Anybody else a bit underwhelmed by 1.0?

[Marclev]

So I did a vanilla install of 1.0 the moment it was available from Steam, started a "Normal" career (as I'd been put off the hard mode grind by the beta) to experience it the way it's meant to be and err ... well sort of meh.

- I can't seem to find a reliable way of launching a basic rocket without it eventually just spinning out of control. Appreciate there's a new aerodynamic model, but I can't get the things to do reliable gravity turns, no matter how early or late I start and how gentle I take it. Even just pointing the rocket 45 degrees until you're in orbit seems hit and miss. We're talking nothing more than a capsule, a few of the tier 1 fuel tanks, and an engine. EDIT: From the replies it seems that this is probably more a case of me being stuck in my ways and not thinking aerodynamically enough, so I'm happy enough to retract this point.

- The "Flight engineer's report" in the KAC is disappointing, in that it doesn't tell you anything about Delta V, or other things that you actually need (it's like in the bad old days before I started using KER, guessing at whether or not the rocket has enough oomph). It tells you that the parachute is on the wrong stage, but that raises the question why the game doesn't just put it in the right stage to start with. If I wasn't used to the old "break up rocket because the staging isn't as you thought it was" I could see that leading to rage quits!

- The altimeter on the external view still shows altitude above sea level, not radar altitude. This has been frustrating me since the earliest days of KSP, and from forum posts, quite a few other people as well.

- I can't find a comfortable exterior camera that doesn't either lead to very weird graphical artefacts or doesn't let me just spin around the craft without banking for some reason.

- Without going to map mode I have no idea what my apoapsis or periapsis is. I guess I'm too used to KER showing me this stuff while outside of map view, but I would have thought for 1.0 some sort of basic flight data would be shown beyond "speed" and "altitude".

- Does re-entry heat actually do anything? I launched a basic rocket to 250,000m and it sort of just fell pretty much straight down. The g counter went to max and flames every where, but not a scratch on the craft when it landed back on Kerbin. Settings where "Full entry heat", so what am I missing, shouldn't it have just disintegrated?

- The contracts are a bit weird to start with. Why do I have to accept "Gather science data from the surface of Kerbin" when things like "Reach 5,000 feet" are pre-accepted. Also, it's doing the old thing of offering me contracts that are impossible to complete given my current tech level (I can't even get into orbit yet there's things in my list asking me to test a part while on an escape trajectory). Bearing in mind I'm playing on normal.

Maybe I was expecting too much and haven't played enough yet (only one or two tiers up the science tree), but for some reason I was expecting more polish from 1.0. It still feels a bit beta-ish to me.

Would be interested to know what other people feel like?

Edited April 27, 2015 by Marclev

[Aerindel]

My main disappointment is that I still can't even view the website let alone get to the game. Its still giving me server migration errors.

[Mr. Roboto]

No, not really.

I'm still waiting on a couple of mods I enjoy, bu that's just to enhance the experience. Otherwise, it's pretty much most of what I've wanted since I bought the game.

[RayneCloud]

Never happy. Ever. It's really kinda old now Marclev, it really is.

So, let's talk about a few things shall we?

1. Your first rockets without gimbaled engines and control surfaces will do no more than go straight up. This is something you'll simply have to deal with and accept that the contracts will auto-update with a lot of base "record" contracts for you to break. I ended up with 500,000 funds and plenty of science after two launches.

2. You want the game to just do things for you, like put something in the right stage instead of you doing it? Hand holding silver platter much?

3. You have to upgrade the tracking station before you get that data. Again, this is on you to learn and part of progression.

4. yes, it does.

5. because those contracts are auto-accepted "records" contracts, they will go away.

In short, 100% of your complaints are pretty much on your shoulders bud.

[boa3532]

My main disappointment is that I still can't even view the website let alone get to the game. Its still giving me server migration errors.

Did you try a different browser? I had that same issue.

