Hanuman

Seriously, no love for George Diller to do a voiceover for launch? I mean, c'mon!

I think they should do an animated video of a time lapse of launch pad preparations for the rocket in the KSP name and hire George Diller to then do a countdown followed by "Launch of your Kerbal Space Program 2015". That would be super awesome.

You're not giving nearly enough information to make an informed decision in our feedback. You've got nearly 40 pages of people trying to guess what features your talking about and how it matters to them, interspersed with some panic over the number "1.0". If this is all I get to go on, then I say slap a 1.0 sticker on it, clean up every single bug you can find in what you've got done now, and release it ASAP. That way I can stop reading the panic posts, and get a new version of the game to play with less bugs and whatever new things are ready.

I just don't understand it, at all. Have the guys at SQUAD ever been dishonest in the slightest bit? Even the tiniest portion of a reason to distrust anything that they say? No. They have been 100% honest and above board all the way, in all the time I've played. How many times, and how many ways do they have to say that they are NOT stopping development, before it sinks in? I'm not going to name any names, but some of the biggest naysayers in this very thread are the same people I've noticed going on and on about their own little personal grievances that they want changed for a while now. I can understand if you don't realize that is their thing, that you might think 1.0 is a bad thing. It simply is not the case, though. Neither am I saying that everyone with a complaint is just a naysayer and aren't legitimate. The reality, like it often is, is much more complicated, and there are people all across points in the spectrum. At the end of the day, you gotta figure out who it is that you can trust when they write something. All I'm saying is that for me, I trust the guys at SQUAD to deliver. They've earned that kind of faith about a hundred times over. Take a look around at the posts of people who think they haven't paid enough at full price, for the enjoyment they've had. Take a look at the kinds of hours some guys have, or the tons of youtube video series from people, or the any of the hundred bajillion praises and positives. If it's a choice for me who to believe about the readiness of the 1.0 stock game between Forumgoer123 who never breaks stride in picking it apart and looking down on it, or SQUAD, then it's a pretty easy choice.

He's also a hoot when he's been drinking a bit too much. Also, be careful with the monkey humor, fella.

You don't know if you can afford it or not yet. That isn't the point though. The point is a partnership where we'll be able to simply click a menu option and place an order for a 3D toy model of a craft or contraption we have individually designed. It doesn't matter how jaded you are, that is still really, really, cool.

That doesn't work though. Of course the mod forum will have the more visits than the others. More people are going to be interested in what kinds of mods are available (even if just browsing) than need technical support or tutorials or simply just want to chat. That doesn't mean that KSP is being "kept afloat" by the modding community. It just means that KSP community has a healthy interest in seeing the kinds of mods that are available, and extending the game beyond stock capability. Without a doubt, mods and the entire modding community are an important aspect of KSP. But they are neither vital nor necessary to enjoy the game. Plenty of people can, and do play with stock KSP, and many more run with only minimal mods, myself included. I currently only use Kerbal Engineer, SCANsat, and RCSBuildAid. That has nothing to do with memory or capability, and is simply a personal choice. On topic: 32-Bit Windows will be not be the death of anything. We'll continue to have/use 32-bit KSP until such a time as SQUAD can ship out a quality 64 bit Windows version thanks to an upgraded version of Unity. Don't forget: There's a perfectly fine 64-bit linux version for the people that simply MUST have that capability. Is the situation perfect? No. But it's the best we have available to us, and it'll be just fine until we can have better.

I get what you're trying to say, but if you stop to think about it, it really doesn't make much sense. I've played since .18 and not once have I ever felt like the game itself was pushing me to make explosions and catastrophe happen. It HAS been embraced by the community though as a byproduct of the learning and experimentation process, because it just is. If you don't want to focus on exploding things, that's good, and that's your thing. But if another player, or even lots of other players do want to focus on exploding things, then it's got nothing to do with you, nor your enjoyment of your own experience. It's not like SQUAD is adding weaponry, or contests for the biggest explosion or most Kerbals lost in space. It's not like they're adding just random explosions of craft as a gimmick, either. That WOULD be toxic, and wouldn't be a good game. But by the same token, as Kerbals aren't actually real, there's no reason to be so serious as to require ongoing support payments to widows and children of KIA Kerbals.

Short Answer? No. Long Answer? Noooooooooooooooooo.

Man, that's what he means by Release Candidate. As in version numbering: 0.90.00 1.00 Release Candidate 1 - Note: This release still has Early Access tag. Before they flip the switch with Steam. 1.00 T Minus Zero: Launch of your Kerbal Space Program 2015. On another note: I want to believe what Harvester is really asking for here, is to officially pick up his bonus check, and maybe take a couple days off. Because really, what else do you think he's going to do but party and then sleep in for a few after release 1.0? I doubt that I'm right, but that's sure as anything what I'd be wanting to do. Double Also: I think "T Minus Zero: Launch of your Kerbal Space Program" would make a great name for the actual launch version.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with an analogy that compares them to children -now-. They are not children, and attempting to dictate to them like a parent would is only going to end in failure. No one appreciates that kind of behavior.

