Feedback Requested: 1.0

[Rune]

... my question to you is whether you'd prefer we try and add more features, or focus more on things like the aero overhaul, bugfixing and balance?

Bugfixing, bugfixing, and when you are done with that... a bit more bugfixing, please!

KSP is a hell of a game already. Heck, it was probably awesome enough for a release a few versions ago. But the thing that keeps it from perfection, and in fact impacts gameplay a lot are performance issues.

Every crash lets you with the nagging feeling that the game is unfinished and rough, in a way that no missing content you never heard about ever would. And we are talking 1.0 here! The game has to be as solid as it possibly can, and with such a sturdy base you can go about adding even moar bells and whistles on top, after 1.0.

Rune. And those are my two cents. Hope they get to you!

[Commander Jebidiah]

Are you sure? Laptops often do not have dedicated graphics cards with 512MB of ram. Your laptop probably has integrated graphics.

My Laptop may have integrated graphics, however it is still over the recommended specs.

[r4pt0r]

My Laptop may have integrated graphics, however it is still over the recommended specs.

Thats wrong though. the reccomended specs are "512MB Video Card, Shader Model 3.0"

By being not having a dedicated card, you automatically cant make the reccomended specs. They reccomend a dedicated card, not intergrated into the CPU.

[GusTurbo]

I think the "recommended specs" need to be re-evaluated. The current specs are more like minimum recommended specs, because my crappy laptop meets or exceeds all of them but still runs poorly. Meeting the recommended specs should allow for a smooth game experience at the default game settings.

[klgraham1013]

I wonder how long it's been since they determined the recommended spec. It may need a second look.

[Robotengineer]

+1 for re-evaluating the recommended specs. It's also a bit misleading that the demo's recommended specs are lower than the full-version's.

[Frybert]

+1 for re-evaluating the recommended specs. It's also a bit misleading that the demo's recommended specs are lower than the full-version's.

The demo is 2+ years old at this point. Is it really even representative of the game anymore? If Aero and heating do get implemented it will be outdated even further. Definitely going to need a new demo with 1.0 as well.

[Barefoot Friar]

I've been carefully going over the Dev Notes all the way back to January 27th. I'll PM my notes to anyone who wants. At any rate, taking HarvestR's list from the Beyond Beta post, and looking at the dev notes and other announcements since then, I can see that:

• The new aero system is finished
  
• Re-entry heat is almost finished
  
• The Engineer's report is almost finished
  
• Female Kerbals are finished
  
• As part of the new aero, new fairings have been implemented and they and the cargo bays have been debugged
  
• Resources are in QA
  
• New landing gear is finished
  
• The aero stability overlay has been canned, or at least pushed back
  
• Timewarp To is finished
  
• New, larger wings are in
  
• Tier 0 buildings are finished or close to finishing
  
• Kerbal clambering is finished
  
• A new sandbox demo is finished, and a career demo is under construction
  
• Some new tutorials are finished
  

This leaves:

• Bug fixes. Some have already been done (lots of them, according to one dev note), but probably no where near all of them. Consider it WIP.
  
• Sound overhaul. I've not seen anything at all about this.
  
• Economic systems rebalance.
  
• Parts rebalance
  
• Tech tree rebalance. It's being worked on, but it's not nearing completion from what I can tell.
  
• Contracts revision
  
• Asteroid and interplanetary tutorials are still under construction
  

It's a lot, and it might be the most grindy. However, it's not going to be impossible to knock these things out in a few weeks, barring further illness or other setbacks. Given we've seen nothing announced about a release date, and given that an announcement would have to be made a certain length of time in advance, I don't think the release will be before the middle of April -- more like the middle to end of May. To me, given how much ground they've covered since January 27th, it looks like they can make it.

Except.

Except that there are always lots of bugs that go unnoticed. The developers likely have dream systems that run everything smoothly, or they're simply too close to the issues to see them. There is a reason why authors hire editors; people tend to overlook the problems with their creations, and having outside sources to tell them there is a problem becomes a necessity. Granted, the QA testers should be able to catch these things, but even they don't catch everything.

