To those who loved alpha and/or beta KSP and say that v1.x.x doesn't feel "right"

[rodion_herrera]

I direct this query to those who loved alpha and/or beta KSP and say that v1.x.x doesn't feel "right". But before I ask the question, let me state this: Some obviously enjoyed their time in the Alpha or Beta versions of KSP, which is why when v1.x.x came out, they felt shortchanged somehow by all the changes and new stuff found in update, esp. in aerodynamics, heating etc.

So my question is, what do you actually LIKE about v1.x.x, that you feel should ONLY be in v1.x.x (and not include the stuff you don't like about it)? The reason I ask this is:

a) If you don't like a MAJORITY of the new stuff in v1.x.x, what's preventing you from reverting back to v0.90.0 or earlier?

If you don't want to revert because you DO like some of the new features found in v1.x.x, then would it be possible to find mods for v0.90.00 or earlier, that would mimic the new stuff you like in v1.x.x? If this is possible, you don't see any POSITIVE thing at all to this move? You do not see it as a solution to your problem?

I think by either going the A or B route, the people who are complaining that v1.x.x is a "bad" update have no reason to really complain at all, unless otherwise, all they really want is to "make some noise" to somehow force the majority to think that "Hey, the way WE play KSP is what EVERYONE else should be playing, because it is the RIGHT WAY or implementation!" and thus fantasize to force Squad to submit to how they envision v1.x.x of KSP SHOULD be like.

Edited May 4, 2015 by rodion_herrera

[Oksbad]

So you're saying that people who do not like the current version of KSP should not complain, but resign themselves to playing an old version, thus cutting themselves off from updates, bugfixes etc. Not to mention cutting themselves off from the mods you claim as a solution, as all developers I'm aware of develop for the most recent build of the game.

I'm sorry, that's not even remotely reasonable.

Besides you're making the complaints sound so insidious ("making noise", "force squad"). Essentially, they are giving feedback about a failings in a product that they like. What exactly is wrong about that?

[rodion_herrera]

So you're saying that people who do not like the current version of KSP should not complain, but resign themselves to playing an old version, thus cutting themselves off from updates, bugfixes etc. Not to mention cutting themselves off from the mods you claim as a solution, as all developers I'm aware of develop for the most recent build of the game.

I'm sorry, that's not even remotely reasonable.

Besides you're making the complaints sound so insidious ("making noise", "force squad"). Essentially, they are giving feedback about a failings in a product that they like. What exactly is wrong about that?

There are those who are making legit complaints and I am not referring to them, because I too believe in good feedback mechanisms. I'm referring to those who are going slightly overboard at their comments and almost even using ad hominem remarks directed at the Squad staff. I don't understand what you mean by "cutting themselves off from mods" when in fact that was the essence of the suggestion--to USE mods to make 0.90.0 or earlier HAVE features that makes it feel like v1.x.x, because after all, a large portion of those who complain in this manner, also are fond of saying "This mod is better" or "that mod actually implements this better than Squad does."

- - - Updated - - -

To give an example, those who make legit complaints or offer suggestions to problem issues, do it in the PROPER Forum area, and NOT in the General KSP Discussion, and I believe they do it, because they know that the General area tends to get more readers, and they hope to gather momentum for their complaint (perhaps to make it seem "a pressing issue") by making sure that most people get to see it and not tucked in some suggestions corner.

The immediate type of response you gave to my post, itself, is a typical example of why this is an issue. You mean to tell me you do not even see a shred of positivity in my post, when I am actually offering a solution (and it is a solution that WILL work if only to preserve fun and enjoyment in PLAYING KSP, rather than the fun and enjoying of "HAH, see? Squad realized I was right, so they are finally listening to my rant and seeing WHY my suggestion is right!" kind of pleasure) to solve certain woes?

Edited May 4, 2015 by rodion_herrera

[OrbitusII]

1.0 has brought huge changes to the way aircraft work, so we're bound to see some complaints about the changes. 1.0.2 brought even more changes, bringing more tension to an already-stressed situation. We're going to see complaints for a while, but once people start to get used to the new aerodynamics they'll die down. If we start offering solutions, rather than griping about the people who are upset with the changes, it's bound to get better much faster.

