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

[EliasDanger]

Where's the "I love KSP 1.1.x. I love KSP 64bit. I love Squad for making a great game. And even if it was never updated again, I still love it and Squad for making it, bugs and all." ? Cuz that's the option I would pick.

[The_Rocketeer]

In response to requests for additional response options, adding them at this point would skew the results since those who have already voted would not have been allowed those choices. This is more-or-less the nature of polls, you pick the 'best fit' for you.

Try to keep in mind this is a question about a hypothetical roll-back, not about what you think of KSP in general. There are plenty of other ways to express that (e.g. in your own new thread for the exclusive purpose).

[Red Iron Crown]

5 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

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.

The poll options are a bit biased, but even so your conclusions are a bit fallacious. Only 7% of the poll respondents can confidently be said to be unsatisfied with 1.1, 69% are playing 1.1, and 23% responded "I can have both options if I want" which tells us nothing about which they're playing (and really everyone should have selected this option, as everyone has the option to use either afaik).

I'm really not sure what you're hoping to accomplish with this poll. A rollback would be an absolute disaster; think of modders having to support 1.1 that's still out there as well as 1.0.5 becoming the official version again, think of new users who can't use Win64 or the better performance of 1.1 (or even find out if it works well for them). It's not remotely feasible.

They can't unring the bell and take back 1.1 after it's already been released. The only sensible, practical thing to do is to make 1.0.5 available to everyone in case they have significant issues with 1.1, which is what is being done.

[EliasDanger]

2 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

The poll options are a bit biased...

I'm really not sure what you're hoping to accomplish with this poll.

Thank you, my feelings exactly.

[Renegrade]

8 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

The poll options are a bit biased, but even so your conclusions are a bit fallacious. Only 7% of the poll respondents can confidently be said to be unsatisfied with 1.1, 69% are playing 1.1, and 23% responded "I can have both options if I want" which tells us nothing about which they're playing (and really everyone should have selected this option, as everyone has the option to use either afaik).

I agree; I voted for the "both versions should be available" (third option in other words), but I'm "satisfied" with, and playing, 1.1.2.

Not to say it doesn't need a load of bugfixing and stuff, but I'm not likely to go back to 1.0.5 any time soon.

 

[The_Rocketeer]

18 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

The poll options are a bit biased, but even so your conclusions are a bit fallacious. Only 7% of the poll respondents can confidently be said to be unsatisfied with 1.1, 69% are playing 1.1, and 23% responded "I can have both options if I want" which tells us nothing about which they're playing (and really everyone should have selected this option, as everyone has the option to use either afaik).

I'm really not sure what you're hoping to accomplish with this poll. A rollback would be an absolute disaster; think of modders having to support 1.1 that's still out there as well as 1.0.5 becoming the official version again, think of new users who can't use Win64 or the better performance of 1.1 (or even find out if it works well for them). It's not remotely feasible.

They can't unring the bell and take back 1.1 after it's already been released. The only sensible, practical thing to do is to make 1.0.5 available to everyone in case they have significant issues with 1.1, which is what is being done.

@Red Iron Crown:

Let me first say that I have made and continue to make a number of posts over the last week or so defending the current situation regarding KSP's current release and ongoing development that I can only suppose you have not taken the time to look up (I have actually suggested that people with such concerns about hidden agendas do precisely that). In general my view is that the situation is what it is, continuing to complain around the forums achieves nothing of itself, and that there are other more constructive outlets for people's concerns. This post is a case in point.

In addition:

1. I am not a committed pollster, I am just a guy in the community who has been reading the forums a lot for the last month and wondered how many people out there actually are mad enough about 1.1.x to want 1.0.5 back pronto. If the options I've provided are biased, I'm suprised that the responses have been so diverse - in fact, I take the spread of responses as a good sign that actually I pitched the options about right.

2. As I pointed out after your earlier post, I think there are many members of this community who are totally unaware of their option to return to 1.0.5 (again, I think responses to this poll alone indicate that). In fact, I've already responded to one member who wanted to know how to do it in Steam (which is actually the only way even I was aware of until your posts, and even that I had only discovered because I went to the trouble of checking on my own system before creating the poll).

3. The only thing I'm trying to accomplish with this poll is to find out what proportion of those who bother to respond to the poll would prefer 1.0.5 to 1.1.x right now. I actually naively thought this was what polls were for, rather than as some sort of pseudo-political support-hedging tool. This is never going to be a perfect sample of the entire community, but the poll doesn't have to be perfectly scientific for its results to be meaningful and interesting.