Thus, I think the wisest choice would be to do like Ubuntu does and have a 1.0-RC that comes out a week or three before the release date. This will allow the community to try to break it, and any glaring issues can be quickly fixed before the real thing ships. But even if Squad doesn't do that, I think it will still be okay. This isn't GTA V; even after 1.20 came out I still can't play that buggy mess, and that's a console game that should have been optimized to the known and reliable hardware and software requirements. Every software has some bugs upon release, but I think that most people will be able to play it. I know there are some folks who haven't been able to; I've had games like that as well that should have played but simply for some reason refused.

Overall I've changed my mind. I think they can do it. The major feature of the new aero, coupled with the new lift system, the re-entry heat and effects, and the new wings, fairings, and cargo bays are all in. Those are the major things that should be in for 1.0, because resources can be added later and not break saves. The little things, like kerbal clambering and female kerbals are already in and (I think) finished.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Barefoot Friar

[Lord Aurelius]

@Barefoot Friar

Don't forget that ISRU/mining was also scheduled for 1.0, but we haven't really heard anything about it since the initial 1.0 roadmap.

[Barefoot Friar]

Ah, I forgot to mention that. It's been sent to QA within this calendar month, but I don't know the current state. I would assume that it's coming along, since I think I saw in the dev notes that the dev team was working with the modder responsible for Karbonite. I could be wrong about that; my memory for names isn't great. At any rate, it's under construction and my guess is that it's nearing completion.

[DoToH]

I can see that:

• The new aero system is finished
  
• Re-entry heat is almost finished
  
• The Engineer's report is almost finished
  
• Female Kerbals are finished
  
• As part of the new aero, new fairings have been implemented and they and the cargo bays have been debugged
  
• Resources are in QA
  
• New landing gear is finished
  
• The aero stability overlay has been canned, or at least pushed back
  
• Timewarp To is finished
  
• New, larger wings are in
  
• Tier 0 buildings are finished or close to finishing
  
• Kerbal clambering is finished
  
• A new sandbox demo is finished, and a career demo is under construction
  
• Some new tutorials are finished
  

Maybe those features you are assuming finished or almost finished are not as finished as they thought when they wrote said devnotes. Maybe it's the reason to ask us what we think about pushing back some of them.

We have no more info about their real progress, only a vague "we bite too much" with nicer words

[CobyLee]

Make the x64 version more stable. I'd love to install lots of mods, they added all the features I want. But the memory space is often limited while running x86 version.

If you're using the unity 4.6.3, there is a known bug that when you compute the result of unsigned integers and float numbers with type cast expression like '(int)unsignedNumberA + (int)unsignedNumberB * floatNumberC', the signed integer type casting becomes invalid. Therefore, you may get an over-bound value as result.

[klgraham1013]

Ah, I forgot to mention that. It's been sent to QA within this calendar month, but I don't know the current state. I would assume that it's coming along, since I think I saw in the dev notes that the dev team was working with the modder responsible for Karbonite. I could be wrong about that; my memory for names isn't great. At any rate, it's under construction and my guess is that it's nearing completion.

I have faith that RoverDude will have resources done. That man is a modding beast.

[lincourtl]

OK, I'm late to the party, and many people have already said what I would have anyway. So just let me give the tl;dr version of my thoughts.

In order of priority: aero (and new heat model and reentry heating since they all go together), female Kerbals*, memory management, bug fixing, bug fixing, bug fixing, and more bug fixing.

Also I'm going to join the chorus of asking Squad to please reconsider making the next release 1.0. If the reason Squad is insistent on going gold is because of a money wall, do a Kickstarter for a second round of community investment. I'm sure anybody who is active on these forums wants Squad to succeed because we love the product, and would help out in any way possible.

*From what I understand, the Valentina model is already done anyway.

[Linear]

OK, I'm late to the party, and many people have already said what I would have anyway. So just let me give the tl;dr version of my thoughts.

In order of priority: aero (and new heat model and reentry heating since they all go together), female Kerbals*, memory management, bug fixing, bug fixing, bug fixing, and more bug fixing.

Also I'm going to join the chorus of asking Squad to please reconsider making the next release 1.0. If the reason Squad is insistent on going gold is because of a money wall, do a Kickstarter for a second round of community investment. I'm sure anybody who is active on these forums wants Squad to succeed because we love the product, and would help out in any way possible.

*From what I understand, the Valentina model is already done anyway.

