ColourOfFire

To add on the CKAN thing, don't know the current status, but when I tried a while back it was such a pain in the ass on OSX I just installed the mods manually. I'm not going through the whole homebrew install process only to find out it doesn't want to recognize my KSP install just to get some stuff I can just download and unzip...

It's very weird that the newer macbooks seem to have more issues. Maybe it's because my old one can't handle fancy graphics anyway, so I turn them down quite a bit. Even mods don't hurt stability on mine, only several huge packs like KW Rocketry and B9 running together runs into problems.

Same here, no issues on a 2011 macbook pro. My 0.25 did crash/glitch every once in a while, but that had a ridiculous amount of mods on it.

I'm terribly sorry, but if this is unforgivable you're going to have a hard time living in 2015. It's unnecessary and useless but come on, not unforgivable. Btw, if you're so offended by this, do you realise you just posted it uncensored on a forum kids might be watching?

Yes of course there's a an update with nobody on the forum talking about it and absolutely no devblog or changelog.

No. It does not change the physics calculations, it just unlocks the ability to use different threads to do it, so it can use more of your computers memory. It's not going to help gazillion part spaceships, it's not going to make miracles happen. Of course, more memory to play with and the updated physics engine might mean there will be improvements, but purely changing from 32 to 64 bit will only makes certain things run a little faster.

And people pointed out factual errors in that opinion, no need to get so defensive. You were the one that came in here trying to vindicate an old post of yours...

Well of course re-entry heat and working aerodynamics are very weird and unique features to implement in a game about space flight... Until there's code that shows they copied stuff this line of thought is completely ridiculous. AFAIK the implementation of aero in 1.0 differs a lot from the way FAR used to handle it with pre 1.0 stock...

In addition, I read (I believe in one of the devnotes) that even though 64 bit might happen, we shouldn't expect huge part counts to be suddenly a lot smoother, as single ships will still need to be in one thread. It will still be faster as other loads can be spread, but don't get overhyped.

Probably because erasing/storing debris with the save game loaded and active is not a great idea

Unless you're on a mac... I much prefer the unzip in gamedata way.

I never drop them, usually they are on a dockable stage that stays in orbit, gets refueled and goes for more missions.

Can't remember if it was .21 or .22. Steam kept recommending this weird game to me, it was on sale and I was in a good mood, so I bought it. No regrets

It's fun. Why else would you be playing it. At times when I think it's not fun, I do something else. That's the whole point of videogames IMHO.

Steam says 234, but that's mostly my very first save and the current one I just started to play stock career. Most of my time was spent on heavily modded copies outside steam. I think the total will be somewhere between 750 and 1000 hours.

But it's a ridiculous assumption to be involved. The community has been involved in a lot of features, priorities and other stuff, but in the end when it comes to business decisions like releasing a version as a certain number it's totally up to the developer. The developer has a company to run and has different things on it's mind than a bunch of people who just want a game to be awesome and want their features in it and their pet peeves fixed. They have no obligation towards the community, if they want to be nice guys, awesome, if they decide it's time to do things their way, no hard feelings. It's not like they pulled a Spacebase DF-9 on us, we're not going to be stuck with this version, they felt it was important to lose the early access stamp. If you look at some more early access developers you see more of them that feel that the early access hinders your work and income by stigmas caused by some notable failures and bad publicity. As much as the community has been helpful in development, at the same time it has cost extra time to keep every version playable and enjoyable. They have always done their best to keep save files compatible and keep stock craft functional at the cost of development speed. If they had released a 0.95 the opinions about the new aero would be as divided as they are now, to get everyone happy about a 1.0 could take ages...

I think these are valid criticisms, they are of course subjective, but hey, that's why it's a forum, and a discussion place. I do however think it's ridiculous that there are people asking/demanding apologies from Squad for releasing this version as 1.0. That is something completely different than saying this version is fine or that I have no point that I'd like to see addressed. We all love this game, otherwise we wouldn't be here, but by no means are we entitled to anything. Early access does not mean the production process suddenly becomes democratic. This is Squad's game, they have the right to release it how they want. 1.0 is not perfect, but business wise it was a very successful move for Squad and whether we like it or not, they are a business. For all we know this 1.0 was a necessity to keep development going, but even if it wasn't, I can't for the life of me understand what would warrant an apology. Pointing out flaws is perfectly fine, continuously complaining about a version number and demanding apologies is ridiculous IMHO.

