Do you feel KSP is ready for 1.0?

[kahlzun]

I was hoping for full IVA (Mk1 inline is beyond a joke by now) and Gas Giant 2 before this was announced.

Perhaps i've been playing too long, but the Kerbol system is a bit... bare.

[GusTurbo]

Too bad I can't get my money back.

Why in the world would you deserve to get your money back? Stop being so melodramatic.

[Nachtwind]

I resented from answering to such a thread.. but after reading a few dozen comments on the topic i need to say something as well.

I came to KSP when it was in Version .11, so I have had my fair share of experience with the game and its development. At some point - i think it was Version .20 or .21 i created a infographic to show how the game developed and how much people didnt see how it did develop. unfortunately i lost track and at some point the interest in updating that graphic.. but well, such things happen. Point is that going now to 1.0 has its Pros and Cons.

1.0 is still some psychological Version number for a lot of people as it normally means "complete" - everything that comes afterwards is maybe a nice addition by the manufacturer but one has to consider something in 1.0 as done.

I dont like this Versioning scheme for the simple reason that it is incompatible to projects like KSP.

Squad was just adding version numbers and might as well just said KSP27 is "Scope complete" and exits Early Access.

But by renaming it to 1.0 they just created a situation since this version number leads to confusion.

There will still be updates. There will still be additional content. There will be, as far as i know there has been nothing said against it, a move to Unity5 and of course this all will be for free since that is something that was promised long ago. And if it comes to plannable promises i trust SQUAD. If it comes to promises like "Reentry heat when 1.0 arrives" - well, we all know how development goes. You just cant really plan this kind of stuff.

Furthermore 1.0 might be a chance for the Devs to finally put an end to adding feature after feature but getting into the serious and needed business of also spending a whole release to bugsquashing and performance upgrades. Just imagine for a second we were still in the Version 90 scheme and said - ok... version .91 is about Mining and Aero, 0.92 about performance, .93 bugsquash, 94 again performance... people would have gone mad and demanded 1.0.

Now with 1.0 in place squad can "relax" and focus on other important tasks that dont neccessarily include adding new parts or features.

So.. if 1.1 comes out with no content but a ton of bugfixes it is different - psychologically - than stalling the release of the final version without adding new content...

So in this regard KSP is absolutely ready for 1.0 as the main and most important features are in place.

One personal note on the whole subject: I'be been playing KSP for several years now and considering the game was in Alpha stage for the most part i got a hell lot of fun from the game... and i would ask everyone who is about to rant about the game rushing to 1.0 to sit back and reconsider for a moment: Is it just a missing feature or an annoying bug that makes you think ksp is not ready? If so just think about how many hours you have spent on KSP enjoying the game so far and how much time you spent on your last bought AAA title in contrast.. i am sure the AAA title will loose in terms of hours played and the joy you had..

Though... long story short. No KSP is not ready for 1.0 as the development of the game is just not compatible to that version scheme, but it damn sure is ready for 1.0 in the sense of completeness and enjoyability. Everything beyond 1.0 will just enhance this even more.

[klgraham1013]

Just imagine for a second we were still in the Version 90 scheme and said - ok... version .91 is about Mining and Aero, 0.92 about performance, .93 bugsquash, 94 again performance... people would have gone mad and demanded 1.0.

People would have gone mad and demanded 1.0? Really? I haven't read a single person asking for KSP to go gold. It was very much assumed we'd be in beta for awhile.

[Nachtwind]

People would have gone mad and demanded 1.0? Really? I haven't read a single person asking for KSP to go gold. It was very much assumed we'd be in beta for awhile.

There was an update.. 22 or 21, not sure right now that was mostly bugfixing and people have created one ....storm after another for the "wasted" release.. they might just not demand 1.0 but they would demand adding another feature X which introduces new bugy x1 to x999..

That way Squad finally has a fixed point in development. So the next few updates may just be there to fix the game, increase performance and after that add other features..

[soulsource]

I would go as far as to say that KSP is *nearly* ready for 1.0. While additional features beyond what is planned for 1.0 have been discussed, I understand the decision to postpone/scrap them, as there might be economic reasons to go out of early access/beta at this point.

To me KSP already feels like a complete game (not counting the annoying bugs that hopefully get fixed before 1.0), and that's all a new buyer can expect.

Nevertheless, the next update will be a feature update, what means that there's a relatively high probability that it'll bring along several new bugs.

Therefore, I'd do the following: Publish a release candidate build a few weeks before the final release, and if the community finds critical bugs, fix them before 1.0 final. Restrict the changes between the release candidate and the release version to bug fixing - balancing issues and feature additions can be done later with version 1.1.

[tater]

It seems life support got canned somewhere along the way, so did the NERVAs not using oxidizer, so did reentry heat. I am displeased, not surprised because I said stuff like this would happen many times, just displeased that my predictions were actually true. I held a small light of hope somewhere deep and now not even embers remain. Too bad I can't get my money back.

