Patch 1.4.3 to be released next week!

[Mr. Peabody]

All this discussion is well and good, but what in blue blazes is taking so long?!

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, The Dunatian said:

All this discussion is well and good, but what in blue blazes is taking so long?!

Fixing obscure bugs isn’t easy.  Would you rather they release another buggy patch, or take the time to find and fix the bugs properly?  You can’t have it both ways

[Serenity]

Someone randomly caused the discovery of another ''small'' bug to surface, its just 7% percent less or more drag when you use different skins in fuel tanks, which is the best we will proly never know  .

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by Boyster

[JAFO]

9 hours ago, Skystorm said:

The 10x number I came up with wasn't arbitrary.  It was because the logs were showing an impact speed that was about 10 times the actually vertical speed.  In my particular case, a little over 2.1 m/s touch down speed was registering as a 21+ m/s impact.

That is what is causing the landing legs to explode because all it takes for a 14 m/s crash tolerance is to land at 1.4 m/s or higher which is why they seem so sensitive.

In fact, I'm starting to think the notion that docking has become more difficult may not just be perception but rather related to the same bug.  If it is applying the same effect to all impacts, then a 1 m/s docking approach would seem like 10 m/s and would certainly explain bouncing off and flying away at a relatively high speed with respect to the approach speed.

 

Oh boy.. so in other words, this is looking very much like a misplaced-decimal-point bug.. <sigh>

Damn.. so easy to do, and at the same time, can be so hard to spot.

[scimas]

1 hour ago, Kerbart said:

Where were you 3 years ago? Squad seems to completely ignore most of us here in the community, but given the way you state that you demand bugfixes, and that you single-handedly paid for its development

I never said that, you clearly need to read again if you think that I did.

You have written the rest of the post from the perspective of a person who has been following the development of the game from its earliest stages. For a new customer, precisely what you're expecting when you release a DLC, I don't imagine the game looking bug-free, let alone polished. I have written my post partially from that customer's perspective. If you don't appreciate that viewpoint, I can't do anything to convince you otherwise.

6 hours ago, T1mo98 said:

Go to your Steam library, click on KSP, click on Properties, navigate to Betas and select 1.3.1 from the drop-down menu. So stop whining, since there is still a perfectly valid way to play without major bugs.

Squad is not a triple-AAA publisher and they do not have infinite resources and time. A game like KSP is inherently prone to bugs, and with every new release and new things added it gets more complicated.
I have a job in testing software and looking for bugs, and I can tell you it's not always as simple as you think it is. 
You don't care if it is software or furniture, but let me tell you, hitting a nail into a sofa to repair a broken armrest is a hell of a lot easier than trying to fix bugs in software, especially in something as big and complicated as a consumer videogame.

Also, how much are you exaggerating the problems? Yes, landing legs are a bit buggy and re-entry effects aren't that great now, but that hardly makes the game unplayable.
 

You definitely haven't read through the rest of the thread or you wouldn't have said some of those things. Again, as some others have said, the difficulty level of a job is not a customer's problem. I, or any other KSP player I imagine, wasn't sitting in squad's office with a gun pointed at them and forcing them to release an update, they did it on their own schedule. If it's hard to diagnose and fix bugs, take your time and fix them. Don't release an end product that is even worse than the previous version.

And just for fun, try using that "it's a hard job" excuse next time you have a university exam or something. "Professor, you have to give me an A for the answers I have written. I know that there are a lot of mistakes in there, but calculus is hard, you know? Give me an A now and I will have all of the mistakes corrected in 2 or 3 months."

[razark]

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Fixing obscure bugs isn’t easy.

Sure it is:

• Notice bug while testing something completely different.
• Immediately know where it is among thousands of lines of code.
• Change single line of bad code to good code.
• Compile.
• Ship.

That's a pretty simple process!

 

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

You can’t have it both ways

if (eat(cake) && have(cake)) then
	release(KSP);

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by razark

[DeliriumTrigger]

1 hour ago, scimas said:

You definitely haven't read through the rest of the thread or you wouldn't have said some of those things. Again, as some others have said, the difficulty level of a job is not a customer's problem. I, or any other KSP player I imagine, wasn't sitting in squad's office with a gun pointed at them and forcing them to release an update, they did it on their own schedule. If it's hard to diagnose and fix bugs, take your time and fix them. Don't release an end product that is even worse than the previous version.

