Poll: Should KSP be rolled back to 1.0.5 until 1.1.x bugs are fixed?

[m4v]

5 minutes ago, CliftonM said:

Ok.  If that's what you want. @HarvesteR.  Please explain to my friend here as to why Unity was decided as the best engine to run KSP with.

Don't twist my words, I didn't question their choice of engine.

[Enceos]

15 minutes ago, m4v said:

No. Take it to the guys that decided to release their game with a point version of a engine that was known to be unstable.

I doubt that it was known. KSP is the game the pushes limits of the engine to the levels the Unity devs never thought of. Squad filed numerous reports to Unity guys and they're working on fixing that, because KSP is still the most famous game which was ever created on their engine.

[m4v]

Just now, Enceos said:

I doubt that it was known.

you talk like you have never been in the bugtracker during the pre-release

[razark]

5 minutes ago, Enceos said:

I doubt that it was known.

Maybe they should have released the game to (some) users and had them test and report issues before release?

[Enceos]

Just now, m4v said:

you talk like you have never been in the bugtracker during the pre-release

I'm talking about the Unity version.

Unity admitted that it was unstable and tried to fix most of the bugs in 5.3.4

http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/5-3-4-released.393187/

Plus waiting for another engine update when so much work has been put into the game already is pointless.

[razark]

So Squad decided to release their game on what was known to be a buggy engine?

 

1 minute ago, Enceos said:

Plus waiting for another engine update when so much work has been put into the game already is pointless.

Sunk cost fallacy.  It doesn't matter how much effort went into polishing a turd if it's still a turd at the end.

[m4v]

5 minutes ago, Enceos said:

Plus waiting for another engine update when so much work has been put into the game already is pointless.

So lets instead ship a crash-prone product and let the users wait for an engine update.

[Enceos]

11 minutes ago, razark said:

So Squad decided to release their game on what was known to be a buggy engine?

Sunk cost fallacy.  It doesn't matter how much effort went into polishing a turd if it's still a turd at the end.

It was not known to be a buggy engine, the post I linked from Unity is from 22 March 2016. The efforts on moving the game to Unity 5 started in mid 2015.

When an engine is buggy workarounds is the way to go which Squad did to the extent of their abilities.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Enceos

[razark]

7 minutes ago, Enceos said:

It was not known to be a buggy engine, the post I linked from Unity is from 30 March 2016. The efforts on moving the game to Unity 5 started in mid 2015.

So...

They picked this version, didn't bother to find out how well it worked, and were unfortunate enough to have guessed wrong.  And for some reason, they were unable to find out, test, and were forced to release anyway because... a large wedge of cheese held a gun to their heads?

 

I shall rephrase: So Squad decided to release their game on what was known at the time they decided to release to be a buggy engine even though they had the ability to admit things were not working out as well as they had hoped?

 

7 minutes ago, Enceos said:

When an engine is buggy workarounds is the way to go which Squad did to the extent of their abilities.

Or delaying release until problems are fixed is also a possibility.

Edited May 29, 2016 by razark

[m4v]

1 minute ago, Enceos said:

It was not known to be a buggy engine, the post I linked from Unity is from 30 March 2016. The efforts on moving the game to Unity 5 started in mid 2015.

You're confusing the decision of switching from Unity4 to Unity5 with the decision of making a release with Unity 5.2.4f1. As pre-release has shown, the point version of Unity 5 that KSP 1.1 is using is buggy as hell, but Squad decided to ship it anyway, instead of waiting until Unity had it fixed.

[Enceos]

2 minutes ago, m4v said:

You're confusing the decision of switching from Unity4 to Unity5 with the decision of making a release with Unity 5.2.4f1. As pre-release has shown, the point version of Unity 5 that KSP 1.1 is using is buggy as hell, but Squad decided to ship it anyway, instead of waiting until Unity had it fixed.

"Waiting" may seem good on user side, but it is very bad on business side. Unity released its latest version only 9 days ago, though maybe Squad went on holidays because they waited for it.

[m4v]

19 minutes ago, Enceos said:

"Waiting" may seem good on user side, but it is very bad on business side.

Lets wait and see how good is going to be for business if they keep releasing crashy crap. The last release was just a symptom that Squad doesn't think QA is something to uphold, if that doesn't change then buggy releases are bound to continue.

19 minutes ago, Enceos said:

Unity released its latest version only 9 days ago, though maybe Squad went on holidays because they waited for it.

Is that so? and I thought that the vacations were because Squad almost burned out the developers of KSP with an unreasonable release deadline.

Edited May 29, 2016 by m4v

[Chris97b]

This is why I bought it on the KSP store and keep every stock version laying around just in case

[Overland]

1.1 gives good framerates with longer trains for me..its also added skid sound and exploding wheel sound in the rover wheel sound mods...so with a little modification. Im able to put an alarm system on the rear most wagon so I get an audible alarm if she starts to sway and risk derailing

Once I killed off the suspension which causes ALL problems with wheels.. Things are ok for me..im loving it

 

Shes a fussy beast though..crashes alot in the SPH but never outside on a run

 

Scrap mechanic and homebrew sandbox arnt going to replace KSP as my beloved land train simulator.  While im tempted to say "yet". I simply cant

 

Ive been with KSP since the early days..some updates have rendered it unplayable on my aging PCs.. But in the end its come good..

With KSP Becoming a part of my life somewhat with an engrained culture and story of its own.. I take the good with the bad .

 

Most if not all my favorate games are in or from early access..sometimes updates kill them too

But in the end im damn glad KSPs come as far as it has..