4. I am well aware that a roll-back is probably totally unfeasible. That isn't the point. I hope by now that's clear.

5. I actually haven't drawn conclusions and frankly don't really intend to draw public conclusions at all, I was simply defending the poll as such. The question is obviously relevant and worth consideration if nearly 10% of responders find 1.1.x unacceptable as an advancement on 1.0.5, purely as a very subjective, qualitative source of vaguely interesting if totally useless data. This is still far more useful to those with the power to do anything at all about the development/release process, if so compelled, than the smattering of complaints from those 10%-or-less (or indeed -more, given time) spread across the forums.

Edited May 29, 2016 by The_Rocketeer

[Van Disaster]

I think you'll find if you try 1.0.5 again you'll find it's no less buggy...

[Red Iron Crown]

4 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

1. I am not a committed pollster, I am just a guy in the community who has been reading the forums a lot for the last month and wondered how many people out there actually are mad enough about 1.1.x to want 1.0.5 back pronto. If the options I've provided are biased, I'm suprised that the responses have been so diverse - in fact, I take the spread of responses as a good sign that actually I pitched the options about right.

That is not the question the poll is asking. "Do you prefer 1.0.5 over 1.1?" is a totally different question from "Should 1.1 be withdrawn and 1.0.5 be made the current version again?"

Quote

2. As I pointed out after your earlier post, I think there are many members of this community who are totally unaware of their option to return to 1.0.5 (again, I think responses to this poll alone indicate that). In fact, I've already responded to one member who wanted to know how to do it in Steam (which is actually the only way even I was aware of until your posts, and even that I had only discovered because I went to the trouble of checking on my own system before creating the poll).

It's not clear to me how a poll is helpful with that, and suggesting that a rollback would be desirable implies that 1.0.5 is no longer available.

Quote

3. The only thing I'm trying to accomplish with this poll is to find out what proportion of those who bother to respond to the poll would prefer 1.0.5 to 1.1.x right now. I actually naively thought this was what polls were for, rather than as some sort of pseudo-political support-hedging tool. This is never going to be a perfect sample of the entire community, but the poll doesn't have to be perfectly scientific for its results to be meaningful and interesting.

Emphasis mine. Again, this is not the question the poll is asking.

Quote

4. I am well aware that a roll-back is probably totally unfeasible. That isn't the point. I hope by now that's clear.

So why bother asking about something that is borderline impossible?

[The_Rocketeer]

@Red Iron Crown

Rest assured, the question the poll is asking is the question I wanted to ask when I created the poll. If I have expressed myself badly in justifying that, mea culpa. If you think the poll would be better if it asked a different question with different answers, please create your own superior poll (I think this is more-or-less what @5thHorseman has already done, and if I in any way inspired that then good for me).

At the time of creating the poll, as I've already acknowledged, it was my understanding (and I believe the understanding of many) that 1.0.5 was not universally still available. It's not up to me to help with that situation with this poll. I don't see how bringing it to light is making it any worse.

I'm not suggesting that a roll-back would be desirable, I'm suggesting that if it is desirable to responders, they should choose option 1 and if it isn't they can choose another option. Why are you reading an agenda into this poll when there isn't one?

People ask about things that are impossible all the time. The point isn't to decide what's going to happen, it's to find out how many people feel a certain way about what has happened.

I'm feeling a little beleaguered here. Nobody is under any compulsion to respond to this poll or any other. If you don't like the answers I've proposed, feel free not to answer or to write a post about it, but I'm not going to change the question or options just because it doesn't satisfy individual needs for individual expression. That's not how polls work.

[qromodynmc]

Nah, 1.1.2 works great for me, No regular crash, or game breaking bugs, landing gears works good.

[cantab]

If Squad felt it necessary to revert to Unity 4 and the KSP 1.0.5 line, they absolutely could. I don't think that's actually called for and I'm 99 point many nines certain it won't happen, but if Squad really wanted to then it's in no way impossible.

[The_Rocketeer]

On consideration of remarks of @Red Iron Crown and others I have created a new poll thread.

I leave the closure of this poll thread to moderator discretion.

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

11 hours ago, cantab said:

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!

Boy am I glad it's not on Unreal.

Every game I've ever played in that engine has made me nauseated after just a couple of minutes.

I much prefer a few bugs when the other option is losing my lunch!

Edited May 29, 2016 by T.A.P.O.R.

[Pecan]

Just now, T.A.P.O.R. said:

...I much prefer a few bugs when the other option is losing my lunch!

Wimp!  What else is a space simulator for *joke*

Seriously - too few people realise what a huge decision the basic engine means for the developers or how hard it is to change, let alone create, one.

[autumnalequinox]

On 5/29/2016 at 10:50 PM, cantab said:

<snip>

I feel confident in saying that it will be a long time before 1.1.x random crashes waste more of my life than 1.0.x godawful performance already has.

This.