[sal_vager]

My main disappointment is that I still can't even view the website let alone get to the game. Its still giving me server migration errors.

It's the DNS server, it's pointing to the old site, please update your DNS cache and if that fails you will need to change to an updated cache such as Googles, using Googles 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 DNS servers.

As for the OP, things have changed, enjoy it for what it is.

[silenced]

- I can't seem to find a reliable way of launching a basic rocket without it eventually just spinning out of control. Appreciate there's a new aerodynamic model, but I can't get the things to do reliably gravity turns, no matter how early or late I start and how gentle I take it. Even just pointing the rocket 45 degrees until you're in orbit seems hit and miss.

I've had no such issues yet, maybe because of I do not use FULL throttle all the time and even limited the solid fuel boosters thrustvalues.

- The "Flight engineer's report" in the KAC is disappointing, in that it doesn't tell you anything about Delta V, or other things that you actually need (it's like in the bad old days before I started using KER, guessing at whether or not the rocket has enough oomph). I tells you that the parachute is on the wrong stage, but that raises the question why the game doesn't just put it in the right stage to start with. If I wasn't used to the old "break up rocket because the staging isn't as you thought it was" I could see that leading to rage quits!

Well, someone who let the game play itself with KER, this is what you get without. You actually have to try, test and find out stuff by yourself, instead of letting a mod do everything for you and be like someone who's just watching a movie. A great experience, isn't it?

- Without going to map mode I have no idea what my apoapsis or periapsis is. I guess I'm too used to KER showing me this stuff while outside of map view, but I would have thought for 1.0 some sort of basic flight data would be shown beyond "speed" and "altitude".

Well, this is what you get, usually. Maybe really try to forget KER and play the game the way it is meant to be played. Trial and Error + experience after time. Believe me, after the third launch to orbit you do not need those extra info. Then altitude, speed and inclination is all you need to know where you are and where your Apoapsis is roundabout.

- Does re-entry heat actually do anything? I launched a basic rocket to 250,000m and it sort of just fell pretty much straight down. The g counter went to max and flames every where, but not a scratch on the craft when it landed back on Kerbin. Settings where "Full entry heat", so what am I missing, shouldn't it have just disintegrated?

Well, it does impact your craft. I had Valentina explode during reentry into the main atmosphere from roundabout 72km max height in her command capsule only. Was a nice little explosion & catastrophic failure.

So far I'm quite happy with 1.0, it's like a fresh start with some new concepts while some old ones still work fine.

[regex]

God this thread is terrible. Maybe people can chill out and approach valid criticism in a constructive way instead of jumping all over the OP like "HURRR UR NOT PLAYING RITE".

[Tiberion]

Stability: its hard on early rockets because you don't have stability parts. Static fins at the bottom and a gimballed engine (T45) will help. You also have to learn to adapt to more realistic aerodynamics, getting a rocket unstable is bad news.

deltaV readout: it was one of the features that got pushed to 1.1

external camera: not sure what you mean, they're mostly unchanged. What artifacts? The new thing is camera shake, which can be disabled in options, or by going to chase camera.

Not sure why you expected orbital data and such on the flight view hud, it was never announced. They never promised to implement every mod's function. its still in map view (once you unlock it via the facilities upgrades)

Re-entry is still pretty forgiving, especially from basic launches/orbits. In the end it was probably a pretty good idea for this release to give people some time to learn, and it can be tuned harder in the future. You CAN still burn yourself up though when doing higher level stuff.

I wouldn't say its polished either. They DID fix a lot of things and tweak a lot of things that needed it, but they also made huge changes to major things, so it feels unfamiliar. A lot of it will feel better as you learn it, and some things you liked from mods will still have to come from them.

