Approaching Patch One

[croviking]

6 hours ago, DavidAF said:

I also hope that all of you at PD have a discipline on these forums to view only the first page of comments. Anything beyond that seems to be an indictment of human devolution and has little in common with the original post; you know, really morale destroying stuff - nobody seeking progress wants that.

Unfortunately, this is on the 3rd page of comments and hopefully but unfortunately, the dev team won't be reading it. Much less this reply.
But yeah, I'm with you in this hope.

While so many complain, my aim here is to balance it out a bit and give praise to what HAS been accomplished so far, which is a lot.

[mcwaffles2003]

3 hours ago, ArmchairGravy said:

It would have helped if they'd said the tutorials are done, but nothing else really is. I'm not sure how they can justify $50 for the game, tbh. I was expecting us to be in phase 1 of the roadmap, not phase 0 where we're still getting basic systems on line for that price point.

I've said this in other threads, but I don't think right now is when they want to optomize revenue and might even prefer less people (pushing more toward the more hardcore player base) so there are less bug reports and more quality per report while exposing less people to the games current state. If they listed the game at like 30 a lot of people would probably go and get it but not play it till its in a condition where it will have hit full price effectively just getting it on sale before release. This would kill long term revenue as most of the player base will have  paid 1/2 price for the game. 

Edited March 11, 2023 by mcwaffles2003

[forge__gamer]

Is the glitch where the game crashes when you get to "Pumping Sim Once" fixed because I have not been able to play the game at all because of it.

[MARL_Mk1]

I'm so hoping that we finally get Aero and Entry FX with this patch...

PLEASE...

[Vinhero100]

3 hours ago, MARL_Mk1 said:

I'm so hoping that we finally get Aero and Entry FX with this patch...

PLEASE...

I'd say almost definitely not, they'd definitely tell us this if they were including that in the patch. They didn't even hint at at for next patch either, so *maybe* the third patch or more likely later.

Edited March 12, 2023 by Vinhero100

[jebycheek]

17 hours ago, LameLefty said:

“Making it performant” should come after “Making the game work like it should.”

Can't be more agreed with that.bad performance aside, this game does not provide the basic functions, personally I can't playing it for more than 10 minutes, it's more of a torture than a game.

I wish it will be completely fixed on patch one.

PS： randomly exploding, savings crash, vehicles bounced Into the sky over a little pit, craft diving into the ground then explode, none of these is “kerbal” and it happens too often.

Edited March 12, 2023 by jebycheek

[mcwaffles2003]

7 hours ago, MARL_Mk1 said:

I'm so hoping that we finally get Aero and Entry FX with this patch...

PLEASE...

I wouldn't get my hopes up, now that the game is released, with performance as it is, the target is stability and efficiency > new features.

[LameLefty]

I played close to ten hours yesterday, but … I had to quit and restart the game at least 5 times, and reload an untold number of earlier saves or quicksaves due to odd dV bugs where my craft had no dV showing despite having 49 tons of LH2 feeding my SWERV transfer stage; once when loading into a scene resulted in my orbital craft having no trajectory showing; at least two restarts due to the bug where hitting LAUNCH from the VAB results in getting “stuck” between scene transitions; and at least once because after undocking my lander from my transfer stage in orbit around Laythe, both craft were flung apart at super-high speed and triggered the Uppity Kerman (*) pop-up window to scold me, “Well, that could have gone better!” Tell it to to the Devs, Uppity. 

Anyway, despite all this nonsense, I will probably play a lot today too. But it would be infinitely more satisfying if these kinds of things were improved, and soon. 

 

(*) Whoever on the Forums who came up with that nickname, thank you. It’s perfect.

[Kurtvw]

Reading this thread helped me understand that 89% of the Kerbal community are CEOs of game development companies we've never heard of.  Clearly these people have years of experience that they draw on when saying IG and T2 etc. are bad at jobbing.

Most importantly, is that from this vast pool of gaming executives hanging out in here, I am left to assume that there are at least 30 space sims coming up in the next year or so that will blow the pants off everything that has ever been done before.  Because with so much obvious inside development knowledge, how could these rando community members not succeed when they release their own sims?

Halcyon days!  I can't wait!
</satire>

Edited March 12, 2023 by Kurtvw

[CapnFuzz]

On 3/10/2023 at 4:21 PM, RaBDawG said:

I'm genuinely curious, Nate.  How did the Team play this game and think:

1. It was ready for EA. 

2.  It should carry a $50 price tag.

A honest letter to fans just cutting through the BS and laying out exactly what happened, why we are dealing with this unacceptable, by any studios standards, launch.  And how the Team is going to change to adapt and move forward would go a long way.   

Chillax dude. I got hundreds of hours out of KSP 1 and I know this is going to be under active development for years to come. 

I paid for it in early release so I could see how it plays and try out the UI.  I played for an hour and then went back to KSP 1.  It's by no means polished, and that's okay. It's not like I have to buy it again in a year after all the patches are released. 

[bwheatley]

On 3/10/2023 at 7:21 PM, RaBDawG said:

I'm genuinely curious, Nate.  How did the Team play this game and think:

1. It was ready for EA. 

2.  It should carry a $50 price tag.

A honest letter to fans just cutting through the BS and laying out exactly what happened, why we are dealing with this unacceptable, by any studios standards, launch.  And how the Team is going to change to adapt and move forward would go a long way.   

