Mako

Once they have a good, working version for consoles, updates should be faster than starting from scratch. They'll still take time, but at least the foundation is in place and solid. In theory, anyway. Here's hoping for a successful re-release.

I'm not saying you're wrong at all, and I am saying I don't remember specifics or timeframes, but I thought there was work that FTE and Squad released in an attempt to fix at least one of the console versions, if not both. The only reason I feel like I remember something about it is because I remember it didn't really fix much and it certainly didn't improve the issue of save game corruption which was one of the biggest issues affecting pretty much all users of the console versions. So, (if my memory isn't as bad as the save games on consoles) technically they did put out a patch that tried to fix things, and failed miserably. Hence the firing of FTE and a restart from scratch by Blitworks leading to a rather lengthy delay on the release date. I might be wrong, and either way whatever frustration you've experienced is beyond justified. I sincerely hope that 3 months from now you and all console players will have finally had the chance to start having positive feelings about your time with KSP. It's been a heck of a wait and I really hope it finally feels worth it all.

Dang it, Geschosskopf! I wanted to go to get away from my ex-wife. Mods! How do I delete my previous post!? I take it all back!

Who says we all want to come back? It's true that the life of a pioneer has been highly romanticised; it is far from a glamorous affair and has a significantly elevated mortality rate, but it also has a certain inherent excitement to it. All I know for sure is that if you put me on a one-way ship to Mars with some training, a plan, and equipment for building a new life out there I'm going to make the best of it that I can for as long as I can for myself and anyone else who is crazy enough to head out there. And I'm okay not coming back. I'm even okay with the fact that I'd be impossible to guarantee a safe departure, not to mention no guarantees of a safe transit and landing. The thing is, if I was going to Mars, and regardless of whether or not I was coming back, I'd want the best chance possible to at least make it there. One person's "suicide mission" can be another's "greatest adventure."

If I understand what you're asking for, this is already implemented and usable by holding down the Alt key (or Mod key) while trying to place a part. With Alt held down, the part you are placing will only attach to nodes and won't show surface attaching possibilities. It's not a toggle per se, but the functionality is there.

To the commentor at that time, this is the only reality they know. To us incredibly advanced, over two and a half years from then far flung future beings, we know a different reality. (That comment and all but the one preceding yours were written about a month and a half before 1.0 was released.)

Unless 1.3.1 stealth added all the necessary updates to the base game to allow the DLC to function, I would be surprised if there is not an update between now and the launch of the DLC. Whether that update is 1.3.2 and only provides support for the DLC (and maybe a bug fix or two while they're at it) or is 1.4 has not been announced as far as I've seen, but I can't see the DLC releasing without an accompanying base game update. As for the announced nature of 1.4, all we know for sure is the Unity update. The only thing that has been confirmed besides the Unity update and the DLC has been a few additional languages.1.4 could be the very next update with some of that stuff, or its even possible it could be the very last update with all of that stuff. It's really anyone's guess. I'm not sure there is much remaining to add to KSP. I would like to see, before then end of development, the code opened up to modders enough where they could pretty much do anything they wanted. Some parts of KSP are already set up to allow modders a lot of freedom, like the ability to turn off stock aerodynamics to make aerodynamics mods easy to integrate. I'd love to see as much opened as possible, so that when development does end the community can keep going with as much ease and flexibility as possible. And who doesn't want more optimizations and better performance?

Now that's a good idea. I assume Squad would be open to that idea since they've done that with the last several PC version updates. I wonder if they've already given it some consideration since it seems to have worked well on PC. I know with Steam on PC it's pretty easy for a developer to release updates on a beta test branch for users to test. I can't think of any reason it would be impossible to do on consoles. Since KSP is not currently available for sale, I'm guessing that Squad could just push an update for the current console version and only those who already own it would be able to download it. Maybe it's a bit more complicated because it's on consoles, but there's ways to run betas if the developer/publisher wants to.