Dude, what are you talking about? The measure of success is if you can make your dream reality without going bankrupt. In that respect the 'ignorant' as you like to call them are just as important as 'your friends'. Some people here seem to forget that this is Squad's game, not yours. The fact that you threw in a couple of bucks for early access doesn't entitle you to anything, nor does it make you more or less part of things than anyone who bought it at launch. Squad saw fit to launch 1.0, Squad got rave reviews, Squad sold a lot of Harvester's dream product, seems Squad did very well. And in the process provided many people with a game they put a crazy amount of hours in. The fact that a few disgruntled forum members seem to disagree doesn't matter much. If you have specific issues with the game there's more than enough room for discussion and criticism, but continuous complaining about a version number is just sad. Also, they said development is not going to stop, there will be some more features, this was announced multiple times. The announcement states that this is what they envisioned 4 years ago, not that it ends here.

Well, I'm sure they're thankful for your warning, of course this 1.0 doubling the amount of players and getting rave reviews is an absolute disaster. Seriously, development is going to continue, business wise it's a good thing they got rid of the early access stamp and the game has massively improved. There have been slight mistakes, but no major errors. There's very few actual bugs, most of the things that people see as a problem are very subjective.

I think the whole process is being changed due to the ease of updating an application. Not too long ago it was just plain arrogant to assume your customers to have constant internet access, and patches were not as frequent, hotfixes only released when functionality was at stake. Now it's very easy to adapt to consumer input and release patches quite quickly. I think the positive of this is that there's more consumer input and a quicker reaction to this input, but the downside is that you get sloppier releases under the motto 'we can patch it if turns out to be broken'. Include publisher pressure (not an issue with Squad, but it is for a lot of other developers) and you get buggy releases and hasty patches. I notice this even in my own work, I build interactive installations and when I have the time to work and test on location before the opening I tend to make code that just works and figure out the details on site. If I can't be present, there's no on site time to test or the hardware is made by an external party I am way more minute in ruling out any potential problems in the code as it's not as easy and quick to fix it.

I agree that the new aero is by no means perfect, and I expect that further tweaks will happen. As for the realism, Squad announced very early on that a fully realistic aerodynamics system is not going to happen in stock, but as far as I understand they did make it possible for modders to disable stock aero so stuff like FAR can implement more realistic models easier. Constructive criticism is not what I am agitating against, if people have suggestions or grievances it's nice to read and I'm pretty sure Squad also reads those. Just ranting on about the new aero being "unbearable" or "not fun" without pointing out particular issues or problems isn't helping anyone and the amount of threads made just complaining about nothing other than "my stuff doesn't fly like it used to" is getting very tiresome. Especially since an overwhelming majority of people seem to agree that whatever we have now is a lot better than what we had in stock before.

Address what? In the poll on this same forum 50% of voters said 1.0 aero is better, over 40% voted for 1.0.2 (which technically isn't a change in the 1.0 aero, but drag values etc on parts). Only about 29 people (about 8%) voted for 'old' aerodynamics. It's a shame you don't think it's fun, but for the vast majority of players the new aerodynamic model is an improvement after some getting used to.

Could you keep your crusade against some minor changes located in one thread please? I think you have made your point and it would be nice to see something else than aerorage on the front page.

The whining about the new aerodynamics is unbearable. It's not perfect, but come on the thousand threads by people who just can't sit down for 5 minutes to deal with something new have made this forum from a place for interesting info and fun new ideas to a negative dump of people blabbing on about every little negative detail they can find.

Went to space on the second flight, achieved orbit on the third. Got money to burn on building upgrades. Took about an hour of playing. And I'm far from a brilliant player. There's a lot of contracts I will not bother with, but it's by no means 'too hard'.