 

There aint no land trains or diesel electrics in orbiter sim.. And the other engineering sandboxes lack entire planets

 

So..it set me back... Cost alot of time and indeed a sense of real sadness and loss when I saw locomotives and wagons explode upon loading with so much force..wheels went into space when I loaded up 1.1+ from 1.04 

 

But slowly the tradition rebuilds and with every great achievement comes setbacks

But.. Its progress im happy with It

 

 

Edited May 29, 2016 by Overland

[samstarman5]

3 hours ago, steve_v said:

I'm just keeping my pitchfork nice and sharp for when <consults crystal ball> 1.1.3 doesn't fix the (probably Unity related) crashing... I would love to be proven wrong about this, but I'm not optimistic.
Pretty sure game engine instability is going to fall into category 3 and/or 4...

Because it isn't fixed yet? Or perhaps because the hyped performance improvements are, as far as I am concerned, irrelevant in light of the instability? Seriously, the game won't even start on some AMD graphics hardware.

You do realize much of Squad took a break from work for a while? While it may be over with with them back to work, expecting a fix now is rather unrealistic, as they aren't going to focus on just one thing just to throw a patch out.  Get over your self-entitledness and show some patience.

[T.A.P.O.R.]

Most of my crashes seem to be mod related, so I can't choose any of the above.

My 6 years old on the other hand, would like less explodey wheels for her pony space program.

She lets all the kerbals crash, but the ponies are sacred!

[Skorpychan]

No; you can just roll it back on Steam if you really want to.

Don't have it on Steam? Too bad you didn't think about the update system before buying.

Stability issues? Stop running it on a toaster with hundreds of mods.

[cantab]

6 hours ago, CliftonM said:

Ok.  If that's what you want. @HarvesteR.  Please explain to my friend here as to why Unity was decided as the best engine to run KSP with.

As I understand it, there wasn't much choice. Unreal at the time cost a bomb, it's because Unity became successful that Unreal Engine is now free or cheap. (And anyway from what I've read, Unreal could be even worse than Unity for KSP anyway). A custom engine would have taken too long to make something to show off to the boss. What else was there available and affordable in 2011?

This, though, doesn't mean I don't hold Squad responsible for any issues in KSP that they might blame on Unity. It might have been the least bad option, but Squad still chose it, and I'm still Squad's customer not Unity's customer!

Edited May 29, 2016 by cantab

[Green Baron]

Option 4. Being on linux, ksp 1.1 was a huge setback compared to 1.0.5. I can wait. Being not on steam i can still play all versions since 0.23 if i want to. Smarmy git.

:-)

[The_Rocketeer]

8 hours ago, CliftonM said:

The only time a software rollback should ever be considered if it:

1. Has major security issues (does not apply to KSP)
2. Is so unstable that the majority of the user base cannot use it (1.1 is not at this level)
3. Is unlikely to be successfully fixed (1.1 bugs can be fixed, it's just going to take time
4. It can't be resolved with a simple bug fix

I really wish there was an "absolutely not" option on the poll.  If there was, that's what I would have chosen.

Now let's lower our pitchforks and get on with life.  Maybe instead of asking about rolling back to 1.0.5, we can spend the time trying to figure out how to replicate bugs?

Why are we even still talking about this?  I'd expect this a few weeks ago, but not anymore.  Software isn't easy.  Some of these bugs occur only on specific machines, and with specific mods, etc.  1.1 is released, and that's it.  End of story.  Just wait patiently like everyone else for 1.1.3.

There is an 'absolutely not' option, it's option 2.

This thread isn't about pitchforks at all, it's about checking the pulse of the community and gathering a little data. Check my other recent posts (from my profile) if you're in any doubt about this.

We're still talking about it because it's contentious and still affecting people. This thread is not trying to leverage anything, it's just a poll to find out where people stand on the question. Given the spread of answers (at time of writing 7% for roll-back, 27% for making 1.0.5 available to affected players, only 42% content with 1.1.x), surely even you can see that a not-insignificant minority are in favour of a roll-back, even if that isn't an option.

TO EVERYBODY POSTING ON THIS THREAD

Please try to refrain from belittling one another and derailing the thread. This is a contentious issue and your views are your own, not everybody is going to agree with you. I don't think it serves any purpose to get the thread locked for being too inflamatory.

Please just vote and let the poll speak for itself.

[pasukaru76]

Well, as a Mac user, I have to say 1.1.2 works better than any previous version of KSP.

[sormi]

Is the Previous Stable Release of Steam BETA tab referring to 1.0.5? I really would like to roll back.

[The_Rocketeer]

Just now, sormi said:

Is the Previous Stable Release of Steam BETA tab referring to 1.0.5? I really would like to roll back.

Yes it is, at least for now. I'm not sure who decides when a release becomes 'stable' for the purposes of this, so I recommend changing the name of the install folder or turning off auto-updates if you want to keep 1.0.5 beyond the next update.

[Pecan]

I have a couple of installations each of 1.0.5 and 1.1.2 plus one of the demo.  Should there be a reason to dig them out I also have zip files of every version since 0.22 (when I first bought it), the freely-available early versions and the 0.18 demo.

Yes, I stayed with 1.0.5 for a while to finish things up but I haven't really had any problems with 1.1.x so don't go back to it any more.

[Guest]

12 hours ago, m4v said:

Don't twist my words, I didn't question their choice of engine.

My apologies, I didn't see that you edited it to explain that it was the version of the engine. As a developer who has used Unity 5.2, I completely agree with that.