I have to say, on the contrary, our opinion DOES matter, and not just if it's positive either. Look how much KSP has changed with regard to community feedback. Look at how proud the developers and everyone at SQUAD is of this community. They take every chance they can to tell us that we are the best gaming community that exists. Not just that exists for this type of game, or that exists for early release, but that exists period. Some companies say that, and it's fake, but I lurked on this forum for a LONG time before I actually joined, and as for here? I tend to think it's true, and I think SQUAD honestly feels that way. We matter to them, and with respect, there can already be complaints or negative reviews. Nothing is preventing that from happening right this moment, no, not even an early release tag. A reviewer could just as easily criticize STAYING in early release, when your original design document and vision has been met (and in some ways exceeded) for hiding behind an early release tag as a lack of confidence in their creation. Nothing can stop a person from writing a harsh or negative review. The only way to counter a negative is by creating a net positive, and if there's any group better put together than this forum to do just that, then I cannot imagine what it would look like. That is why we matter, and THAT is what SQUAD would need from us most. Not just post 1.0, but today.

The inherent problem with this analogy is that Harvester and SQUAD are not children, much less YOUR children, and you do not know their vision better than they do.

I'm going to do my very best to keep this as short as I possibly can. The problem is that I can see and understand both sides of this issue really well, because rather than just immediately choose a side and then stick to defending it, I've spent the last couple days actually thinking about it all. In super-short, I chose yes, KSP is ready for 1.0. Here's why: It's really easy for us, to not see the forest for all these trees in our way. I truly understand why people are saying no, it's not ready. They're worried that out there in the "regular world" current issues with Unity, with Tutorials, with whatever issues are most important to them are such a big deal, that they will derail development and bring about an end to something they love and/or care about. The problem with this point of view however, is that you've become inured to the qualities and highlights of the game, and aren't realizing that for each and every standing issue, there is so much more quality and in-general "good things" backing it up. It's easy to panic at a possible threat, when you lose sight of how good something objectively is, because you're so used to looking at it, that all you can see are the imperfections. On the other side of the coin: This is a dream of Harvester's come to life. This is his baby, and has been a project that has essentially consumed him for years now. Try to imagine, if something this important, and this personal to you, if you could point at it say "This is my vision made real. This is everything that I thought of years ago, and now, there it is. I am absolutely going to take what I've learned, and the goals I've also picked up along the way, and continue to try to make it better, but, as far as the inception goes? There it is." Can you imagine how much he cares about this game? Try to picture it, even for a second. Can you really find yourself believing that he'd just flippantly do anything to bring harm to his creation? Remember that SQUAD was not a game development company. They were/are an ADVERTISING firm. Do you really believe that an advertising company cannot grasp the notion of the review, and word of mouth? So why did yes win out for me? Truly, because of this forum, not the game. Because of this community. I've played a LOT of games in my life. I've seen a LOT of game communities, and still the community for KSP surprised me with their positivity, and general sense of cheer. I'm not a cheerful person, by nature. That said, people here are genuinely friendly, with a unique interest that unites us, and gives us common ground with which to put those good things on display. I truly believe that Harvester and SQUAD with this announcement were expecting some upset, and some fear, but also for the note of positivity in this community to carry us all forward. The only problem that comes with that, is it's very easy to panic, and so much harder to just trust someone when you have not put as much thought into it as they have. I started playing KSP in .18, far from the earliest, but also just as far from where we are now with KSP now. Back then, I couldn't have imagined the actual gameplay beyond the sandbox, but the developers were doing just exactly that. They have been thinking about this, and working towards this milestone for several years now. Knowing that, when Harvester asks for us to trust in a decision like this? I may be inclined to panic, but I'm going to try to keep a handle on that, and let trust win out. All the hours of work that they've done, and all the fun and good times that KSP have brought me from .18 to now have earned that from me. I won't let panic over something that might happen, maybe, possibly, cause me to forget that. So: Yes, Harvester. If you say KSP is and/or will be ready for this leap, I believe you. You've earned that much, and I wouldn't dare want to be someone to try to stand in the way of this kind of accomplishment. You know, just... don't screw it up.

This forum has a reputation for not putting this kind of behavior on full display. They've stopped caring about their creation? Really? Nobody, and I mean no-freaking-body believes that in the slightest. To suggest otherwise is utterly misguided at best, and just a flat out made up butthurt accusation at worst.

Hey Guys, What's going on in this thr-- OH LAWD

I've been playing KSP since .18, and while reading the forums, I never registered. That is, until now specifically so I could write: I want to thank SQUAD for seeing the absolute logic behind the opt-in and opt-out debate, and abiding by it. If both sides of the argument are "It matters to us." and "It doesn't matter to us."; the first one weighs more. Problem solved, now let's go build something, ignite it, and see what happens.