I always forget there's an Alt+F12 menu. Actually, I can't remember when it was added. I'm not sure it was in the game when I started playing, so maybe it wasn't an option when I was learning to play. I mention this because I think the way I learned to play could possibly help you, @guesswho2778. I relied heavily on quicksaves and quickloads as I was learning. Something like a Mun orbit-and-return mission meant breaking everything down into steps -- achieving Kerbin orbit, successfully burning for Mun intercept, mid-course correction to fine tune approach, achieving Mun orbit, burning to return to Kerbin, and landing/splashing down succesfully -- and quicksaving before attempting each step. If I messed up the next step, I just loaded the quicksave and tried again until I got it right. This way, I practiced the parts I most needed to practice until I was better at them without having to redo the whole mission from the beginning each time. These days it's even easier since you can save and load multiple named saves. If you discover at Step 5 that you don't have enough fuel, and you know that you can execute Step 2 better, you can load back to before Step 2 and try again. Sometimes you'll still fail from just not having enough fuel for the mission you're attempting, but even failure provides knowledge and practice. Accept your mistakes and failures, learn from them, and move forward.

@Jeremiah I meant exactly what I said. It would be nice if they offered something to console customers, however I have limited expectations of them doing so. I like to deal with realistic expectations, and it's probably egotistical of me but I like to try to help others have realistic expectations. I find that so many disappointments and disagreements, both online and in the real world, stem from poor communication and poorly-managed expectations, so I open my big mouth (probably way too often and if you all haven't caught on by now I love to hear myself talk [or in this case type way too much]). Furthermore, I don't believe Squad to be under any obligation to offer the things you'd like, and as long as they do deliver a working console version I don't believe anyone is entitled to anything more. In fact, if Squad had left the console version as broken as it was, all any customer could do is try to get a refund, say "Shame on Squad!," and complain on the internet about it, but that would be the end of it. This kind of thing happens all the time with all kinds of products. Some companies offer warranties, others offer satisfaction guarantees, and some offer easy return policies, all so you feel good about your purchase. And still other companies don't offer anything as a sign of good faith that you'll like your purchase, and when you buy from them and are unhappy, well, it's very unpleasant and unfortunate, but that's it. Right now Squad is a company that doesn't have any products of their own, and doesn't own the product they're working on, so they're in no place to really offer anything besides an apology. I pretty much accept the work they're doing on fixing the console versions to be an apology. What do you really care about at the end of the day: a working console version or an apology? Personally, I'll take the working version every time. Take-Two could do something more substantial, but I guess it depends how much they want to make the people who bought KSP on consoles feel better. As I said before, I'd love to see them do something nice for console customers. And on that thought I will wish you well on your mission to get something for your grievances. And I hope that Squad does deliver a good console version to you and that you experience enough enjoyment from it that it overcomes any negativity you have experienced caused by myself and this whole ordeal in general.

I came here to say "You've heard of Soylent Green, right?," only to find I've been beaten by one of the best. So instead let me say thank you @linuxgurugamer for all you've done for KSP modding.

Sure, I totally see how something like that could work. I wasn't aware of what that title did, but it sounds pretty similar to what I was saying about an in-game mission browser. Though the big difference between a title like that and KSP is that Halo Reach launched as an already online game with existing servers. KSP has no current online functionality (unless someone wants to be pedantic about sending usage data to Squad being online functionality), so work would need to be done and mission data servers would need to be implemented, operated, and maintained. I do think that this is the most user friendly way to implement mission sharing, but since no word of how sharing will work has been announced yet we'll just have to wait and see. The quickest, easiest, and least expensive way for Squad to implement sharing missions, having creators upload them wherever they want like they do with mods and having users download them and install them like mods, is also the least likely way for Microsoft and Sony (especially Sony) to allow in my opinion. Because it's quick, easy, and cost-effective, the treating-mission-sharing-like-mod-sharing method is my best guess for how Squad has been thinking about sharing. I would love to be wrong, but the pros out weight the cons from the development side of things. If it does go that way, at least on PC I can imagine a community-made website will be adapted or created to handle mission sharing, possibly (probably) complete with a search and download manager similar to CKAN. Then again, Squad could have the PC audience do sharing the way I'm expecting, and have the it function differently on consoles by making use of the servers that Microsoft and Sony operate for online functionality. That seems like a pontential solution, and console-specific mission sharing could be implemented during the likely necessary console port work for the Making History DLC. That would mean that consoles wouldn't get the DLC until much later than PC, most likely, but at least it could arrive with feature parity. Also, having mission sharing be on Microsoft and Sony servers means it'll last at least until their current consoles are no longer supported which is actually a huge positive point for doing it that way. All of this is just dumb speculation on my part, and all of this is moot if the DLC never makes it to the consoles.

