J.Random

And based on mass, "realistically", it shouldn't even glow.

This horse is dead. Stop beating it. You monster.

iirc, Kerbin's scale height is 5km, so that would be roughly 5% @15km and 1.8% @20km.

Has anyone understood what this means? "Impossible". Bah. I think this guy needs to meet Whackjob.

Yup. Stock KSP 1.0.2. As soon as heat gauges show up, game starts leaking like a Niagara Falls. More gauges shown = faster increase in RAM usage. My personal best is CTD at 0:05:05 MET.

This. So much this.

Community voiced its concerns here. Community has said: "Guys, don't leave Beta just yet, let us test things because there will be bugs, tons of them, and you won't have an "Early Access" excuse anymore". Squad (namely, Maxmaps) answered: "Don't worry, guys, trust us, we'll deliver. We always deliver" (not an exact quote, but close to it). So, please excuse me if I'm angry seeing all the bugs and lack of polish in a "released" software product. And it's 40$ (or 40 euro in Europe) now, with temporary 25% discount. BTW, completely stock installation has just CTD'ed on me. Out of memory in half an hour, one scene change (craft was already on a runway), climb to 20k and back.

Changes aren't the problem. Rushed release is. Lack of quality is. It's not in Early Access anymore, so it's time to start treating Squad as adults. No more "it's an alpha" sugarcoating.

The new stock resource system is really nice. Here's what I think can be done to make it better. 1. Resource overlay: persistent settings (per planet, per resource). If I set up a cutoff and pattern, It means that I would like to see this resource map for this planet exactly like that, without tuning it every time. I'd like it to be saved. 2. Narrow band scanner's GUI: autoupdate. It doesn't need to be drawn on every OnUpdate or something like that. 1FPS for the map would do just well. Clicking refresh-refresh-refresh-refresh isn't fun. 2.1. Ability to save the resource map with coordinates, say, in Science Archive, under separate tab, "Exploration" or something like that. 2.2. Synergy with the contract system: ability to generate an empty/generic mission for the saved region. 0 science, 0 rep, 0 funds, but what's important, a nav point on the surface for me to easily find the spot I liked and land there. 2.3. Maybe new part to make photos of said spot and save them - how cool would that be! Target the navpoint, click "take photo" and if the site is visible, render high-detail terrain image as seen from the current position.* Maybe a part which would make an elevation/inclination map for said spot. All linked together and saved under the same folder inside Science Archives: "Site Duna-XYZ-789". See the workflow? Make a scan, save location, create a mission, take photos from different angles and radar scan from orbit, then send small rover to find/confirm exact hotspot and closest flat terrain, then send a refinery. What do you think? *Bonus points to developers if it would also allow to take photos of satellites, ground bases and celestial objects in the same manner.

Fixing all the bugs and polishing what's already there, I hope.

I'd guess they cost much, much more if you include their training.

Oh. I guess I didn't pay enough attention. That sucks.

I don't recall base contracts to require kerbals. They needed enough space for certain amount of kerbals, which isn't the same. Was it changed?

Well, it's not Alpha/Beta/EA anymore, it's time to deliver.

Speaking of the circular intake, does it spin in the wrong direction only for me? Is it the frame rate issue?

Suit headlamps and illuminators. They don't cast shadows. The only light source able to cast shadows is the Sun, and it seems to be emulated with directional light instead of being a point light (it was discussed in the CactEye thread).

Yeah, it looks too negative. Maybe I'll change the title. Thing is, I can understand when the game has bugs. Managing a large project's code is hard. What annoys me is no-brainers which you can see at the first sight, or failed promises.