Second this - i'd rather donate money and see a release that really shows the full (or very close to) potential of the game.

[delder92663]

Aero, resources and game stability are the items I'd like to see in 1.0.

Being 1.0 /commercial release I'd imagine stability would be the highest priority. Maybe even 64 bit release.

[Viandox]

hello,

it would be nice to see some upgradable parts...

i could put some science point or money into an engine to raise its ISP, or make it lighter etc...

tanks could be lighter or cheaper with some upgrade.

i say that because russian space history begins with the R7 rocket, and ends with the soyouz rocket, built with almost same parts.

but years after years, all parts have been upgraded.

bigger part or more powerfull engine have to be unlocked, but then, they may be upgraded.

from now, i have to duplicate all parts, with better stats, and put them higher in the tech tree.

[LongHairedHuman]

When 1.0 hits the fan, it'll be a fair target for all sorts of criticism that could be waved away with "It's in development!" in the past. Make sure it's a complete package, without incomplete or imperfect features that may seem broken. Make sure everything is well-documented in the interface, to prevent questions being asked as "How do I un-do stuff in the editor?" and "Where did my saved rocket go?". I'd say rather than focusing on a specific bug or feature, interact with the QA team to polish the product to perfection. Perhaps expand the QA team to get some new views on the product.

[Vallius]

Actually, I think Kerbal will get great reviews, so long as SQUAD avoids major bugs. I think they'll succeed there, based on how they've done in the last few releases.

For me to consider it 1.0, I reiterate the need for fixed aerodynamics. I really hope they add some sort of clouds in 1.1 or 1.2 though. It's a minor touch which (with Astronomer's Visual Pack, for example) do wonders for the game's overall appearance.

[foxkill2342]

Although I have shared my opinion on Reddit how rushing this release will be a disaster for the game, I would say polishing what you have working is probably the best option. A final release full of bugs will be looked at poorly. I really hope you guys know what's best for this game. I love what you have done so far, but I hate to see the game released sub par because of a due date.

[Heavens]

Finishing of the core game features like:

• Aerodynamics
  
• Resources
  
• Parts/Missing parts
  
• Balancing (parts, career/science mode)
  

After that feel free to add new features like for example mechanics like SCANSat. I would suggest not making extremely game-changing additions shortly after the official release unless they're optional.

An example would be adding a feature like Remote Tech that instantly renders all of your unmanned probes unusable after updating etc.

If you want to change the gameplay that drastic better push 1.0 further back and implement those changes now

[Apollo91]

I sure do hope I'm not too late for this party.

Anyoo, to me personally I would say bugfixing is an absolute must, but I have to wave a red flag here about resoures. Everyone seems to think that it isn't important, but of all the features on the table at the moment, only the aero refinements rival that.

Without ISRU, Engineers are near useless. Without ISRU, interplanetary travel is not indicative of the modes being proposed by ACTUAL interplanetary missions (mainly recent Lockheed and SPaceX proposals.) Without ISRU, space stations have VERY limited value. ISRU is also the big goal after mastery of the solar system. What do you do after you land on Laythe? Once you've experimented and planted your flag, Duna is useless. Everyone thinks, naturally, "Live and work there, in some way that benefits my future goals" - like pulling fuel out of the ground.

Without ISRU there is no 1.0 for me, not when this is a part of the product that has been pushed since a .jpeg was released a long, long time ago. I'm actually somewhat astounded that everyone else in the community is so uncaring about this feature when it ties so many parts of late-game career progression together.

TL;DR ISRU is a must. I would sacrifice aero for it. And I believe strongly that a .99 update before 1.0 is a great idea. Don't worry about giving us your bugs, Squad. Us EA folks paid for them - we want to help!

[impyre]

I concur with many of the others, aero, performance improvements/bug-fixes, tutorials/scenarios. (And for me that's in order of importance)

[Aragosnat]

Resources aero, fairings, updated tutorial, female Kerbal, and bug fixings are a must. Anything not listed should wait a while as you fix more bugs after releasing 1.0.

[L3GO]

Dont do the whole 1.0 update with most of the stuff then release the second half in the next update and go out fix it all, Add all the stuff and have it all release many of us are tired of the extra updates when you can just do one then a few here and there.