[Hotblack Desiato]

I had that very same problem, and the only solution for me was: go to the pc (I'm usually accessing everything from the notebook) and download it from there.

regarding the game experience. when I heard that they introduce a new aerodynamic model, and that the days of the souposphere are gone, I was happy. but they nerfed the engines down to a point where the overall performance of the rocket was equal or worse to the stock 0.90 experience. especially the nerf of the vacuum-engines hurts, because there is no atmosphere that can brake you down...

I knew that they tried to integrate the functionality of several mods, which evolved over the last 2 or 3 years, and that it is hard to overtake them with the first try...

by the way, at the third launch, an old bug greeted me... being zoomed out at maximum.

[Marclev]

Never happy. Ever. It's really kinda old now Marclev, it really is.

Err, do I know you? Anyhow wow, some people are getting defensive, trust me there really is more important stuff in life to get worked up about Good to see more constructive replies emerge below this one after I somehow personally offended some people by my post.

I installed 1.0 and was left a bit underwhelmed compared to what I was expecting of THE BIG RELEASE, so much so that I thought I'd air my views in the forum and see what other people thought. No offence intended guys

Edited April 27, 2015 by Marclev

[Redwizard000]

I for one am really enjoying 1.0 and the new mechanics. It is more "real" than previous versions, that's for sure. I think the new atmospheric\aerodynamic system adds a nice new challenge to the game. I believe it can be turned off. I am not sure about your specific instance, but I have been having all kinds of things explode during reentry...

I second that the Engineering Report tab would be more useful if it contained more information about the rocket, like Delta V and such. It would be nice.

I also wish that there was either a vanilla module or a tab in the tracking station or something that would show you the angles for the launch windows to other planets, like the protractor mod does.

I just started a new career, but I am already having a lot of fun with 1.0. I can't wait to unlock some of the more advanced stuff.

I doubt that any release of any game is going to ever please 100% of the players or contain 100% of every feature that every player wants. That is why games (especially sandbox games) have a modding community.

[Marclev]

I for one am really enjoying 1.0 and the new mechanics. It is more "real" than previous versions, that's for sure. I think the new atmospheric\aerodynamic system adds a nice new challenge to the game. I believe it can be turned off. I am not sure about your specific instance, but I have been having all kinds of things explode during reentry...

I second that the Engineering Report tab would be more useful if it contained more information about the rocket, like Delta V and such. It would be nice.

I also wish that there was either a vanilla module or a tab in the tracking station or something that would show you the angles for the launch windows to other planets, like the protractor mod does.

I just started a new career, but I am already having a lot of fun with 1.0. I can't wait to unlock some of the more advanced stuff.

I doubt that any release of any game is going to ever please 100% of the players or contain 100% of every feature that every player wants. That is why games (especially sandbox games) have a modding community.

Definitely. I was trying to play it as if it I was brand new and I didn't have a "Must have mods list" about to be downloaded carefully put together over 800 odd hours of playing over the last few years I'm now off to download my favourite mods and spend a lot of hours with 1.0., but it just didn't make the "wow" first impression I was expecting. It's still by all accounts a marvellous game!

Edited April 27, 2015 by Marclev

[Tiberion]

but they nerfed the engines down to a point where the overall performance of the rocket was equal or worse to the stock 0.90 experience.

This is absolutely not true for the launch phase, it is so much easier (with regards to power/fuel requirements, not stability) to launch now than in 0.90. If you're having trouble launching, its probably a design issue (pancake rockets are not a thing anymore) so make sure you build with aerodynamics in mind (tall and thin is good, add nosecaps to boosters, etc)

Also on the general topic; having criticisms is good, so is discussing them. I don't know that discussing the entire release being underwhelming is really helpful because your level of "whelm" can be determined by many things included being overhyped, having incorrect expectations (reading bad info or speculation) and frankly, reading "I am underwhelmed by 1.0" threads here.

So, focusing on specific feedback is probably going to be better and more useful to everyone in the long run.

Also, give it some time. Change is scary!

[Linear]

Have to say, re-entry heat is really..underwhelming.