So, I've deleted my installation completely and reinstalled 1.0 to see what would new player see. New player perspective: 1. Textures look horrible! ...? Oh, texture size set to "half" by default. That's weird. I don't remember any other game trying to show me its worst on first launch. Usually, it's either set to best/close to best or it tries to predict optimal settings for particular rig. 2. Let's fire up a tutorial, shall we? Ignoring all the insults thrown my way by the old geezer, let's build a simple rocket and... what just happened? It seems that tutorial... ended? I see a crapload of parts and I can continue to build things. Let's launch, just because we can... again, what? Game just quits into menu. I don't get it, let's launch the same tutorial again... WHAT??? Now I can't even select a pod. I'm clicking on it but nothing happens. Also, I can't exit the tutorial now because all buttons in the top right corner are inactive. So, Alt-F4 (it's great that I know this key combination, not everyone does). Maybe I'll launch the game again. 3. Screw bugged tutorials, I can build things myself, and launch, and go to the Moon or whatever... why are my things exploding? Overheat? No warnings? WAIT, WHAT? DEBUG MENU? I HAVE TO USE CHEATS JUST TO PLAY THE GAME? I'd like to punch devs and QA in the face now, thank you very much. Seasoned player perspective: 4. Confetti fairings look awful, don't support partial deployment and break things. If fairings, decoupler and next engine are in the same stage, engine doesn't activate. 5. Any hope of stock wheel module handling multiple wheel colliders is lost. No rocker-bogie rover suspension for us. Medium and large landing gear don't even spin their wheels, which is kinda ridiculous. 6. Dynamic lights do not cast shadows. Google 'deferred lighting', which is available in UnityPro. Dear Squad, you call it a "Release" and you don't bother to spend 1500$ (it's a one-time payment)? No wonder Unity team doesn't help you to fix x64 issues - you're not their customer and they don't owe you anything. 7. If it was 1.0 Release, this thread wouldn't even exist. More so, most of it was updated right after "release". By one person (Thanks, Claw!). What does it tell us about QA process? 8. Kerbal professions are STILL linked to kerbal names. Seriously, Squad? 9. Water still looks like crap. I remember Squad members saying that "it's a placeholder". There may be no placeholders in proper release. 10. Procedural Mun craters. It was a great addition to the game. Community loved it, as I recall. I'm also recalling someone called HarvesteR saying that every planetary body will be revisited and improved at some point. Now, I'm pretty sure that save-breaking updates (like changing height maps for planets) are off the table after release. I mean, usually. So, either Squad thinks that it's OK to break saves for people using the supposedly finished commercial product or there will be no more polish on planetary bodies. Which one is it? 11. Sound FX are still somewhat bugged. If I'm in a map view, I would either not hear engine sound at all, or hear it constantly but muffled. Loud stuttering puffs are certainly not the way to do it. 12. Why is The Claw still available in one size only? 13. Antennas are still retracting after transmission and get stuck retracted. Now, good things. New Big-Ass plane parts (do not pretend that you didn't expect it to be pronounced this way) are great. Engine thrust changing with air pressure is great and long-awaited for. ISRU is nice-looking, although it needs some work. Female kerbals... never thought they're much needed, I'd better have sexless/androginous kerbals, but it's not a bad addition to the game, just the one I don't care much about. That's about it. PS One more thing I forgot because I'm used to RemoteTech: 14. Stock SAS SUCKS in any other than "hold direction" mode. Try setting Mk1 pod with parachute to hold surface retrograde at reentry, and all it does is just... vibrating. Same for small satellites. It doesn't account for vehicle mass, multiple SAS sources make it go crazy, it overcompensates and tries to shake vessel apart. This abomination was introduced in 0.90 (the one and only beta release we've got) and somehow is still alive.

Is it an update to Unity Pro, with proper dynamic lighting?

The quality of conclusions being drawn is directly proportional to your ability of showcasing new features. Don't blame your customers, we're discussing what you've shown us.

Of course, there wouldn't be any need for interpretations if there was no freaking embargo. Then we would just see how it works from youtube and KSP-TV streams.

No, I haven't read all 12 pages in search of developers' posts. Ted have said that fairings are like broken solar panel parts. Do you remember having any control over specific solar panel segment? What I remember is that solar panel segments are uncontrollable, glitchy (dance around on the surface or react to kerbals climbing ladders, for example), locked to the vessel's frame of reference and disappear after you leave physics range of that specific vessel they're attached to (or reload), like most of the engine fairings. I am reserved to my opinion that fairings we have now are better until I actually see what Squad has made.

KW Rocketry and Procedural Fairings for me. Voted "Do not care". I'll probably delete this confetti crap from my install anyway. To anyone who likes the confetti, I'll laugh at you when you try to recreate Constellation lander with it (upper half of the aeroshell decouples way before the lower one), for example.

As I remember, there was a lot of time for you to transfer to Steam. Like, half a year or something like that.

Like any activity, it's easy to learn the basics, but it takes a life to master it.