May I ask when will the first bug fix update will be?

[AUnknown]

The current game is filled with literally game-breaking bugs, not to mention the disasterous peroformance... Most of my friends and half of the community is complaining, and I think we really need a bug fix update ASAP plz

[Vl3d]

Devs said in a few weeks.

[RayneCloud]

"Coming Weeks" is not "A Few Weeks" it could be next week, or the week after.  I'd expect something SoonTM personally, but that's just a Theory.. a KSP 2 Theory!   

[tstein]

Imminent in game dev means 2 weeks. Coming weeks usually means within a month.

[Stoup]

Most recent news I'm aware of cited:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/954850/discussions/0/3772364949848364468/

[Athlonic]

2 more weeks, is definitely a classic 

[The2x4]

Does anyone know how updates will be rolled out for the Direct Download version purchased from Private Division directly?

[Fullmetal Analyst]

5 hours ago, RayneCloud said:

"Coming Weeks" is not "A Few Weeks" it could be next week, or the week after.  I'd expect something SoonTM personally, but that's just a Theory.. a KSP 2 Theory!   

intercept handles time a little different:

days = weeks
weeks = months
months = years

[uglyduckling81]

9 hours ago, AUnknown said:

The current game is filled with literally game-breaking bugs, not to mention the disasterous peroformance... Most of my friends and half of the community is complaining, and I think we really need a bug fix update ASAP plz

Give it a couple years and revisit. 

It's got a long and bumpy road ahead, so long as take-two don't pull the plug first.

[magnemoe]

24 minutes ago, uglyduckling81 said:

Give it a couple years and revisit. 

It's got a long and bumpy road ahead, so long as take-two don't pull the plug first.

This the company I work for rolled out an new update on our main software. 
Found that localization was totally broken. Testers had not noticed as language used on various setup is pretty random but customers spotted it at once, its was my bug.  
It was fast to fix but stupid.  Lots of the KSP 2 bugs are also stupid. And stuff like fuel use should not be an performance issue, huge rockets exploding yes. that will be slow motion who might be an feature so on an 5090 ti its slowed down 

[Jebsded]

pumping sim once

pumping sim twice

pumping sim

 

[Twipsy]

The faster

[HebaruSan]

It's tricky. From what I've seen, getting this into a stable state would mean putting the whole dev team onto bug-squashing duty for quite a while. But that's something you do toward the end of a development cycle when you have all the basic frameworks in place for the completed product. Here, ≥75% of the announced feature set is missing, so they'd be polishing code that might be heavily altered or thrown away when those planned features eventually land.

So either the playerbase will get the current quality level for a long time while the rest of the meat is put onto the bones over months and years, followed by a fix phase, or the headlining features get delayed even more (as dev time is diverted away from them) and we get frequent regressions of things that were fixed in previous premature fix passes.

[PopinFRESH]

2 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

It's tricky. From what I've seen, getting this into a stable state would mean putting the whole dev team onto bug-squashing duty for quite a while. But that's something you do toward the end of a development cycle when you have all the basic frameworks in place for the completed product. Here, ≥75% of the announced feature set is missing, so they'd be polishing code that might be heavily altered or thrown away when those planned features eventually land.

So either the playerbase will get the current quality level for a long time while the rest of the meat is put onto the bones over months and years, followed by a fix phase, or the headlining features get delayed even more (as dev time is diverted away from them) and we get frequent regressions of things that were fixed in previous premature fix passes.

I'd say its greater than 95% of the announced feature set is missing. It has a new tutorial and on-boarding experience, the rest is "on the roadmap".

[ProtoJeb21]

2 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

It's tricky. From what I've seen, getting this into a stable state would mean putting the whole dev team onto bug-squashing duty for quite a while. But that's something you do toward the end of a development cycle when you have all the basic frameworks in place for the completed product. Here, ≥75% of the announced feature set is missing, so they'd be polishing code that might be heavily altered or thrown away when those planned features eventually land.