On 5/29/2016 at 7:43 PM, Pecan said:

Seriously - too few people realise what a huge decision the basic engine means for the developers or how hard it is to change, let alone create, one.

Yea I already went through the U4 to U5 upgrade with my other fav game 7 days to Die.  It was rough for about two versions but now the game is gorgeous and smooth like butter goodness (and very little physics lag).

[steve_v]

22 hours ago, samstarman5 said:

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.

Crashing to desktop is a critical issue. Critical issues warrant single-issue patches. Again, 1.0.5 == zero crashes, ever. 1.1 may well be a 200% performance improvement, but on GNU/Linux it's also an ∞% stability decrease.
Stability > performance > features.

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

9 hours ago, Pecan said:

Wimp!  What else is a space simulator for *joke*

Am too! (Funny because true)

However, now that you put it that way, I demand Unreal and true immersion!

Maybe if I kept playing those games for days on end, my nausea would have been conquered?!?

just like space sickness/madness, right?

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I voted " No, 1.1.x is progress and while it's imperfect I can live with it (for now). "

But I think 1.1.2 is fairly stable and bug-free.

[Geschosskopf]

@The_Rocketeer

This poll has a fundamental flaw....  If you deleted all your 1.0.5 mods when 1.1 came out, then you're pretty much stuck with 1.1.2.  Mods and modders have moved on, and most of them ain't gonna support 2 versions of their mods.  A few have left their 1.0.5 versions available but no longer support them, and they're a minority anyway.

1.1.2 is as stable for me as any previous version of KSP.  More stable, in fact, considering I've got it loaded down with scads of huge mods that I wouldn't have dared to use individually, let alone collectively, in any previous version, and it still gets smooth FPS.  I have seen a number of other polls that show only a small percentage of users are having crash issues with 1.1.2.  Therefore, I can only conclude that those folks' problems are of their own making, or otherwise related to their own systems, and not the fault of 1.1.2.  While I sympathize with them, I am getting rather tired of them blaming 1.1.2 for their own problems.

That said, while 1.1.2 is very stable for me, I don't regard it as a playable version due to its orbital decay problem.  I can live with or work around its issues with wheels and legs, but orbital decay kills anything except short-term missions in isolation.   You can't leave stuff parked in orbit for any length of time.  For this reason, I haven't started a real game in 1.1.2.  But hopefully 1.1.3 will be here soon and return the orbital decay issue to its previous state.

Of course, anything in 1.1.3 will likely be blown away by 1.2's unwanted stock communications system, so I doubt I'll do a real game with 1.1.3, either.

But regardless, the path is forward.  I'm resigned to waiting on 1.2 before I make any substantial space empire.  But that's OK.  In the meantime, I'm learning kOS, writing configs for Custom Asteroids, and trying my hand and building new star systems with Kopernicus.  So even though I'm not really playing KSP right now, I'm still messing with it quite a lot.  I suggest you do the same.

[Slam_Jones]

One thing I can tell for sure after reading this thread: justified or not, people just LOVE to complain.

 

Personally, I chose "No, 1.1.x is progress and while it's imperfect I can live with it (for now)," however

On 5/29/2016 at 10:14 AM, EliasDanger said:

Where's the "I love KSP 1.1.x. I love KSP 64bit. I love Squad for making a great game. And even if it was never updated again, I still love it and Squad for making it, bugs and all." ? Cuz that's the option I would pick.

This is what I woulda picked were it there.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Slam_Jones

[The_Rocketeer]

39 minutes ago, Geschosskopf said:

@The_Rocketeer

This poll has a fundamental flaw....

*snip*

I have seen a number of other polls that show only a small percentage of users are having crash issues with 1.1.2.  Therefore, I can only conclude that those folks' problems are of their own making, or otherwise related to their own systems, and not the fault of 1.1.2.  While I sympathize with them, I am getting rather tired of them blaming 1.1.2 for their own problems.

*snip*

So even though I'm not really playing KSP right now, I'm still messing with it quite a lot.  I suggest you do the same.

@Geschosskopf I get the impression you didn't read your way thru the thread before posting (to be fair it is starting to get a bit long now). There's no issue with mods, because this poll isn't doing anything except asking a question. There's no prospect of a rollback as far as I know, and never has been. (Although, if the official version was once again 1.0.5, I doubt it would take modders long to also roll-back. )

The poll is flawed, but not for the reasons you suggest. The poll is just that - a poll. In no way does it suggest that a roll-back is a good idea, desirable, likely or even possible. It's just a question with set answers that people can choose to identify with or not. If you don't identify with any of them, you don't need to answer it. If you do see your views reflected in one of the answers, feel equally free to tick a box. As I've commented elsewhere, polls are totally unwieldy as support-hedging or opinion-influencing tools, because the normalised outcome (from all the reasonable folk out there) totally overwhelms any nuance of the question and options.