This is at the core of what bothers me about this situation.  It's not that it's difficult for me to keep separate installs and work around the bugs.  It's that at this point we simply shouldn't have to.  This isn't an early access game and while new features are certainly appreciated they should not come at the cost of introducing new bugs to the already established product.  They should not be used as an excuse to hold up a major bug fix that is apparently so simple it can be solved with a text editor by users. 

The problem isn't in the addition of new features/bugs, but in the way they are released to the community at large to deal with until 'soon". 

There should to be a public beta/prerelease branch where new features/patches are released after the internal/closed testing.  The current way is absolutely unacceptable.  Expecting every customer - new, veteran, technical or not - to deal with bugs by applying mods, patches for those mods, and keeping multiple copies of KSP on their drives just to ensure that Squad's haphazard release procedures won't break a core gameplay loop is ridiculous.  It shows a complete lack of care, concern, or respect for the people who bought this game. 

I don't care if its hard.  Why should I care?    Why should I have to dig through forum threads and apply modulemanager patches?  What if that's hard for the customers? 

Squad wants to call their game released and sell DLC, why should they get to sell me a game under false pretenses and then treat me like someone who bought an early access product?  Woe is me, coding is difficult, well then put a big banner on your Steam page telling everyone that you're still in early access.  Sure, caveat emptor applies but presenting this as a complete product while pulling crap like this - crap that could be avoided - is being willfully misleading.

I'd just like to point out, again, that 1.4.2 was released on March 28th.  In three more days it will have been a month that the entire installed user base has been waiting for an official fix for exploding landing legs.

Edited April 25, 2018 by nanobug

[DeliriumTrigger]

35 minutes ago, razark said:

Sure it is:

• Notice bug while testing something completely different.
• Immediately know where it is among thousands of lines of code.
• Change single line of bad code to good code.
• Compile.
• Ship.

That's a pretty simple process!

No, it's even simpler:

• Implement future testing procedures that insulate the entire installed user base from the worst bugs by utilizing a public beta/prerelease testing phase after the internal testing is completed.  Then crap like this current situation has a much smaller likelihood of happening again.
• Then when you don't immediately know where a bug is among thousands of lines of code next time around, that's okay because it's a beta/prerelease and you haven't broken the stable release of your customer's already working game.
• When a bug breaks a core gameplay loop and someone in the forum manages to do your job for you and fix it with a text editor, maybe consider releasing an official patch with that bug fix to all the thousands of users whose game you broke,  instead of making people dig for the fix on their own or wait for it while you work on an airfield that isn't even in the game yet

Edited April 25, 2018 by nanobug

[razark]

5 minutes ago, nanobug said:

public beta/prerelease testing phase

It's been tried.  The result is an overload of complaints that the latest version does not work (and how DARE Squad release such a buggy product), and a dearth of usable bug reports.

 

7 minutes ago, nanobug said:

you haven't broken the stable release of your customer's already working game

Except that you end up with a bunch of people screaming that Squad broke their working game, because people don't realize that 1) backups are a thing, 2) "bug-testing" is not spelled "P L A Y I N G   M Y   S A V E   O N   A   T E S T   R E L E A S E", and 3) that testing on live data is bad and wrong.

Then Squad gets blamed for ruining people's lives.  Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

 

12 minutes ago, nanobug said:

someone in the forum manages to do your job for you and fix it with a text editor , maybe consider releasing an official patch with that bug fix

First, if Squad releases a patch to fix every minor bug separately , we're going to be looking at hundreds of patches per version, rather than four or five.  Then, when patch 1.4.53 comes out, people are going to whine that they have to wait for 1.4.54 to fix another minor problem.

Second, doing so would reduce each patch to nothing more than a minor mod, and I could have sworn I just saw someone say that "Expecting every customer to deal with bugs by applying mods... is ridiculous."

I just wish I could remember who said that.

[DeliriumTrigger]

27 minutes ago, razark said:

It's been tried.  The result is an overload of complaints that the latest version does not work (and how DARE Squad release such a buggy product), and a dearth of usable bug reports.

That doesn't even make sense.  An overload of complaints that the latest version does not work?  Want to point me in the direction of all those complaints for 1.3.1?  

Do you think releasing exploding landing legs to the entire installed userbase resulted in more or less noise?

Why is it my problem again?