I agree that what you're saying makes a lot of sense, but until they announce something else the only official word we have to go on is the console version Blitworks is putting together will be 1.2.2. In absence of any other announcement, and since I haven't seen a hint of it being otherwise, that's what I'm expecting to see. While it does make sense to then continue working to update the console versions to be in line with the PC versions, the PC could potentially be on a newer version of Unity by then. Even if not, the amount of work that went into 1.3(.1) might take a while to port since it included a lot of UI changes to accommodate the localization work. It could be another long wait to catch up. It even seems possible that console versions might not catch up until the PC versions' development comes to an end, if they ever catch up at all. I don't know how well the console versions sold before they were pulled and I'm a bit pessimistic on how well they'll sell after the relaunch (based on nothing other than my own assumptions so I'd love to be wrong). If sales numbers are less than expected, I can imagine a world where 1.2.2 is the last version of KSP available on consoles. It would be a real bummer, and I sincerely hope that isn't the case. I've asked several times, specifically with the console versions in mind, if the Making History DLC will have an in-game mission browser for the mission builder to find and download missions to play. I've never seen Squad discuss how they intend players to share missions, but if it requires going outside of the game to share and find new missions, then it seems less likely that they even intend to make this DLC for the console versions. I'm not a console owner so I might be missing something, but are there any games that allow external, user-made data to be loaded? I know in the past stuff like that has been used to bypass security on consoles, and if I recall correctly even the two Bethesda games that allowed mods on consoles exclud mods with scripting, and in the case of the PS4, any external assets. Since mods with scripting (and external assets) seem to be considered a security risk, I suspect the missions you can build with the Making History mission builder would be considered a security risk. If somehow loading user-made missions from an external source was allowed (which seems unlikely), it would at the very least be a bit of a hassle to go to a webpage like Curse, search for and download missions, and copy them to a flash drive to be able to load on your console. An in-game browser is the most user friendly solution I can think of and the only way I can see the Making History mission builder working on consoles. It's also the most difficult solution with the most amount of work, and since they've never even bothered to get the update patcher to work on PCs I don't expect it as the mission sharing solution. I guess console versions could exclude the mission builder part of Making History and be available at a discounted price. That doesn't seem unreasonable and would certainly be possible. If the console versions get updated enough to support the DLC it would be the quickest and easiest way to make at least part of the DLC available. Or, I suppose you could include the mission builder, but make it only able to load missions created locally on that console. I'm fairly sure that would be allowed, and it might be worth it. As I said in that quote, besides two Bethesda games (Fallout 4 and Skyrim being those two games), do any other games support mods? Even those two only support mods that have no scripting and on PlayStation only mods that use existing in-game assets. The allowed user-made content is incredibly restricted.

