csebal

I would not complain either. I would simply be disappointed if I do not have a release date. Would be a long and off topic discussion, suffice to say, that I have my own expectations towards practitioners of my profession and being able to tell how much time you need to finish the job is among those expectations. As a side note: Spoons can be dangerous if handled improperly and should be banned to avoid being misused. I mean.. if you are not careful, you can scoop your eyes out with them I am sure that release schedules are okay, as long as they are used responsibly by *professionals*.

Thanks for the update, Squad, good to hear there is progress and congrats for the forum upgrade. Sorry for the TL/DR, but I can only read so much drama in one thread What is the consensus here, do we have a new release date set for 1.1 or is it still hush-hush?

There is a very distinct difference between criticizing something and judging something. Yes I have my opinion of every mod I play. I sometimes even make suggestions on how (I think) they could be improved. I do not judge them however. Why? Because they are: - labors of love and love is crazy - provided for free and you should never look a gift horse in the mouth - often created by enthusiastic, aspiring new developers - juniors by my scale - and as such prone to make mistakes PRODUCTS however, and product is everything you try to sell for cash in my book, I do judge and I do judge harshly. The moment you ask money for something, you enter the big league where the usual excuses do not fly and the expectations are a lot higher. The charity analogy was quite weak, I agree, however your bashing of it was even more so. If you think using mods (or free software) is like relying on charity, then you do not understand why some of those people doing mods are doing what they do. Free software (let alone mods) is free not because people do not think you could afford it. Comparing free software to charity is like comparing apples to pumpkins. Roughly the same shape, but nothing else in common. I strongly suggest you read this: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html While I do not entirely agree with the lets all go open source philosophy, I can stand behind it when it suits my purpose Seriously though, they got some valid points.

I love the KSP modding community and have the utmost respect towards those modders who not only put tons of hours into making the game better, but also share their creations with the world. I can also understand, how some might feel that they deserve some sort of compensation for their effort, after all.. why should someone benefit from the labors of their work for free? I do not necessarily agree, but I can understand. What I do not like, nor support, is 3rd parties pushing, nudging communities towards a paid model, just so they can skim their 15-20% off all the sales, because that is about the only reason Steam is pushing for the whole workshop thing. A freaky disgusting way of monetizing off of other people's work. With that said, I will likely never pay for any but the most serious of mods and frankly speaking, KSP has maybe a handful out of the hundreds that I would even consider paying for. Main reasons: - Quality, which I do not get to judge as long as I get it for free, but will look at with a critical eye the moment someone asks money for it - Necessity, lots of stuff I use I do because I can, not necessarily because I need it - Longevity, games are made by companies and even then the likelihood of them not getting supported on the long run is quite high. Mods are made by enthusiastic individuals, who can get a new fancy the next week and leave their project in the state it is, not updating it any more. This is especially critical with a game that is changing so much as KSP does. - Principles, because the moment I start giving out money for something someone did for himself, either because he wanted to see if he could or because he wanted that feature himself (as those two are the most common modding drivers), I turn into a charity and I'm definitely not the red cross. At the end of the day though, it all comes down to how much I want something vs the asking price. I will buy it, if I cannot acquire it cheaper, but I will think twice on how much I need it before I do. That and boo steam for even trying. I hope the whole idea crashes and burns, because its bad and evil on many many levels and it brings toxicity into otherwise awesome communities just by its existence.

Voted 15+, but generally I believe its suited for anyone 5 and up in its Vanilla format. If you want to get anywhere in the game, especially modded game, and are serious about it, you need to put some thought into it and understand some concepts about physics for which you likely need to be at least 10-12 in my opinion. With that said, I think everyone can have some mindless fun building and blowing up rockets in spectacular ways, or doing the same with planes. Just as kids love LEGO, they can have fun with KSP as well, for some time at least.

Yes, almost and no, not really. Confused? Good. Here is what I'm thinking. Yes, because: The game is awesome already. I do not count the hours I spent with this, suffice to say, I am still playing it and having a blast with it. For me, it was the contract system and economy that was needed to push me over the edge in terms of wanting to play this, as it gives just the right amount of framework to your space exploration. With the amount of mods available, virtually all the flaws of the game can be amended and eliminated and the few remaining are more than outweighed by the sheer greatness of KSP. With that said, if squad want this game to success out of the box, they really need to look to the modding community (I know they do it already, and thats also awesome) and with their help, cobble together a package of mods endorsed by them that can fill the gaps between their 1.0 features. and No, because: The lack of a proper 64 bit version in 2015 is hardly excusable and it is severely limiting the extensibility of the game due to memory constraints, also the game is a little bland in itself and has to rely on mods to make it a complete experience. Some stuff that I think should really be part of the game that I did not see in the 1.0 list: - Constructions taking time, limited use of revert functionality and instead the reliance on testing and simulations (aka. Kerbal Construction Time) - Probes that make sense and antennas that are meaningful (aka. Remote Tech) - An autopilot that allows you to get from A to B without having to eyeball and guesstimate your burns (mechjeb) - Procedural / scaleable parts, as it reduces clutter a lot - Crew ribbons and achievements (Final Frontier) - Proper (at least some) re-entry heat simulation and handling (Deadly Reentry) - Life support (make your pick, I prefer TACLS, but snacks might be more in line with the KSP theme) That is really just the things I think is still missing from the BASE game. The actual version I play has 71 mods - 14 part mods, mostly procedural, plane and USI parts, 3 science mods and 54 mods that enhance the way you play (mostly the editor tools, but some in flight tools as well) Not writing this to brag about it as I am sure there are many using way more mods than I do.. Just to illustrate, that most of the mods I use actually are intended to fill in for missing game features or to further enhance the user experience (either in editor or in flight). This is my only concern with the game going to 1.0. Its not THAT awesome out of the box and 90% of the players will not go the extra mile to make it great by adding all these mods, especially as making these work needs a bit of technical know-how, looking through the log to figure out which ones you need to remove to make your game stable