Love the game BUT..........

[Whackjob]

Ask Whackjob what his system specs are and how big his craft are.

Intel® Core2 Extreme CPU Q9300 @ 2.53GHz (4 CPUs)

Crafts in excess of 4,000 parts.

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

People, Keep calm.

One must have the guts to write his thoughts down even when he is aware that he will earn huge negative Feedback by doing so and probably he just wants to know why his thinking is wrong.

My 5cent to this is, that KSP is in Alpha State right know and it costs only 20€ in Europe I believe.

You probably have to have constant advertising going on to keep a constant cashflow going on, but still I have no clue how you will be payed for a sold Version of KSP through steam. So this is not to be taken too seriously.

- Yes the game could use some polishing like more sounds for various items (like Xenon engine, rcs and so on). But you still need some very visual content like the R&D System to keep the players at bay.

- The developing Branch of Squad is in fact a very small Team for a design Studio and I really have to pay them my compliment to raise this game and this community out of nothing.

Squad wasnt even a Game Developer before HarvesteR came around.

- For the future I have only above mentioned polishings on my wishlist. Maybe the one or the other new planet or moon, eventually

BUT! - I am very pleased and satisfied with the work that Squad does. I know that they dont simply go on vacation after a patch was released. Remember the SAS-System after 0.21 was released. C7 had some sleepless nights I believe. Aaaand you have the L³'s (Limb Landing Legs) after 0.22 which will be fixed soon probably.

So dont lose faith in Squad if things are not developed as you would wish.

And no one will rip your head off if you post some constructive suggestions even if they were mentioned before

So long, Fellars!

Edited November 5, 2013 by MalfunctionM1Ke

[Sirrobert]

Agree, their dev cycle is totally wrong for an alpha game. Look at starforge, starbound, and even space engineers. Hell, just look at freaking spaceengine, he's a single guy and updates take him the same time as squad, and he puts loads and loads of content.

Well I'm very curious of how you define 'loads of content'. You do realize that some things take more time than other things right?

Vacations are ok? yes. Vacations are well deserved because of the work? Not really.

So what's your point? The devs should keep working on this like slaves because you are impatient?

This is mostly true. All updates up until now have been pretty much all hype and no content.

Right, SAS fix adds no content. Ofcourse it does fixes a load of things. And ofcourse the career mode, that's worthless. Anyone could have coded and balanced that in a spare weekend right?

The problem is the part count, and it's a derivated problem. It comes from the fact that you need struts for everything because squad can't freaking make the joints stronger (A modder could, hey!).

Just because you think it should happen and Squad hasn't done it yet doesn't mean they can't do it. Maybe it means they have decided not to do it. If you don't want your rockets to break, open the debug menu and select unbreakable joints.

Modders are basically saving the game. That's why I halted my progress with my part packs and stuff, I don't want to help a company that doesn't deliver stay afloat, even if it's just by halting the development of my non-crucial, small and badly done parts. I know of some -big- modders that think the same way, too bad they love the game and their work so much.

Yea, some people actually want this game to progress. Weird isn't it?

[Saberus]

1. Yes the Squad team is limited. So I'm not expecting HUUGE patches every month. But look at the last patch, I believe it was around 70 MB in data, which took around 3-4 months. Yes it was an awsome leap and added much more to the game, but other companies add 1-3 GB of data in the same time with the same size team. Look at overkill and payday 2.

As others have said before, using lines/bytes/heisenwhatzits as a metric for what's put in as effort for an update is a poor means to compare. I could care less how many MB it took to add in the science modules and the tech tree, they could have stripped down the code for all I care, the end result is a huge amount of playable content.

2. I dont feel the devs, although they do a great job, deserve a break as many have said in the forums after every big patch. They are living on the money that we have payed as kind of a stock in them making the finished product they promised to deliver. I don't know about you guys but no boss in any job i have ever had has said, "you did that last job great, take the next week off with pay!"

I don't know about you, but I bought in at .14 when they split the paid version and the demo, and was pleased enough to have spent the money for what I got. Every update since has just been icing or gravy to me. This might be an alpha game, but it feels more complete than the watered down trash pumped out for profit by the big name companies. And there is absolutely zero obligation for them to complete the game. If you think otherwise, I feel sorry for you.

3. I feel too much has gone into honestly what i see as stupid junk. I read for weeks in the weekly about how the astronouat complex was getting redone. All it ended up being was a nice pic in the background that gets blurred out cause of astronaut selection. So why even bother. How about putting purpose to the stats of the pilots rather than a background picture that noone will notice anyways.