So either the playerbase will get the current quality level for a long time while the rest of the meat is put onto the bones over months and years, followed by a fix phase, or the headlining features get delayed even more (as dev time is diverted away from them) and we get frequent regressions of things that were fixed in previous premature fix passes.

I think with the quality of the game right now, we'll probably need a good few months of >90% of the dev team working on optimization, bugfixes, and porting over some missing KSP1 content like heating/reentry effects, inventory, and a handful of parts that aren't tied to other parts of the roadmap (ex: I don't expect any science parts until we get science mod and tech tree updates, even though the original game had those parts introduced well before the mode). So that'd mean there would be barely any progress on roadmap content for a decent chunk of time. However, if the game's foundation is successfully improved in the coming months, then a further delay to science, colonies, etc wouldn't be much of a problem. Even now I think we could get science mode before the end of 2023. 

[Alexoff]

I remember that patches for KSP1 were released, after which the number of bugs only increased, saves broke, something stopped working. Will this long tradition continue with KSP2?

[TomKerbal]

No bluescreen until now. What else do you want ?

Well, no, I quite enjoy it; yes there a a lot of bugs, without question. 10fps during launch with my system is quite astonishing (i9, RX6950XT), but I am sure, they will improve

[Sequence]

We need some of these bugs fixed as soon as possible. I'm running into so many issues that I cant even reproduce specific bugs to write bug reports without other bugs getting in the way.  

[Znander]

Going to stay optimistic for at least a little while, but when they were saying things like the dev team was "playing the game too much because it's so fun" just before release... Almost feel like I'm missing something. Did maneuver nodes work before they released the game? The KSP account commented on this video yesterday, around the same time as the Steam posts, with "soon": 

 

[LoSBoL]

9 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

It's tricky. From what I've seen, getting this into a stable state would mean putting the whole dev team onto bug-squashing duty for quite a while. But that's something you do toward the end of a development cycle when you have all the basic frameworks in place for the completed product. Here, ≥75% of the announced feature set is missing, so they'd be polishing code that might be heavily altered or thrown away when those planned features eventually land.

So either the playerbase will get the current quality level for a long time while the rest of the meat is put onto the bones over months and years, followed by a fix phase, or the headlining features get delayed even more (as dev time is diverted away from them) and we get frequent regressions of things that were fixed in previous premature fix passes.

I actually don't think it's a question of choice. 

Loaded up the bigger (forgot the name) rocket, wanted to take it to space, didn't work due to the poodle and the decouple sticking together. Back to the VAB and with a lot of tinkering I found out that if you give the decoupler and engine their separate stage it would work. 

So I got to space with a lot of dV left, so why not take it to the moon?

Creating a maneuver node is fiddly but doable, but the flight path in Mun's soi was not visible. So you don't know what the end result would be. 

After circelizing and enjoying the view the orbit was decaying, which I found out due to the surface getting closer and closer after some time. So what do you do? Let's just land, enough dV in the pocket to do so. 

Time for EVA and some screenshots, beautifull! 

So what happend more on the mun? 

Having my craft go through the surface and to the center of the moon when loading the save. 

Having kerbal dissappear when loading the save. 

Having not been able to enter the lander. 

Having the dV go to zero when entering the lander. 

A lot of saving and loading, but finally it was ready for departure, and after circelizing again the path out of Mun's soi and the path beyond its soi was showing. I had just about enough dV to make it back to Kerbin. Untill I loaded the save again and all flight paths disappearing. Loading the saves didn't help and I'm quite stuck now with about 15 dV left while not being able to see what path the lander is going to follow. 

Here on the forum the first challenge is to take your craft to the moon, it's a challenge (of perseverance) indeed.

Although in early access, this should become a more 'playable' state then its currently in real quick, because it will otherwise loose interest fast among players. I don't think it's a choice. 