You don't understand EA, it is in a better state then ksp 1 on EA launch, and it's ok if the price is too much for you. As a day 1 ksp 1 player it was the best value of a few bucks i ever spent, $50 is easy.  Unfortunately you or I don't have a "right" to know the sausage. Tell me you don't understand Early Access w/o telling me you don't understand Early Access. 

On 3/10/2023 at 10:32 PM, eagleswing12 said:

Seriously - this is a genuine question-

why was this build approved for early access? It was broken, buggy, and borderline unplayable on ALL hardware. How did the team think this was worth of release, let alone a 50$ price tag? I genuinely hope either the price decreases or the quality significantly increases. I can feel the love that has been added, but- keeping the same physics engine as KSP 1?? how do you possibly expect to have performance improvements if it’s on the same engine! Seriously- how was this game released?

Let me hook you up with the definition of early access so you can reset your expectations <3 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_access

[crumpet]

Been playing ksp 1 for a long time and started the second since day one of EA, and can't wait for final release. Just wanted to say thank you to all the team for your work in this difficult time <3

[Terwin]

On 3/11/2023 at 2:57 AM, Matt_In_Oz said:

Of course there'll always be the few who will say "aww but you PROMISED..." if the date slips, but they'll complain no matter what happens so ignore them. The vast majority of us understand that the E in ETA means "estimated".

Perhaps the inevitable slips would go over better if they used a NET Date instead?

Presumably everyone here would be familiar with the implications of that term as it is used for every future launch date, and those are frequently delayed with few or no recriminations...

[Jacob Kerman]

On 3/10/2023 at 7:01 PM, The Aziz said:

Careful with that

dum Dum  DUM

[XLjedi]

I'm afraid... 5 pages in, yes....  my only reply remains the obvious.

What we have to play with thus far is extremely disappointing, in too many ways to begin to list.

[Matt_In_Oz]

13 hours ago, Terwin said:

Perhaps the inevitable slips would go over better if they used a NET Date instead?

Presumably everyone here would be familiar with the implications of that term as it is used for every future launch date, and those are frequently delayed with few or no recriminations...

Never heard of a NET date. Neither has google. Please explain.

[Periple]

4 minutes ago, Matt_In_Oz said:

Never heard of a NET date. Neither has google. Please explain.

It means No Earlier Than!

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Steamdb showing 'staging' - likely a good sign they're on track. 

Ofc if they discovered something gross and yucky it will slip - and that is okay if we can collectively start breathing again after the first patch! 

[cocoscacao]

15 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

if we can collectively start breathing again after the first patch

From what I can gather, this will mostly be performance improvement, making game accessible to more players. I'll hold my breath for two more patches probably. I wish I'm utterly wrong here... Hype!!!

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

7 minutes ago, cocoscacao said:

From what I can gather, this will mostly be performance improvement, making game accessible to more players. I'll hold my breath for two more patches probably. I wish I'm utterly wrong here... Hype!!!

I don't think this is the big performance overhaul. 

Sure we had a pre-launch kerfuffle about the perf requirements and a lot of people want those - but if you listen to the pre launch interviews they mentioned two parallel processes there.  The big overhaul of the PQS that was the topic of Dev 18 isn't coming this patch - or, likely, soon.  The other process was things like resolving resource hogs like fuel calculations - except we don't know which ones are on the list.  All we know is the process - identify the largest slowdown and try to fix it, then move down the list.  Other groups are fixing the low hanging fruit if it's part of their sub section of the team. 

So I'm guessing they are focused on the things identified in the pre-launch message and a few identified since that are relatively easy to resolve. 

[t_v]

2 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

The other process was things like resolving resource hogs like fuel calculations - except we don't know which ones are on the list

We don't know the exact specifics, but this issue may be at least partially addressed in the first patch:

On 3/10/2023 at 6:45 PM, Nate Simpson said:

we managed to sneak a few additional fixes into the first patch, including a fairly high-impact resource flow optimization

 

[RyanDhar]

Any idea when it’s coming to mac?

[Flush Foot]

6 hours ago, t_v said:

We don't know the exact specifics, but this issue may be at least partially addressed in the first patch:

 

No, not specifically performance, but definitely a fair number of known issues (of varying severities)

[rmaine]

On 3/12/2023 at 11:41 PM, CapnFuzz said:

Chillax dude. I got hundreds of hours out of KSP 1 and I know this is going to be under active development for years to come. 

I paid for it in early release so I could see how it plays and try out the UI.  I played for an hour and then went back to KSP 1.  It's by no means polished, and that's okay. It's not like I have to buy it again in a year after all the patches are released. 

Exactly. I fiddled with it a little just to see what it was like. Even submitted 2 entirely trivial reports (one was just a typo and the other wasn't much either). Not ready for me to actually play yet, but I'm fine with that and it isn't unexpected for an EA release. I'll likely play more KSP 1 for a while, glancing at the KSP 2 updates as they come.

[Kerbart]

I suspect that after the first, maybe second patch the game will be a lo better, as the most blatant features have been adapted to aligned with what users prefer.