27 minutes ago, razark said:

Except that you end up with a bunch of people screaming that Squad broke their working game, because people don't realize that 1) backups are a thing, 2) "bug-testing" is not spelled "P L A Y I N G   M Y   S A V E   O N   A   T E S T   R E L E A S E", and 3) that testing on live data is bad and wrong.

As opposed to a bunch of unwilling participants and Squad being subjected to the exact same thing anyway because Squad broke everyone's landing legs?

The bug tracker has logins.  Ban people who abuse it with useless bug reports if efforts to guide them toward utility prove fruitless.  This is a moderation issue, and again, not my problem.  Why should I care?

27 minutes ago, razark said:

First, if Squad releases a patch to fix every minor bug separately , we're going to be looking at hundreds of patches per version, rather than four or five.  Then, when patch 1.4.53 comes out, people are going to whine that they have to wait for 1.4.54 to fix another minor problem.

Second, doing so would reduce each patch to nothing more than a minor mod, and I could have sworn I just saw someone say that "Expecting every customer to deal with bugs by applying mods... is ridiculous."

I just wish I could remember who said that.

First, landing legs exploding isn't a minor bug.  This is a game where you explore other planets, and a huge part of that is landing on them.  

Second, you're trying to create a strawman of my argument and it's not appreciated.  I don't expect every bug in the game to be dealt with now or else I'm going to scream about it.  That's unreasonable and unrealistic.  What I'm complaining about is that my game that I paid for was working and  is broken now.  Not the airfields that aren't in it yet, but the product that I already have.  And instead of getting an official fix for the problem, a problem that can apparently be fixed well enough by a simple user applied patch that it was left to linger for a month, we're waiting around for it so that they can work out some final issues with content that isn't even in the game yet.

And if you can't respond to people without distorting what they said and throwing in a bunch of snark, maybe you should stop arguing and go take a walk, get some air or something.

Edited April 25, 2018 by nanobug

[steve_v]

13 minutes ago, razark said:

you end up with a bunch of people screaming that Squad broke their working game, because people don't realize that 1) backups are a thing, 2) "bug-testing" is not spelled "P L A Y I N G   M Y   S A V E   O N   A   T E S T   R E L E A S E", and 3) that testing on live data is bad and wrong.

At which point one can say "It's a prerelease, and you agreed to the disclaimer". Much like what you see in mod threads when someone asks for prerelease compatibility -  namely, "No".
There's no accounting for stupidity, and you get this kind of thing whatever you do.
At least with a beta period, somebody is going to spot the really brain-dead obvious oversights that otherwise "somehow" get through into hype-train .0 "OMG DLC"  releases. In a perfect world, Squad would have the resources to spot these internally... but apparently this is not the case.

 

21 minutes ago, razark said:

It's been tried.  The result is an overload of complaints that the latest version does not work

The only complaints that I saw wrt the last prerelease were: a) It was only available to steam users. and b) Several well-documented bugs that were flagged in the prerelease were still not fixed when Squad suddenly decided to close it and go for a full release.

[razark]

2 minutes ago, nanobug said:

That doesn't even make sense.

It really does.  How long have you been around?  Were you here for the 1.0 release?  This is nothing compared to what was gong on back then. 

 

You said Squad should release the fix that a forum user had posted.  You seemed to be saying that Squad should release that NOW and fix other stuff later.  I guess I read that wrong.

Now, if Squad did do so, then they would be releasing another patch shortly after to deal with other issues.  So, which is it?  Fix the stuff in one release, or get it right once and not release a bunch of sequential fixes?  (And then break something else, so you can sit around waiting for them to release a patch to fix what got broken by the last patch ?)

 

11 minutes ago, nanobug said:

maybe you should... go take a walk, get some air or something.

Sounds like a better plan than worrying too much about a video game.

 

 

4 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Several well-documented bugs that were flagged in the prerelease were still not fixed when Squad suddenly decided to close it and go for a full release.

While they did fix the Steam-only problem, I don't see, given their track record, why anyone would expect this to change.  When they released the much hyped and vaunted 1.0, you couldn't even re-enter a capsule with a parachute on it correctly.

[steve_v]

22 minutes ago, razark said:

When they released the much hyped and vaunted 1.0, you couldn't even re-enter a capsule with a parachute on it correctly.