My advice (for everyone) is to buck up and figure things out. SSTOs aren't impossible, Squad doesn't hate aircraft, and we're only upset because we don't like change.

[Alshain]

I think I'm seeing the most complaints about the change between 1.0 and 1.0.2. I think they feel like Squad dangled a great aero system in front of them and then almost reverted it because 1.0.2 is more "soupy". Personally, I think 1.0.2 is closer to 1.0 than 0.90, but I can kinda/sorta see where they are coming from. I'm seeing less complaints about the new aero package in 1.0 because they like 0.90.

[Renegrade]

Personally, I think 1.0.2 is closer to 1.0 than 0.90, but I can kinda/sorta see where they are coming from.

Yeah, 1.0.2 is definitely more like 1.0 than 0.90. I'm just concerned that the aero is going in the wrong direction though (possibly - thanks to packing, I didn't have much time to play with 1.0).

Overall though, I'd say that 1.0.1/2 has brought KSP from 70% overall (in 1.0) to maybe 75%. It's good, getting better, based on a really solid concept, but could use improvement still. If they stabbed some of those nasty bugs in the face (like the heating gauge memory leak), that would go from "maybe 75" to "definitely 75, maybe 76-77.."

[Oksbad]

There are those who are making legit complaints and I am not referring to them, because I too believe in good feedback mechanisms. I'm referring to those who are going slightly overboard at their comments and almost even using ad hominem remarks directed at the Squad staff. I don't understand what you mean by "cutting themselves off from mods" when in fact that was the essence of the suggestion--to USE mods to make 0.90.0 or earlier HAVE features that makes it feel like v1.x.x, because after all, a large portion of those who complain in this manner, also are fond of saying "This mod is better" or "that mod actually implements this better than Squad does."

- - - Updated - - -

To give an example, those who make legit complaints or offer suggestions to problem issues, do it in the PROPER Forum area, and NOT in the General KSP Discussion, and I believe they do it, because they know that the General area tends to get more readers, and they hope to gather momentum for their complaint (perhaps to make it seem "a pressing issue") by making sure that most people get to see it and not tucked in some suggestions corner.

The immediate type of response you gave to my post, itself, is a typical example of why this is an issue. You mean to tell me you do not even see a shred of positivity in my post, when I am actually offering a solution (and it is a solution that WILL work if only to preserve fun and enjoyment in PLAYING KSP, rather than the fun and enjoying of "HAH, see? Squad realized I was right, so they are finally listening to my rant and seeing WHY my suggestion is right!" kind of pleasure) to solve certain woes?

Come on, there's nothing in your original post that suggests you're targeting a subset of complainers. It's full of massive generalizations.

What positiveness? Your "solution" is to make complainers use an outdated version of the game. What would that accomplish beyond splitting the community? First off, most complaints are not because 0.90 was inherently superior, but because the release version had promising new features (heating, new aero etc.) but the execution was in their eyes botched. People gave beta versions more leeway because that were explicitly beta versions and thus tolerated flaws they wouldn't in a full release. As for "use mods", that's a good idea, but if a person believes a mod makes for better game play for most people than stock, why shouldn't they recommend that the change be made in vanilla?

You also accuse the people who are complaining of trying to make a point and trying to force their vision on the game, instead of simply trying to give feedback to improve the game. The fact that you disagree with their feedback doesn't make them villains trying to devilishly take control of Squad for their own ends.

[LordFerret]

There are those who are making legit complaints and I am not referring to them, because I too believe in good feedback mechanisms. I'm referring to those who are going slightly overboard at their comments and almost even using ad hominem remarks directed at the Squad staff.

Likewise. And I'm sure the Devs appreciate constructive feedback ..... note I say constructive. Constructive can be both positive and negative.

I'm chuckling at all of this, all these posts as such, because had there been no Beta or early releases you'd not know the difference and would be very happy just to have a new game to play with.

[Roflcopterkklol]

I direct this query to those who loved alpha and/or beta KSP and say that v1.x.x doesn't feel "right". But before I ask the question, let me state this: Some obviously enjoyed their time in the Alpha or Beta versions of KSP, which is why when v1.x.x came out, they felt shortchanged somehow by all the changes and new stuff found in update, esp. in aerodynamics, heating etc.