How many hours have you played? This game costs less than a bottle of wine. This post makes people assume you are probably a tween... Except my kids wouldn't sweat a little allowance money.

[Jouni]

Everyone has their own list of features they expect to see in 1.0, and usually the lists are incompatible with each other. For my part, I'm quite pleased with the announced feature list. Assuming that reentry heat is included (or will be in 1.1), the only missing major essential feature from my list is something similar to MechJeb, which is probably never going to be in the stock game anyway. Everything else, such as more planets or better graphics, is just optional extras that can be delayed to later versions. The lack of Unity 5 is kind of annoying, but it's probably going to be too late for KSP 1.0 anyway.

Given the number of major new features in KSP 1.0, I don't expect the game to be properly balanced before 1.1 or 1.2. That's quite common with the initial releases of complex games, however. For example, it took 9 months and four major patches to get Civilization V more or less balanced.

[Skyentist]

Next version can be called "Balloon" for all I care.

[ShadowZone]

I have a bad feeling about this...

Usually there's more than just one Beta version if you release something of this magnitude and with this many bugs still not resolved!

[juanml82]

I think it's not ready purely from a performance point of view. I don't think even an i7 is powerful enough to consistently run this game at 30+ fps

- - - Updated - - -

I have a bad feeling about this...

Usually there's more than just one Beta version if you release something of this magnitude and with this many bugs still not resolved!

Sadly, that's how games are released nowadays anyway

[Dispatcher]

I really enjoy KSP and I really like Squad (collectively and individually) and the devs have a track record of generally succeeding with their update goals. However, with so many new features and tweaks, I feel like the next update with all the announced changes ought to be beta 0.95-ish. This would allow all potential bugs and balance issues to be addressed prior to an actual version 1.0. I'm in no hurry to reach 1.0 if it will ensure that prior releases squash any major bugs and allows proper tweaking (and new parts which "feel" as if they belong in the game).

Its Squad's decision on this, but I urge the devs and testers to consider releasing at least one incremental step before releasing version 1.0.

[forenci]

I think there are a few issues that need to be addressed in many of the complaints toward whether or not KSP should be "released."

First, I think we are all looking at a more traditional approach to game development rather than the current model (or currently developing model). Many games are no longer a "reach release and be done with it" model. We have plenty of examples of that, such as Minecraft, Payday 2, and scores of others. Payday 2 and Minecraft were both still buggy and arguably dry on features at release, but have continued to add tons of content that have made them incredibly well-reviewed and successful games. I envision a similar process for Kerbal Space Program. Speaking personally, I've dumped hundreds and hundreds of hours into a -singleplayer- game. That's incredibly rare for me. When they add multiplayer it will completely take the game to a new level for me, and I am certain for many others too. Just because it hits release and is a bit buggy and perhaps still incomplete in terms of features does NOT mean these "critical reviewers" will win over the day. And honestly, I think the whole game review industry has been vastly overrated.

Secondly, and my first paragraph leads into my second one, I feel we may be a bit jaded on the subject of KSP. For someone who reviewing the game (presumably if they haven't played it a ton like many of us have) this game is incredibly deep. Sandbox mode alone may hold hundreds and hundreds of hours of gameplay. Think back to when you first played this game. Getting to Mun alone was this amazing accomplishment, never mind that first time stepping onto Duna or another planet. I think for the majority of us who have played the game for a long time, who love mods, and have played the game a ton sometimes we forget how incredible those first and many hours can be. Let's not forget that fact for the many new people and reviewers who may be playing this game.

Finally, I say yes, it is ready. You can't wait for Unity 5 (who knows when it will be released?), you can't wait for (insert feature here), and bug fixing is an ongoing process even AFTER 1.0 release. That's how games tend to be these days, and honestly, KSP in terms of "bugginess scale" I feel is pretty low for me compared to the many games I have played. It has plenty of issues to fix, but most of them are far from game breaking - and hopefully any that are will meet the bug hammer during this final phase.

Plus, 1.0 means we're that much close to multiplayer, which for my money is going to put this game on a Mincraft level of success (well, perhaps somewhere in the vicinity of it, which would still be pretty darn awesome).

1.0 does not change anything to me. Let's get this thing released and move on with the process of more features, content, and bug fixes that comes with that process of games these days.

Finally, even though there is a bit of negativity in this thread and I disagree with some of the sentiments behind it, I feel it's still pretty awesome how passionate people are about KSP. Honestly, outside of a very few individuals, I feel the majority of the sentiment behind the "heck no it's not ready" side is that people in this community want this game to not only be successful, but to be perceived well by EVERYONE. That's awesome. I think it shows how much people love this game that they would go so far to worry about how others will perceive it upon release.

And sorry for the uber long post.

[iFlyAllTheTime]

Just imagine for a second we were still in the Version 90 scheme and said - ok... version .91 is about Mining and Aero, 0.92 about performance, .93 bugsquash, 94 again performance... people would have gone mad and demanded 1.0.