Those stats do have a subtle purpose, they affect how the Kerbal reacts to their current situation. And you act as though that one picture was the update... there's so much more, or does that not count because they denied you a clear shot of one image?

4. BIG ONE. OLDER SYSTEMS. I have a system that meets all the requirements for this game, yet like tonight had to reload 20 + times in i would say 3 hours because of crashes while reworking and launching my ship. I would rework, save, try to send to launch pad, game crashes. Reload select launch pad , select ship and crew, and say launch, ship messes up getting into orbit, if i stick around and watch it crash into the ground, or hit revert to anything,, game crashes.

( I am running no mods, have 4 gigs of ram, 2.4 GHZ processor, win 7 32 bit) According to squad that should be no problem.

The ship I am trying to get up is my interplanetary shuttle. It has around 580 parts I am guessing, so nothing too insane. many of the parts are struts.

Yes my comp is a good at least 7 years old, but if they say a comp with what ever specs as minimum can run it, then it should be able to run without crashing. Lagging is one thing, but to reload ever 5 minutes is another.

This is still and alpha game, until everything that's going in goes in, there's no way to form a reasonable metric of minimum specs. The developers have even stated the minimum listed is just what 'feels right'.

Also, raw speed is NOT a metric for end-all performance. All it can be used for is relative performance within a generation of processors. Example:

Intel Core2 Quad Q9650 (Launched Q3'08) clocked in at 4 cores running 3GHz. Passmark gave it an average benchmark of 4228

Intel Fourth Gen i5-4430 (Launched Q2'13) clocked in at 4 cores running 3GHz. Passmark average benchmark: 6289

Same number of cores, same speed, better results. The i5 outperforms for a variety of reasons, better bus speeds, more efficient pipelining, smaller die, all help make it better.

And there's also the consideration that the game, like many others, is built on an engine that uses only one core.

580 parts is a hell of a computational load, every joint between parts has to be computed, and every joint that connected to that joint. Each part adds a load that increases quadratically, not linearly. Even an 8 GHz rig supercooled with liquid helium is going to cry for mercy after that many parts.

[Alguien]

Just because you think it should happen and Squad hasn't done it yet doesn't mean they can't do it.

Well, they can go ahead and do stuff like fix wooble, the game supporting more than 4 GB ram, fixing the aerodynamics or a planeart pass instead of adding flags, some wheels, kerman recruitment, and a background for said kerman recruitment.

As far as i have see over this year, Squad is adding more trash instead of fixing what they have in the plate already. Which is pretty counterproductive. And meanwhile users have to resort to mods to fix some of this stuff.

[Shuttle]

Yes it was an awsome leap and added much more to the game, but other companies add 1-3 GB of data in the same time with the same size team. Look at overkill and payday

I think the main reason is because the game is very specific. I remember Harv adding multiple improvements to the core so that the player could just fly around the universe without any problems like calculation errors. One of the fixes was to move the universe around the player, not the player around the universe. I think you can read about it in the recent presentation. And of course you don't have to deal with that kind of problems in shooters. The problem with adding content might be very simple: it will increase RAM consumption that is already very high.

I don't know about you guys but no boss in any job i have ever had has said, "you did that last job great, take the next week off with pay!"

I remember someone from the team saying Harv works from 8 am to 9 pm in 2011 or so. If Harvester keeps working with the same enthusiasm, it is not surprising he needs a rest after every update. You can even try to look at my older posts from 2011, maybe they are still present - there were times when Harv was community manager, programmer and bug tester at the same time. And it took him only a couple of hours to respond to the submitted bug.

How about putting purpose to the stats of the pilots rather than a background picture that noone will notice anyways.

I don't understand it as well. I hope Artyom had nothing to do and created that picture as a bonus.

BIG ONE. OLDER SYSTEMS. I have a system that meets all the requirements for this game, yet like tonight had to reload 20 + times in i would say 3 hours because of crashes while reworking and launching my ship.

1. PhysX is single-threaded => only uses one core=> low fps with high part counts. Devs can't modify Unity due to licensing model => they can't do anything about it. I think they will be happy if someone buys them UE4 or CryEngine or whatever engine is best right now.

2. I've been using KSP since 2011 and didn't have a single crash in vanilla on Win7 64 bit.

[JackGruff]

They have 0 obligation to you to finish this game. The only reason they are working on it, is cause they want to.