I think any feedback on the game received can go on to the pile and they don't even have to look at it, there are that many bugs which needs to be squated first. 

I share your concerns, and the only thing I hope is that Intercept will be allowed to be in for the long haul. KSP2 1.0 is a very very long journey. KSP was granted the long haul, so it's not something new which makes me hopeful. 

Edited February 26, 2023 by LoSBoL

[HebaruSan]

13 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

I actually don't think it's a question of choice. [...]

Remember, you're talking about getting the current build into a playable state. Without colonies. Without interstellar. Without multiplayer. Without science or career progression. Without robotics. Without IVAs. Without re-entry heating! Those pieces will all break things when they merge, and presumably are being worked on right now (or in the future). Each developer that they take off of those pieces to fix early bugs is a delay of their completed product. It's a difficult choice with no great options, but it is still a choice.

Edited February 26, 2023 by HebaruSan

[LoSBoL]

2 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

Remember, you're talking about getting the current build into a playable state. Without colonies. Without interstellar. Without multiplayer. Without science or career progression. Without robotics. Those pieces will all break things when they merge, and presumably are being worked on right now (or in the future). Each developer that they take off of those pieces to fix early bugs is a delay of their completed product. It's a difficult choice with no great options, but it is still a choice.

Yes, I can't however really imagine how I would give feedback on colonies if they drop through the planet's surface, or its orbit decaying into the ground, or giving feedback on interstellar if flight paths disapear. 

I understand what you're saying, and that's why I said that I hope Intercept gets the opertunity from T2 to go for the long haul.

[tstein]

19 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

It's tricky. From what I've seen, getting this into a stable state would mean putting the whole dev team onto bug-squashing duty for quite a while. But that's something you do toward the end of a development cycle when you have all the basic frameworks in place for the completed product. Here, ≥75% of the announced feature set is missing, so they'd be polishing code that might be heavily altered or thrown away when those planned features eventually land.

So either the playerbase will get the current quality level for a long time while the rest of the meat is put onto the bones over months and years, followed by a fix phase, or the headlining features get delayed even more (as dev time is diverted away from them) and we get frequent regressions of things that were fixed in previous premature fix passes.

In fact that is BAD software development practice. Good software is made  by keeping the bug count LOW during ALL development.  By far the highest quality project I worked on, and the ones that   had least problems fullfilling  release dates were the ones were  bug fix was ALWAYS top priority..  I am yet to work , in my 30+ years of industry in  a software that took the approach of "leave bug fix to the end" were a good result was achieved.

[HebaruSan]

22 minutes ago, tstein said:

Good software is made  by keeping the bug count LOW during ALL development.

If we were talking about starting from scratch, I would agree with you. But that ship has clearly sailed, and catching up will be tough.

[Lordzombieboy]

On 2/25/2023 at 5:36 PM, HebaruSan said:

It's tricky. From what I've seen, getting this into a stable state would mean putting the whole dev team onto bug-squashing duty for quite a while. But that's something you do toward the end of a development cycle when you have all the basic frameworks in place for the completed product. Here, ≥75% of the announced feature set is missing, so they'd be polishing code that might be heavily altered or thrown away when those planned features eventually land.

So either the playerbase will get the current quality level for a long time while the rest of the meat is put onto the bones over months and years, followed by a fix phase, or the headlining features get delayed even more (as dev time is diverted away from them) and we get frequent regressions of things that were fixed in previous premature fix passes.

While this is definitely true, I do also think they should give the next couple of weeks to solely fixing bugs, as my game went from just being laggy with the occasional avoidable loading crash on an RTX 3050 (Which I'm completely fine with, still love the game), to being literally completely unplayable as all of my game saves crash upon loading in, never showing a sign of gameplay. I tried to make new campaigns with the same happening. So, while yes they should focus on upcoming major game-changing features, they should also fix the game enough to make it consistently playable so they can get the feedback they need about the features, not the bugs and crashes.