I'm aware of two other polls on similar/related subjects, one of which is also mine, and a direct follow-up of this poll:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/140782-poll-ksp-since-11/&do=findComment&comment=2607218

The real flaw in this poll (the rollback one) is bias, specifically bias against 1.1.x. It was unintentional (see various posts upstream, and in the other poll), but it actually doesn't harm the outcome of this poll very much, because in truth I was really only interested in seeing how many people were prepared to answer with option 1, so a little subtle encouragement makes little difference. All the other options are moot, really, except as a 'proportion of people who didn't choose option 1'.

So while I hope your advice is kindly intentioned, I think you're basing it on little more than presumption and possibly even prejudice (for which I entirely forgive you! ). In many other recent posts of mine I've commented on the many respects in which I'm enjoying KSP. My answers to all 3 polls have put me firmly in the '1.1.x is fine, devs are fine, everything is fine' camp.

***

Edit: FWIW, while it does seem the majority/greatest minority is carrying on without serious difficulty, there are certainly significant minorities badly affected by bugs - this is reflected in all 3 polls. I don't think it's reasonable to blame the victims for their own troubles.

Honestly, I'm mostly just glad that more people haven't been affected.

Edited May 31, 2016 by The_Rocketeer

[herbal space program]

I actually like the air in 1.1.2 quite a bit better than 1.0.5. Things are possible again that were not in 1.0.5, like getting a Mk1 nuclear-powered SSTO on orbit with almost 6km/s deltaV left in the tank. Heck, I'm not even sure I want them to fix the bugs if it means they're going to nerf my planes again!

Edited June 1, 2016 by herbal space program

[Geschosskopf]

3 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

@Geschosskopf I get the impression you didn't read your way thru the thread before posting (to be fair it is starting to get a bit long now).

Naturally, I didn't read any of it.  This is a poll.  It is a direct question to each reader and asks for that reader's own honest opinions.  If I read what everybody else said before I replied, that would unavoidably influence my answer.  If you actually wanted a discussion, you shouldn't have posted a poll, but instead just floated the question out there and asked for discussion.

 

3 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

There's no issue with mods, because this poll isn't doing anything except asking a question. There's no prospect of a rollback as far as I know, and never has been. (Although, if the official version was once again 1.0.5, I doubt it would take modders long to also roll-back. )

Well, the question was asked as if you were trying to rally a torch-wielding mob to storm Castle Squadenstein.  If you're not doing that, then why even bother with a poll, especially one that asks for the patently impossible?

But if you have Steam, you DO have the option to go back to 1.0.5, or so I'm told.  I haven't tried because I have no interest in playing 1.0.5 again.

 

3 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

Edit: FWIW, while it does seem the majority/greatest minority is carrying on without serious difficulty, there are certainly significant minorities badly affected by bugs - this is reflected in all 3 polls. I don't think it's reasonable to blame the victims for their own troubles.

I'm not blaming the victims for their own problems, I'm blaming them for  blaming their problems on Squad when the relatively small number of folks with stability problems inescapably points to the conclusion that it's something on their end, not Squad's.  As if Squad can possibly envision, let alone test, every one of the nearly infinite number of hardware and software combinations out there spread over multiple operating systems.

[The_Rocketeer]

@Geschosskopf you're dead right about discussions. I didn't want a discussion, I wanted data. But people like you, for various reasons, wanted to talk about and criticise my poll. Naturally the only polite thing to do was to discuss it with them.

I don't think your 'torch-wielding mob' remark really credits further discussion. If my reasons for saying so still aren't clear to you, I can only recommend you read more widely the posts above. I'm certainly not going to waste my time quoting myself, you don't even really need to go further back than this very page.

The number of folks with stability problems actually isn't 'relatively small'. Only half (52.81% of 178 responders) in my other poll have said they were gaming on 1.1.x 'without frequent bug-related issues', and some of them have even suggested that that was possibly due to modifying their own behaviour to avoid problems. There's just no evidence for what you're saying about individual systems at all, if there was we'd be looking at 1 or 2 in the entire community, not half of it.

I genuinely am a moderate about all this, but I really can't stand bigotry. When the game doesn't work properly, people understandably get upset. Don't throw that back in their faces saying it's their own fault when the game was working alright before the update and now isn't. The game was working adequately before, then got updated, then started exhibiting gamebreaking bugs: that's not individual software/hardware issues, that's a buggy update. There really isn't any doubt or debate to be had about that.

Edited June 1, 2016 by The_Rocketeer

[Gargamel]

Rollback?  What for?   Just use the previous install you have in another folder.   You do have the previous version zip files right?

 

Oh...... steam players.... gotcha.

 

I still have a functioning .24 version running.