I.e.: "The devs have no obligation to finish something I paid them to finish!"

There are games which are more complete than KSP's current state that are also $20. Unlike some of those games, we paid our $20 in advance instead of afterwards. That's the only difference.

Not only that, we also pay them back by bug hunting and marketing the game via word of mouth before it's even gone gold.

So yes, they are obligated. Not legally, no; but I'm hoping they have ethics.

[DMagic]

580 parts is definitely a lot. Yes, you can build crafts with a lot more, but 580 is still a very high number and it will drastically slow down all but the most powerful CPUs (and how many of those parts are struts makes little difference, with a few exceptions all parts have more or less the same impact on performance).

That said, high part counts alone should not cause crashing, you probably have something else causing this. I don't think I've had anyone complain about problems with crashing while using my 600 part CPU performance test rocket. And some of the systems used for testing that rocket were far slower than yours; they ran very slow, but there were no issues with crashing.

[Whackjob]

I think I provided a solid data point that says drastic slowdown doesn't happen at 600 parts on all older processors.

[Sirrobert]

Well, they can go ahead and do stuff like fix wooble

They did, with the SAS upgrade. If your rocket wobbles, it's designed bad.

the game supporting more than 4 GB ram

No they can't. Engine doesn't support it.

fixing the aerodynamics or a planeart pass instead of adding flags, some wheels, kerman recruitment, and a background for said kerman recruitment.

Fix what exactly? I don't see anything broken.

[csanders]

I.e.: "The devs have no obligation to finish something I paid them to finish!"

There are games which are more complete than KSP's current state that are also $20. Unlike some of those games, we paid our $20 in advance instead of afterwards. That's the only difference.

Not only that, we also pay them back by bug hunting and marketing the game via word of mouth before it's even gone gold.

So yes, they are obligated. Not legally, no; but I'm hoping they have ethics.

KSP could be released the way it is right now, and the devs could say "This is it!", and it magically becomes a finished game. "Finished" is arbitrary.

You paid them a reduced price for what you got, as is, with the benefit of getting more for free.

[Sirrobert]

I.e.: "The devs have no obligation to finish something I paid them to finish!"

There are games which are more complete than KSP's current state that are also $20. Unlike some of those games, we paid our $20 in advance instead of afterwards. That's the only difference.

Not only that, we also pay them back by bug hunting and marketing the game via word of mouth before it's even gone gold.

So yes, they are obligated. Not legally, no; but I'm hoping they have ethics.

Well someone forgot to read the terms. You din't pay for the finished product. You payd for the CURRENT product, and are getting all future updates for free.

I'm not saying they have any reason to stop working on it. I am however saying that you have exactly ZERO right to complain about them not working fast enough

[DMagic]

I think I provided a solid data point that says drastic slowdown doesn't happen at 600 parts on all older processors.

Can you run my CPU test rocket and send me the results? That's really the best way to see how much or how little performance is impacted by a large craft. Since everyone is running the same rocket and for the most part is CPU limited I can get some mostly objective results for comparison.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/42877-CPU-Performance-Database

[boxman]

You seriously cant really complain about crashes when you are running a ancient 32bit OS.. Even though there is no 64bit version of KSP for windows yet, it does stop it from crashing like this. I had the same issue when I still had 32 bit winxp installed.

I have a old phenom 2 system with 4gigs of ram and can run it for hours without any crashes even when I launch ships that have thousands of parts.

32bit XP on the other hand crashed nearly every second launch due to memory issues on the exact same computer.

And btw.. Why are you comparing file sizes??? How much they do with the game can have very little to do with the actual filesize. There might even be a patch where they add alot of content but yet the size of the game goes down because they did some optimization. It seems to me like you think that adding bloat to the game is a good thing.

And what about what is happening behind the scenes?? Alot of the work might be bug fixing, optimizations or features that will come in a later patch. They have for example been working at least since .21 or earlier on a optimization that most likely will come with .23 which is supposed to significantly lower the memory usage.

Edited November 5, 2013 by boxman

[boxman]

I.e.: "The devs have no obligation to finish something I paid them to finish!"

There are games which are more complete than KSP's current state that are also $20. Unlike some of those games, we paid our $20 in advance instead of afterwards. That's the only difference.

Not only that, we also pay them back by bug hunting and marketing the game via word of mouth before it's even gone gold.