So my question is, what do you actually LIKE about v1.x.x, that you feel should ONLY be in v1.x.x (and not include the stuff you don't like about it)? The reason I ask this is:

a) If you don't like a MAJORITY of the new stuff in v1.x.x, what's preventing you from reverting back to v0.90.0 or earlier?

If you don't want to revert because you DO like some of the new features found in v1.x.x, then would it be possible to find mods for v0.90.00 or earlier, that would mimic the new stuff you like in v1.x.x? If this is possible, you don't see any POSITIVE thing at all to this move? You do not see it as a solution to your problem?

I think by either going the A or B route, the people who are complaining that v1.x.x is a "bad" update have no reason to really complain at all, unless otherwise, all they really want is to "make some noise" to somehow force the majority to think that "Hey, the way WE play KSP is what EVERYONE else should be playing, because it is the RIGHT WAY or implementation!" and thus fantasize to force Squad to submit to how they envision v1.x.x of KSP SHOULD be like.

Only reason i don't download an old version is i share all of my craft.

[ajburges]

I've actually been scared away by 1.0.2. I knew I would have to redevelop my design and flight intuition with the new atmosphere, but it seems Squad is still trying to figure that out two. (disclaimer: I was against the .90 to 1.0 jump. I thought they should have figured atmo out before leaving beta)

I'm only interested in completely rebuilding that intuition once. My 10 attempts at a NuStock SSTO planes have not gone well (all suborbital after I stopped cooking Kerbals and the new readouts are poorly documented) and the community developed knowledge on design is scattered and fractured by differences in the 1.0.X versions.

In summary changes this radical should be sorted out in beta. Not as you leave, and certainly not as a hot-fix.

[Geschosskopf]

So my question is, what do you actually LIKE about v1.x.x, that you feel should ONLY be in v1.x.x (and not include the stuff you don't like about it)?

A or B doesn't matter to me because ModuleManager

Things I like about 1.0.x:

* Service bays.

* Ore stuff.

* Stock procedural fairings.

Things I'm meh about in 1.0.x

* Aerodynamics: I've used FAR or NEAR most of the time I've played KSP so I already know how to deal with this.

* Re-entry Issues: See above.

* Female Kerbals: To me, Kerbals are all sexless fungi. So now we've got 2 species of them.

Things I don't like about 1.0.x

* The entire class system for Kerbals and everything to do with it, especially including how KXP is scored. True, this hasn't changed since before 1.0, but the obvious faults in the system should have been taken care of long since.

* The totally unrealistic heat model, which has more massive things heating up the quickest (but some work with ModuleManager makes this a non-issue).

* The removal of most science awards for contracts

* The continued spamming of unremunerative contracts when well into the game.

* The re-nerfing of ion engines. In 0.90, they were actually fun to use. Now they're back to being toys for masochists to abuse themselves with.

* The memory leaks leading to erratic game behavior and ultimately crashes

* Changing the EVA command "board capsule" from F to B, and making F be "clamber" when there's a choice. This has already destroyed more of my spacecraft than the Kraken ever has.

[Van Disaster]

The ridiculous heat system. I don't care about the aero because I've used FAR since a month after I got 0.18 and have no intention of stopping, and I've never liked any of the career game at all, so the rest of it - including the stock air changes - are just "meh".

I reckon stock air could be a reasonable arcade-game-level model with some work, but as it is even the 1.0 version feels soupy if you try and maneuver.

The DX11 improvements I like.

[Curiosity7907]

For these reasons I had played KSP 0.13.2 - 0.90 for many months I hate 1.0. At April 2015 when 1.0 was released I hated 1.0 show much that for 2 months I started playing another game called minecraft.

Then later I returned back to KSP. Now I am Still playing in 0.90.

 

 

[Champ]

5 hours ago, Curiosity7907 said:

For these reasons I had played KSP 0.13.2 - 0.90 for many months I hate 1.0. At April 2015 when 1.0 was released I hated 1.0 show much that for 2 months I started playing another game called minecraft.

Then later I returned back to KSP. Now I am Still playing in 0.90.

 

 

This was very interesting... I am glad you necro'ed this thread for that.