Indeed. And many were shocked at the single beta release that preceded it. Many cried out "It's not ready for 1.0" . Squad has learned nothing, and continues with testing on live data. Our save data, to be precise.
Instead of "Here's a beta, it might fix stuff, but treat with caution. Okay, that didn't work, try this build" we get "Look, awesome new release! All ready to use (so buy our DLC)... Oops, we broke the toys again."  And again... And again.
Dunno 'bout you, but I'd have preferred the former - even if it did delay the grand 1.4.0 reveal. On release day, there'd be more people commenting on how fun the DLC is, and fewer focusing on the gamebreaking bugs that were also in the box.

Same goes for 1.0. Forgetting the parachutes is forgiveable in a beta release... It's pitchfork territory for a grand opening.

Just because Squad has done this in the past doesn't make it a good release model, and the "we can always patch the bugs later" defence only works if you patch them quickly - before too many get fed up with it and leave.

Edited April 25, 2018 by steve_v

[DeliriumTrigger]

50 minutes ago, razark said:

It really does.  How long have you been around?  Were you here for the 1.0 release?  This is nothing compared to what was gong on back then. 

So because things were bad at the moment they stopped being an early access game, that excuses them dropping the ball now?

This isn't an argument.  I wasn't here for the 1.0 release and I didn't buy the game in early access.  I don't care about how rough it was back then.  

50 minutes ago, razark said:

You said Squad should release the fix that a forum user had posted.  You seemed to be saying that Squad should release that NOW and fix other stuff later.  I guess I read that wrong.

Now, if Squad did do so, then they would be releasing another patch shortly after to deal with other issues.  So, which is it?  Fix the stuff in one release, or get it right once and not release a bunch of sequential fixes?  (And then break something else, so you can sit around waiting for them to release a patch to fix what got broken by the last patch ?)

I said that Squad should release an official fix for the landing leg bugs.  Apparently its such a minor issue that they are content to let it be solved by a modulemanager patch, so why shouldn't they release it?  

I can't tell if you're being willfully obtuse or disingenuous or what.  I'm trying to be charitable here.  Squad stated that the reason they're holding up the fixes for a bug that impacts a huge portion of the game is because they want to fix some problems with content that doesn't have a huge impact on the core gameplay and isn't even in the game yet.

Apparently this is okay with you, and that's fine, but can you really not understand why others might have a problem with that?  Why they might be inclined to come on the forums and voice their disapproval?  And your answer to that is... well you guys should have been here when the game first left early access.  How is that even relevant to now, when they've been bought out by a major publisher and are releasing DLC?

I think some people on this forum are so wrapped up in modding and how things were done "back in my day" that they forget that this is a product that is being sold as a finished, released game.  There are expectations that come with that.  Sitting on a fix for a freaking month so they can work on airfields isn't acceptable anymore. 

Maybe it is for you.   Maybe it is for modders who are too busy worrying about the impact rapid bug fixes would have on their own workload to care about anyone else.   Maybe you bought in before it left early access so you're fine with this state of affairs.

But some people don't want to spend money on half finished products and provide unpaid labor as QA testers.  And frankly I don't care about the impact on modders because I didn't buy mods, I bought a game that was presented as complete, not early access.  And it hasn't worked properly for a month.  The solution I get from Squad and the people who feel some kind of duty to vigorously defend anything they do is "keep backups, look in the forums for unofficial fixes.  Who cares about your time or your hard drive space because we're too busy trying to sell DLC to care about your problem."

I know Squad cares about this game and I know that they aren't doing this maliciously. I know software development is difficult.  But I refuse to accept that because it's hard, that means paying customers should just accept pee in the face because they tell us its rain.  I want them to do better.

As far as "fix things now and break something else" I already presented a solution to that.  And said solution would have certainly caught this stupid landing leg bug before it made it to the stable release branch, but according to you it's completely unworkable because reasons.

Edited April 25, 2018 by nanobug

[IanCanberra]

I work with large coding development. What we have developed is a test engine model that goes through all the various Use Cases to ensure that they function as expected. Can this not be done here? Also it would allow for code not to turn into more spaghetti but a modern solid coded application.

Just my thoughts

Edited April 25, 2018 by IanCanberra

[steve_v]

19 minutes ago, nanobug said:

we're too busy trying to sell DLC to care about your problem.

Honestly, this is about what I'm getting from all this as well.
"Bugs? What bugs... Look, more stuff for the DLC!"