So yes, they are obligated. Not legally, no; but I'm hoping they have ethics.

Really??? This is a game that most people have spent hundreds of hours playing, and yet you complain it is too expensive???

And btw some of us who joined earlier paid less.. The later you jump on the bandwagon the more you pay.

And if you actually did some research before buying you would know this game is at least a year from being released.

You should just uninstall the game and forget about it, because this game is clearly not for you.

[Whackjob]

Can you run my CPU test rocket and send me the results? That's really the best way to see how much or how little performance is impacted by a large craft. Since everyone is running the same rocket and for the most part is CPU limited I can get some mostly objective results for comparison.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/42877-CPU-Performance-Database

I followed the instructions with fraps and F11. But where is the data?

[PDCWolf]

Well I'm very curious of how you define 'loads of content'. You do realize that some things take more time than other things right?

Well, starforge is constantly adding and removing features, starbound just entered the beta phase and they are still adding content like crazy.

So what's your point? The devs should keep working on this like slaves because you are impatient?

Do not move the goalpost. One thing is waiting 3 months for a recategorization and 5 new parts, another very different is waiting 3 months for an update worthy of said time. What the hell happened to "often but lighter updates"? We just got the lighter part.

Right, SAS fix adds no content. Ofcourse it does fixes a load of things. And ofcourse the career mode, that's worthless. Anyone could have coded and balanced that in a spare weekend right?

They didn't balance anything, that's why there was a day 1 techtree mod, they just threw the already existing parts into tiers and made 4 new to add some progression. Coding UI elements is easy as hell, unless you are coding your game in some senseless way.

Just because you think it should happen and Squad hasn't done it yet doesn't mean they can't do it. Maybe it means they have decided not to do it. If you don't want your rockets to break, open the debug menu and select unbreakable joints.

Unbreakable != Rigid. Rockets are not spaghetti.

Yea, some people actually want this game to progress. Weird isn't it?

Read what I wrote again.

They did, with the SAS upgrade. If your rocket wobbles, it's designed bad.

Mere lies. Rocket wobble like crazy and work like spaghetti unless you strut them. SAS has nothing to do with wobble.

Fix what exactly? I don't see anything broken.

Oh jesus, WHY did I have to read this part last. Now I discovered who am I responding to. Wish I wouldn't have wasted my time like this. I'll just click submit and be done with you.

You seriously cant really complain about crashes when you are running a ancient 32bit OS.. Even though there is no 64bit version of KSP for windows yet, it does stop it from crashing like this. I had the same issue when I still had 32 bit winxp installed.

"You can't complain about crashes when you are using a 32bit OS for a 32bit app. Use a 64bit OS that doesn't care about an incompatible 32bit app instead!!!!!"

We need some hardcore redpilling around here.

Edited November 5, 2013 by PDCWolf

[Whackjob]

Well, starforge is constantly adding and removing features, starbound just entered the beta phase and they are still adding content like crazy.

Starforge is also being made by a company with the intent of making games. KSP is not coming from a gaming company.

Do not move the goalpost. One thing is waiting 3 months for a recategorization and 5 new parts, another very different is waiting 3 months for an update worthy of said time. What the hell happened to "often but lighter updates"? We just got the lighter part.

I'd rather have more parts and stuff, too, but remember. This isn't a gaming company.

They didn't balance anything, that's why there was a day 1 techtree mod, they just threw the already existing parts into tiers and made 4 new to add some progression. Coding UI elements is easy as hell, unless you are coding your game in some senseless way.

I look forward to your competing version of a space exploration sim.

Unbreakable != Rigid. Rockets are not spaghetti.

Spaghetti doesn't have to withstand tons of force either.

Mere lies. Rocket wobble like crazy and work like spaghetti unless you strut them. SAS has nothing to do with wobble.

Something undergoing tons of force needs reinforcement?! Next thing you'll tell me you need oxidizer to get combustion in an airless environment.

Oh jesus, WHY did I have to read this part last. Now I discovered who am I responding to. Wish I wouldn't have wasted my time like this. I'll just click submit and be done with you.

Let's be honest, PDCWolf. This game is obviously not for you. You're not getting what you're expecting. That's understandable. But if you think you can browbeat people and get them to do what you want, so you can get the game that you want, well... you're just fooling yourself. The world doesn't work that way. Additionally, if you're trying to structure this as constructive criticism, then you're absolutely not helping your cause. I'd go so far as to say you're being detrimental to that cause. Therefore, I believe that it is not your intent to provide constructive criticism. I believe you're just here to gripe for the sake of griping.