@Jeremiah I wasn't saying your idea is bad. Your idea is lovely. I wish more companies acted the way you're asking them to act, but as I said, refunds would have happened by now and there is nothing additional to offer to console players at this time. So, besides a refund, there is nothing KSP-related with which to compensate a console customer that currently exists or that has been announced. I am saying you are unlikely to get what you would like to get for that reason, whether I believe you should get it or not. That's just the reality of the situation. I'm glad you've had good experiences with Take-Two in the past and I sincerely hope this turns out to be a net positive experience for every console customer, but in this specific instance what could they offer to console customers that would make sense? A console exclusive feature is a nice thought. Heck, it could even be a nice compromise to the fact that modding is PC only and likely to remain that way. Besides two Bethesda games, does any game support mods on consoles yet? Whatever it might be would likely come to PC eventually even if only in the form of a mod, but for a time the console versions could have something exclusive. But what would that exclusive be? A console exclusive might be a bit of work and therefore could be a long time coming since work hasn't begun on anything yet (unless they've already planned a surprise for console customers), so what else would be reasonable compensation? This isn't criticism of your idea; now I'm genuinely asking what would work in absence of any current or announced products. They still could decide to do a refund, I suppose, but waiting this long to do so still seems very unlikely to me.

I don't see this happening, certainly not anytime soon if it does. There's no other KSP titles announced and the Making History DLC has not been announced for consoles. In fact, it hasn't even been announced that the consoles will be updated to a version that will support the DLC. So your primary examples are not even things that are coming to consoles at this time. I guess Take-Two could offer you something for one of their other games. Maybe some free loot boxes for NBA 2K18 or WWE 2K18? I'm guessing that despite now owning the failure, Take-Two is probably the least concerned with how you feel about your purchase. I'd guess that Squad employees care a lot, followed by however much Squad's owners care (certainly enough to drop FTE and get Blitworks making things right, at least). I'm not sure if I think Take-Two would have even bothered trying to fix the console versions. I don't think you'll see any compensation at all. Refunds would have happened a long time ago if they were happening at all. And to be realistic, this is pretty much how the software industry has always worked. In fact, I would have been dissapointed, but not shocked, if Squad never started this new console work at all. It's unpleasant when you make a purchase and it turns out bad, but it's pretty much always been "Buyer Beware" with very few guarantees and very limited refunds.

They just recently said they fixed a bug relating to saving the game. Given that one of the biggest failures of the initial console versions was issues with save files, I'm not surprised at all that they're making sure console players can save their games reliably before releasing. Honestly at this point it sort of feels like KSP is far enough removed from its launch window that interest in the product has dwindled to those already invested in it. I don't really know how big of a splash games make two and a half years after the general fanfare of their "official 1.0 launch," but I kind of suspect that the work being done on consoles is almost solely to the benefit of existing customers. It's only a guess of course, but I don't think the console relaunch will drive a large amount of new sales after so much time. I am really glad that they're doing the work to get it right even though that is not a quick process. Unfortunately, in my personal opinion, I think the best thing that can be said about KSP on consoles is it serves as a cautionary tale to developers on how to avoid a bad product launch, to console makers on how to work with indie developers to release a good product, and most importantly to potential customers on the fact that software is sometimes very broken with (sometimes) no method of refunding your purchase and possibly an indefinite/infinite wait for things to be made right. I feel like this scenario occurs less these days so it's important to remember it still can screw over everyone and that software has pretty much always been (until recently with implementation of things like Steam refunds) "Buyer Beware!" I am hopeful that existing and any new customers will feel more positive about the end result when it finally arrives, but I won't be surprised if many have moved on by then. I just hope that everyone who is excited about the idea of KSP can, at some point hopefully sooner rather than later, enjoy KSP as much as I have.

To be clear, I wasn't accusing Squad of anything nefarious. I was simply pointing out that DEPORTED is/was the shell that Squad created, likely for the reasons you mention, in The Netherlands. The fact that The Netherlands has been internationally known as a tax haven may or may not have had something to do with that decision; I have no way of knowing, but it doesn't change what happened. As this is only tangentially related to the original topic, I'll leave this alone now too.

Well, the only option the public has is to not buy and use products licensed as such. We can ask companies to change these agreements, but unless everyone who enjoys videogames wants to stop buying and playing games with these agreements then there is little incentive for a company to offer less restrictive terms. And since contracts like this have not really held up in court, at least to my knowledge, there is really no rallying call to inspire the public to boycott products licensed this way. All in all it seems like a non-issue. Also, if memory serves me, DEPORTED is the shell company that Squad set up in a tax haven to sell KSP. I'm not sure of the status or position of DEPORTED in the wake of the sale to Take-Two.