Now with 1.0 in place squad can "relax" and focus on other important tasks that dont neccessarily include adding new parts or features.

I like your post.

However, can I just express that I would've been perfectly happy if squad took their sweet time to polish the product before 1.0 release.

I can't speak for others, but I would definitely not "demand" anything from squad. Let alone a 1.0 release.

[PDCWolf]

How many hours have you played? This game costs less than a bottle of wine. This post makes people assume you are probably a tween... Except my kids wouldn't sweat a little allowance money.

I'll only respond to your question, since the rest is a personal attack. I've got 800 hours of it, and 790 of that is thanks to mods and roleplay, since the game has almost no content and even skyrim's radiant system is better than the contract system, not even talking about the science and money grind.

[SubzeroSpartan7]

I have this suspicion that we might be misunderstanding what 1.0 means. They said that there are features they still want to implement later. It seems to me that 1.0 is an arbitrary line that they have drawn for no apparent reason. Also I think quite a few people are overreacting such as the ones who are going on how the games is now ruined for some reason now that the version number has changed to 1.0. They explicitly stated that this is no where near the last update and that everything after this update will consist of many community recommendations. Everyone that is freaking out needs to calm down. On the other hand it is unwise to release all these features in one update and call it finished. But if they have one or two releases with these features it will give people enough time to find the worst bugs and Squad can then focus all of their efforts on bug squashing. But I also think it is too early, as someone else in this thread stated, to call if these features will make the game ready. In my opinion, if their are very few large bugs (the krakens will have to be gone and several annoying problems, looks at deouplers) and 64-bit is ironed out, the game is ready.

[Jouni]

Sadly, that's how games are released nowadays anyway

It used to be a lot worse. Software quality has generally improved in the past couple of decades, and because of internet connections and automatic updates, it's possible to distribute patches after the initial release.

[tater]

So even the first 10 hours were cheaper than coffee, and more long lasting than a bottle of wine... Yet you whine about wanting a refund. When you post stuff like that, you are making yourself look exactly the way I characterized it. It's not a personal attack, I said that is how that post made you look, and it does.

[Sage]

How many hours have you played? This game costs less than a bottle of wine. This post makes people assume you are probably a tween... Except my kids wouldn't sweat a little allowance money.

I think that "wanting back the money" is a way to say that some of us feel a bit betrayed over promised features, features that made us consider buying the game to see them one day in one form or another leaving our faith to do so to the devs. I'm already a bit relieved that at least re-enty heat could sneak in, but some others seems to just have been forgot for the "relase" of the game. Hopefully they are considered for later updates, but it's still sad to see SQUAD rushing out relase without those features in.

So, the money itself it's not that important, it wasn't much to start with, but it's about what it meant for us.

Also, in general, adults value money, as it is the reward for (hard) work, so every cent is somewhat important to someone who feel he is earning his money, especially when it seems that it was "wasted".

[tater]

Wasted $15-27. Except he already claimed many hundreds of hours of fun out of it. He's wasted exactly nothing.

if he wanted to say something else, he should have. It reads like a 10 year old with buyers remorse having blown their allowance money.

[PDCWolf]

Wasted $15-27. Except he already claimed many hundreds of hours of fun out of it.

Out of mods you mean. And if you value your money differently, then that's not my problem nor do you have to attack me for it.

[GusTurbo]

Did a lot of people actually buy this game based mostly on potential? I bought it in .18.2 and I thought it was well worth the money based on the existing content at the time.

[tater]

Out of mods you mean. And if you value your money differently, then that's not my problem nor do you have to attack me for it.

You asked for it. I expressed what the pittance KSP cost can also buy, and clearly even in alpha represented value for money.

to be clear, I might even agree with your points, but "I want my money back" is childish.

Edited January 24, 2015 by tater

[klgraham1013]

Did a lot of people actually buy this game based mostly on potential? I bought it in .18.2 and I thought it was well worth the money based on the existing content at the time.

I bought it off potential, yes. I saw something unique and not catering to the typical gamer. A realistic space flight sim with a fun art design. A game that was difficult, but highly rewarding.

With every pasing update, my vision and Squad's vision grew farther and farther apart. I certainly don't want my money back, but I'm highly disappointed that the game I imagined will never exist.

[PDCWolf]

Did a lot of people actually buy this game based mostly on potential? I bought it in .18.2 and I thought it was well worth the money based on the existing content at the time.

Yep, I bought it for potential, the game was nothing back at .13, and even less before that, and there were a lot of nice please-give-us-your-money-look-at-our-planned-features promises, and then they changed the EULA to allow them to ask for money without anything in change, but I noticed this when it was already too late.

You asked for it. I expressed what the pittance KSP cost can also buy, and clearly even in alpha represented value for money.

to be clear, I might even agree with your points, but "I want my money back" is childish.

As I said, we value our money differently.