[luizopiloto]

the only problem I have with 1.0.X are the fact the game lags way more with less parts count crafts... 0n 0.24.2 I was abble to fly 2000 parts ships with the same frame rate I have now with crafts that have only ~500 parts...

[Zoidos]

Reverting is not an option, no mod support, no bugfixes, no updates.

Still, I never understood all the moaning and whining when 1.0 came out. Yes, there were a few minor glitches (like the no-physics heatshield which caused the craft to turn prograde in atmo and could be solved by replacing 1 character in the persistent file) but overall I found 1.0 great. With the new atmo and re-entry it was almost like an entirely new game with new challenges. And SQUAD really put a lot of effort into listening to the community and fixing the problems.

My perception was that that there was a lot of unjustified whining about the version numbering (As a regular player I can't really see any impact of the version on the game itself) and many people were actively searching for reasons to complain just so they can say "I told you so". 

I personally loved the beta (I bought KSP shortly before 0.90 came out) but I loved 1.0 even more. And 1.0.5 improved the game even further for me. I love the new features and new parts and 1.0.5. has an overall more polished feel to it.

[Guest]

I think the fact that .90 is still available for download is a great example.  I personally love 1.x.x, but a lot was lost after .90.  Several wonderful mods are gone now.  I think that 1.1 with Unity 5 will fix a lot of the performance issues, and will make my experiences better.  I personally was able to play VERY heavily modded on my Core2Duo MacBook with no problem.  I now have crashing every 15 minutes on my brand new Mac Mini.  Again, I think much of this will be fixed in 1.1 due to the major improvements in Unity 5.  I think Unity 4 was never really meant to make something this huge.  Unity 5 on the other hand, is much better at doing these kind of things.  Also, many people are also used to .25 and .90 much more than they are 1.x.x.  It's kind of like iOS 7.  I hated it until I got used to it.

[pandaman]

I have never yet liked a new version less than the one it replaced.

I can understand that it can sometimes be difficult to adjust to some changes though, especially things like the aero system which purely affects how stuff flies, so things that worked before no longer do.  It just needs players to adjust, which some do better than others.

I see each new version as just another stage in KSPs evolution.  It has been said before, but in essence the 'release' status of 1.0 was no more than a sales gimmick, the reality has in practice been a continuation of the alpha/beta development system.  As much as it seems obvious that the v1.0 release was rushed to meet deadlines, I think the decision to release was essentially the right one, it just needed another few weeks to check balance etc. first.

[Kerbal01]

I like planes more post .90, rockets just seem boring by comparison. For reference I've been playing since 18.2. Each new version adds new stuff that is neat, but adds more to relearn. I end up using the same parts the same ways each version, so I get into a rut easily. I just started using the part tools that were released in 1.0 I think (place, offset, rotate) just yesterday. I'm an old kurmugen stuck in my ways. 

Edited December 30, 2015 by DarthVader

[Scarecrow]

The changes that work for me in the latest iteration of KSP are things like the improved aerodynamics so that aircraft flight is more realistic, and flights to orbit follow a more believable gravity turn.  What I am not so fond of is the change to the heating mechanics, as it is a lot easier now to lose a craft due to overheating.  I haven't tried aerobraking at another planet ever since my last trip to Jool caused my craft to insta-explode as soon as it touched the atmosphere.

[wumpus]

For various reasons, I tried the demo over the holidays.

One thing that hits you when you go from 1.0.5 to 0.18 (insert actual demo build here) is that while you lose a ton of polish and physics accuracy (not to mention planets and other goals), you gain a certain Kerbalness.  The demo build just has you, three kerbals, some rockets, and gravity.  This is pure KSP.

While I highly recommend the full version (even if you insist on 0.90, it certainly beats the demo and pays Squad's bills), I would suggest that the devs try firing it up occasionally and try to figure out what makes this game so great (however good later features are, looking at them obscures the forest for the trees).  One thing that I would recommend re-including from earlier editions would be explosive staging.  It might not really have a place in the modern career mode, but it so uniquely kerbal that I think it should remain in the game (and no, I really haven't looked into the heat model to see if it is even remotely an option, although if firing a rocket into a SRB isn't going to heat it up we have greater issues with the heat model than even mentioned above).

Edited December 30, 2015 by wumpus
got things to agree