Congratulations on your successful build, @firosiro. It is indeed a really rewarding experience when your vehicle design and/or mission execution finally succeeds after all the work and time you put into it. Now, take that shuttle somewhere fun, and may your landings be as successful as your lift-offs!

Performance of KSP, however, is almost entirely limited to speed of the CPU. So bugs or no bugs, a faster processor will handle all the physics calculations more quickly which generally results in a higher framerate. I can see the processor being the bottleneck even more on consoles than PC, since you can better optimize the graphics performance when you know exactly what graphics hardware you're running on. On PC, performance is can be limited on your graphics hardware if that hardware is older or lower spec. I know work has to be done for 4k and HDR, but on the performance side of things do games just run better because the hardware is more powerful? Do the devs have to do any work for that to happen? I don't have any of the consoles, so I don't have any experience with the software or the hardware. I've been curious how all that has worked out so far.

Speaking of performance, I'm curious whether KSP will support/utilize the upgraded console versions. Will KSP run better on a PS4 Pro? How about the upcoming Xbox One X? I may have missed some news, but I don't recall any mention of Squad/Blitworks working on support for those console versions. That being said, I don't really know if it takes much work at all for a dev to utilize the upgraded hardware of those newer versions. Maybe it's quick and easy and/or maybe they're going to take care of that after bugs get fixed and control schemes get finalized so it just hasn't been mentioned yet.

The thing is Squad no longer owns or controls KSP. Squad is still currently handling development, but Squad sold ownership of KSP to Take-Two Interactive. I'd have to imagine they're the ones who actually make decisions on what work is or isn't done from here on out. At this point Squad is an independent, third-party development team that for the time being is hired by Take-Two to work on KSP. There is nothing to suggest that will change, but presumably Take-Two could stop development (of any version) or switch development teams at any time with or without Squad's permission. I find in interesting that Squad is now a software development team that owns no products and currently consists of people who, since being hired by Squad, have only released updates for a product made by former employees. I think Squad shows some promise, but I'm very curious to see what comes after console and PC updates and Take-Two's first expansion to KSP. (I suppose that's a topic for a different thread.)

The KSP Weekly posts in The Daily Kerbal section of the forum provide a weekly report of the development of KSP both on console and PC. If you want an extremely brief summary: to fix all the console version problems Blitworks started from scratch, work is continuing, bugs are fewer, and control schemes are being tested and fine-tuned. If you want more details check out those posts and I think there's main thread for the console versions which might hold more info. As always with Squad: there is no announced release date and it will be available when it is ready. My impression of the situation is they are taking their time to make sure they don't repeat the same mistakes as the original release. They can choose to rush things again, but you're already familiar with what happens when they do that.

Cupcake... Not that I'm anyone in particular, but I am constantly impressed with your creations, both the ships themselves and the presentations of them. You make both designing and flying look effortless and easy when I know the opposite is true. Your work is an inspiration.

@AlamoVampire There is no vessel part in the game that is procedural. Whether Procedural Fairings could have been used in whole, in part, or not at all is completely irrelevent: it was never going to happen. I believe HarvesteR said they specifically wanted vessels in KSP to be built from fixed-size, prefabricated parts. Therefore, procedural parts, such as fairings, were not a possibility no matter how much anyone wanted them. I'm actually surprised stock fairings have as much flexibility as they do because of this. So, if my memory serves me, the dev team wanted it this way. It was a conscious decision. They understood the arguement for procedural parts, but felt that functionality didn't fit with everything else so they made their own version that fit what they wanted. That's also why we don't have stock modular/procedural fuel tanks. At this point I doubt we'd see this design change significantly. Perhaps a new product with a different design philosophy would have a better chance of implementing procedural parts in stock. I'm just glad options exist, even if it's in the form of mods, so that players (at least those on PC) can tailor their experiences to their preferences.