*Half-baked releases to hit an arbitrary PR-dictated DLC launch date are bad.
*Half-baked patches focusing on DLC content and introducing regressions in the base game are bad.
*Delayed half-baked patches focusing on DLC content while withholding fixes for regressions in the base game are worse.

@SQUAD Please stop doing these things and make sure the game we paid for continues to work properly. Introducing additional content is a secondary goal.

Edited April 25, 2018 by steve_v

[LoSBoL]

I think we can debate here about bug-testing and when to release all day long, but it seems both Squad and Private Division are well aware of the issues and working on it for future releases.

Squad seeking QA Engineers

Private Division: Lead QA Tester

Private Division: Release Manager

KSP 1.4.x is Private Divisions first release ever, maybe difficulties could have been expected?

Edited April 25, 2018 by LoSBoL

[Silverwood]

Has the 'admin bug' and the issues with the tracking station map flickering also been resolved?

Keith

[Majorjim!]

7 hours ago, The Dunatian said:

All this discussion is well and good, but what in blue blazes is taking so long?!

Because there are so few people working on it..

[MarvinKosh]

12 hours ago, Waxing_Kibbous said:

Hey it's Marvin from Rimworld! Hello Marvin! Any plans to mod KSP?

Maybe. Sort of depends on me learning how to mod it first.

[Majorjim!]

2 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

KSP 1.4.x is Private Divisions first release ever, maybe difficulties could have been expected?

No, the constant delays and bugs are due to a lack of experienced staff. There have always been too few people working on this game. Even now they are looking for a senior game designer, a QA Engineer, a lead developer, a junior developer and a senior developer.. It's a tad late in the game. So to speak.

Edited April 25, 2018 by Majorjim!

[DoToH]

13 hours ago, T1mo98 said:

Go to your Steam library, click on KSP, click on Properties, navigate to Betas and select 1.3.1 from the drop-down menu. So stop whining, since there is still a perfectly valid way to play without major bugs.

MH DLC doesn't work with KSP 1.3.1. I didn't pay for the DLC, but is safe to assume that people who paid for it wanted to PLAY IT.

 

9 hours ago, Kerbart said:

They're not happy with it either. They're working hard to fix it.

I hope so. The current state of the game is not the best to increase sales.

 

9 hours ago, Kerbart said:

In return, be a bit more relaxed towards the state of the product. 

Why? Will SQAD/TTI be more relaxed towards the price people want to pay for their game/DLC? Can people download and play today and pay "next week"?

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by DoToH

[netbumbler]

As to the docking bug being related to the landing leg bug, as mentioned earlier in this thread, I am still on 1.4.1 (which is working very well overall, btw) but I have the docking bug without the landing leg bug.  Landing legs are completely fine but docking is way harder than it was in 1.3.1.  Especially with the new flexible, extending docking port:  that thing takes the ship that is trying to dock with it and moves it all over the place.  Have to kill SAS (which is a shame since I used to use the target mode to help line things up) and go in completely manually and then wait for the two ports to 'kiss' each other and swing side to side before actually docking.  Very frustrating as in 1.3.1 docking was extremely easy and predictable.  Just another data point for the discussion...

[klgraham1013]

9 hours ago, Kerbart said:

During it's lifetime the Unity engine went through various upgrades, forcing the game to upgrade with it

Well, as far as I know, this one isn't the case.  There was even a question on whether KSP would jump to Unity 5, and to this new version for 1.4.  In fact most released games don't change the engine their on once they're released, because they're released.  It's almost like KSP isn't 1.0 after all.

9 hours ago, Kerbart said:

Version numbering is a joke

I know, right?  When did that happen?  Sometime in 201X?  I've decided I'm going to start using the game developer's definition of released for my job in maintenance.  This is going to sweet.

9 hours ago, Kerbart said:

There was no vision for any long-term development

You said that in past tense.  Typo?

8 hours ago, Boyster said:

Someone randomly caused the discovery of another ''small'' bug to surface, its just 7% percent less or more drag when you use different skins in fuel tanks, which is the best we will proly never know  .

Red paint makes it go faster.

6 hours ago, razark said:

if (eat(cake) && have(cake)) then release(KSP);

Confirmed: Life support coming to KSP!

5 hours ago, razark said:

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

The greatest cop out of modern times.

Edited April 25, 2018 by klgraham1013

[Virtualgenius]

So does anyone know when thel patch is going to be released last week this week next a month