Stuck a pod on the SLS Engine with Infini fuel and it had to get up to 6/7km/s before things started to happen.

[m4inbrain]

The question was, are other people a bit underwhelmed.

Yes, i am. I was looking forward to 1.0, and it's still fun - and even though this thread is bursting with armchair-warriors trying to defend stupid things, it has to be said. I can certainly launch rockets etc no problem (fins being best friends now), made my first mun and back so far - but after the game crashing three times on me now (stock install, obviously), i think it's time to take off the rose tinted goggles and look at what we have realistically. Do i like it? I certainly do, and i will prolly not close the game (well.. voluntarily at least) for at least another couple of hours.

That being said: some things are really stupid and should've never gone live like that. Heatshields? I just came back from the mun, all i needed was three parachutes to land safely. I arrived with some fuel to spend at kerbin, fired retrograde until roughly 2500m/s, then fell straight into the atmosphere. Guess what: the nose-parachute acting as a drogechute is enough. It's actually all you need, my ablative shielding was still at 200/200 after landing. Meh.

If you take the re-entry out of the picture, all you really have is nerfed engines, some new parts (most of which i couldn't play with yet, so not commenting on those/the ressource system), a new aerodynamic model which makes planes fly easier and creating the need to put fins on your rocket - and that's about it.

It's not a bad release by far, but if somebody asks me: is 1.0 everything you wanted/expected? Sadly, no. It's not.

[Caelib]

I can't seem to find a reliable way of launching a basic rocket without it eventually just spinning out of control. Appreciate there's a new aerodynamic model, but I can't get the things to do reliable gravity turns, no matter how early or late I start and how gentle I take it. Even just pointing the rocket 45 degrees until you're in orbit seems hit and miss. We're talking nothing more than a capsule, a few of the tier 1 fuel tanks, and an engine.

Same. I have tried endless combinations of speed and gradual turns and I can't seem to find a way to get past 20km. I am all for a challenge, but I think this learning curve might turn off new players.

[ddenis]

Another thing that underwhelming me is that the fairings are massless. I just can't get why are they massless...

[m4inbrain]

Use AV-R8 Fins. Makes the aerodynamic model pretty much moot. And don't use SAS/deactivate it every now and then to get the wobble out of the rocket.

edit: @caelib

[Aerindel]

Probably since it would be hard to program mass for such a variable sized part?

[m4inbrain]

Fueltanks are variable in mass too, you know.

[Nobody_1707]

Well, someone who let the game play itself with KER, this is what you get without. You actually have to try, test and find out stuff by yourself, instead of letting a mod do everything for you and be like someone who's just watching a movie. A great experience, isn't it?

KER doesn't play the game for you, it just tells you what your DV and TWR are. Perhaps you were thinking of MechJeb?

[Aerindel]

yes, but not variable in size. The mass is just a function of their fuel, the mass of a fairing would have to be a function of its surface area, I'm not a programmer but that sounds a lot more difficult than just adjusting the mass based on fuel.

[rodion_herrera]

a new aerodynamic model which makes planes fly easier

Seriously? Do you really fly aircraft or SSTO's in KSP? Esp. in v1.0? I fly with a joystick, and frankly, it responds more like a REAL aircraft now, when flown with a joystick and rudder/throttle controls. It's not "easier" in the sense that everything is ho hum--there are things that make flying more complicated now, such as watching altitude and airspeed because the aircraft/SSTO behaves differently in different altitudes and speeds. If you think aerodynamics made aircraft and SSTO's "EASIER" now, I challenge you to get to orbit with a winged SSTO, and I tell you it's much more difficult now (which actually makes it a little more realistic).

[ddenis]

Probably since it would be hard to program mass for such a variable sized part?

The mass IS programmed, because it's displayed, fairings are just massless because... I have no idea why. You can see mass while building fairings, it's added in engineering report but not in flight.

Edited April 27, 2015 by ddenis