait until we receive the new trunk colored led light, becuse that's what you really want. You can drive your new car without windshield, wait one week more or use your old car instead.
- That's unacceptable.
- Don't be a whiner. You have to understand that cars are a very complicated piece of harware, with hundreds of different parts and the windshield is only one of them, an acceptable mistake. Please be patient and wait

I don't understand why this kind of conversation only happens when the broken/faulty product is software. None of the people of the "coding is hard" mantra would step out of their car dealer with a car with no windshield or their computer store with a keyboard without space bar and enter keys.

Coding is hard, so is manufacturing proccess design. Your keyboards have enter key and your cars windshield.

 

Sure but manufacturing processes always run on exactly the same environment(aka the real world where Iron is always harder and heavier than aluminum, but aluminum cools faster because it is a better conductor), for software that can only happen when you provide the hardware as well(and keep it in a locked box that the users are not allowed to tinker with).

How well would those 'consistent' manufacturing processes work if you had to ship the same manufacturing line to all factories, even though in some of those factories Aluminum is heavier than lead and harder than diamonds, but high-carbon steel has the consistency of tapioca pudding?

Could you still guarantee that all of those product lines would ship the same, high-quality products?

13 hours ago, steve_v said:

If KSP was a DOS program circa 1988, you wouldn't have all those handy OS facilities and abstraction toolkits to do half the work for you. Win some, loose some.

Again, "It's complicated" isn't an excuse for releasing code with major regressions. It might, to some extent, explain how they happened in the first place, but that's beside the point.

 

Ed.

FWIW, neither is your average CNC system. The last one I worked on had 4 cpus and 3 monstrous FPGAs scattered around in various locations, each running their own code, in different languages, and communicating with at least 3 different protocols, not counting the various microcontrollers. And that one was built in 1988. They're even worse now, as they tend to run on Windows PCs with a stack of large and obscure proprietary co-processing PCI cards.

Despite all this complexity, (and running the frontend control software on Windows, of all things) somehow the manufacturers manage to find time to test them sufficiently that they neither produce defective parts, nor kill their operators while swinging 10+ ton components around at 1500RPM.

Tell me, how many CNC systems have you seen that sell for less than $100 and will run on any custom computer you build for it, with no requirements more stringent than 'CPU at least as powerful as computers made at the start of this decade'? 

Industrial tools will often have embedded computers of one sort or another, but he creator of those tools will also specify the exact specifications of those computers, including every program that should be run on them when working.

I am sure that if SQUAD could specify the entirety of your computer(including operating system version, CPU, bios version, Graphics card, ram, all input devices, power supply, all installed software, including driv3er versions, and even the brand and version of the memory cards used) they could perform deeper tests with the specified hardware and prevent such 'obvious' bugs, but they do not have that much control, so they test what they can based on the reported system specifications of their installed base, needing to make a much broader set of tests on lots of different hardware configurations.

Also, a $40 game does not necessarily have the testing resources of a $10K-$100K piece of CNC equipment, so the total amount of testing being spread over many more system configurations is probably also much smaller, leaving you with relatively shallow testing for many configurations, and probably none at all for anything uncommon.

And don't pretend that the latest thousand dollar GeForce card using a beta release of the next version of the latest driver will behave exactly the same as integrated graphics on a dell economy box from 2005 which has never had its drivers updated.

Sure the game may always run exactly the same on the same hardware with the same software running in the background(Deterministic), but I can guarantee that we are not running identical systems and code that works perfectly for me, may well fail to finish the start-up process on your machine(not so deterministic).

 

[Superfluous J]

11 hours ago, Flayer said:

Do people just have super high expectations?

I had the super high expectation that I could complete a single Mission without being so frustrated with the user interface that I'd rather just stop playing than even do enough testing to fill out a bug report. I also had the super high expectation that I could create a mission without the exact same thing happening.

Neither of those expectations were met. I guess the fault is mine.

[LoSBoL]

7 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

Everybody's glaring in these threads already. That's the problem. 

Please don't attack each other over differing opinions. Insulting other people is not going to win them over to your point of view. 

Thanks for making me re-read my post, I can see now that it could be deemed as an insulting, my apologies to @steve_v for being offensive.

[steve_v]

11 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

my apologies to @steve_v for being offensive.

No need, I wasn't offended.

I on the other hand, probably offend people all the time. Sometimes I even do it unintentionally.
There's a lot to be said for a good argument, and this one's a cracker.

[Gargamel]

19 hours ago, DoToH said:

windshield.

This is one of the dumbest analogies I've ever read.  The onus is on you for buying a car without a windshield, not the manufacturer. 

Note, I'm not calling you dumb, just the analogy.  Like as @Kerbart said, if it was some part that was bad that you never noticed before purchase, it'd be a different story. 

If the main menu didn't work, then I can buy the windshield analogy.    But then the fault is still your own for buying a lemon and knowing it's a lemon beforehand. 

 

But this is just a game people.   There's no reason for people to get so upset over a one week delay.  If you need to game that much, play a different version, or a different game, or try that wonderful place called "OUTSIDE". 

This is par for the course with SQUAD (but this time, lack of QA, I'm laying on TTI, as they probably forced the rushed release).  They release an update, there's a bunch of bugs that they never found, QA or not, so they fix them quickly.  That brings more bugs they never anticipated, and they fix again.  Our player base is notorious for finding game breaking bugs in ways that you shouldn't find bugs.  Happens a couple few times until it gets worked out.

Then we wait for the mods to get updated, and we know some take longer than others.

When all that settles down, then I go get the update.   Not before.  

Edited April 23, 2018 by Gargamel