It's obvious you are upset. But you aren't helping anything. Take a step back, have a breather, then reassess your situation, and what your overall goal is.

[boxman]

I'm sure squad could switch to rendering planets with uncompressed bmps, instead of using procedural generation. That should boost downloads from a few megabytes to a few terrabytes, and enter them into the "most productive software team ever" hall of fame.

Good one

[boxman]

No they can't. Engine doesn't support it.

Have to correct you there.. The engine supports 64bit and there is even a fully working 64bit version of KSP for linux. It is just the windows build of KSP 64bit version that does not currently work, which is why it has not been released yet.

[Xyd]

Well, starforge is constantly adding and removing features

Really? You must be looking at a completely different starforge... All I see is stale development that hasn't changed at all over the past year, and previous year as well.

I dare you, double dare you and triple dare you to post development changes along with dates and the gaps between.

[PDCWolf]

Starforge is also being made by a company with the intent of making games. KSP is not coming from a gaming company.

What about space engine then, being made by a single guy?

I'd rather have more parts and stuff, too, but remember. This isn't a gaming company.

What about space engine then, being made by a single guy?

the "This isn't a gaming company" argument is as stupid as it gets. Modders can turn the game upside down and create (and update) a part pack in a whim and squad battles to include 5 kspx parts per update? And I'm using parts as example, you can basically just use every feature in the game to talk about this level of incompetence.

I look forward to your competing version of a space exploration sim.

"If you can't do better then don't criticize" is, again, an invalid argument when there are clearly visible examples that something can be better.

Spaghetti doesn't have to withstand tons of force either.

Jesus, this part was just too much, not even bothering. Show me a rocket that wobbles in real life.

Something undergoing tons of force needs reinforcement?! Next thing you'll tell me you need oxidizer to get combustion in an airless environment.

Yeah, lets complement a stupid argument with sarcasm, that'll sure show him.

Let's be honest, PDCWolf. This game is obviously not for you. You're not getting what you're expecting. That's understandable. But if you think you can browbeat people and get them to do what you want, so you can get the game that you want, well... you're just fooling yourself. The world doesn't work that way. Additionally, if you're trying to structure this as constructive criticism, then you're absolutely not helping your cause. I'd go so far as to say you're being detrimental to that cause. Therefore, I believe that it is not your intent to provide constructive criticism. I believe you're just here to gripe for the sake of griping.

It's obvious you are upset. But you aren't helping anything. Take a step back, have a breather, then reassess your situation, and what your overall goal is.

You are wrong, this game is more for me than anyone else because I want it to be the best. I get my balls together and criticize everything because I want it to be the best it can possibly be. I know they are doing stuff wrong and I'm not the only one that can see that. I don't see myself blinded by brand or game fanatism, and that's why I have the balls to criticize as so do a lot of members (that for some reason are on the "DON'T LISTEN TO" list).

Once again the people here show their retardation when they can't take an idea behind an insult. Not everything is a hugbox. Go out and live freaking life, nobody is going to compliment you for your work except for fans, and guess what, fans are the last people you want to listen to because they are going to approve everything you do, even if it's wrong. Why do you think artists listen to critiques that pretty much destroy their work? because they want to be better.

To reinforce my argument, everybody knows what everybody thinks about the ones that shall not be named, yet somehow max manages to get ideas, he manages to get good criticism and hell, even majiir, ted, artyom and nexis post there.

Edited November 5, 2013 by PDCWolf

[boxman]

@PDCWolf

Mere lies. Rocket wobble like crazy and work like spaghetti unless you strut them. SAS has nothing to do with wobble.

This shows that you are nothing but a troll.. You seriously complain about having to strut the rocket??? And you expect that you are able to attach huge SRBS or liquid rockets to a SINGLE tiny decoupler and not have any wobble at all??? WOW...

I would actually be seriously pissed if they did what you suggested and removed the chance of structural failure or wobble when not using struts.

And your comment about the SAS shows you know nothing as well... The wobble only happens now on poorly constructed rockets or if you have way too many reaction wheels and gimbals.

[Whackjob]

What about space engine then, being made by a single guy?

Is he working a full time job besides?

What about space engine then, being made by a single guy?

Is he working a full time job besides?

the "This isn't a gaming company" argument is as stupid as it gets. Modders can turn the game upside down and create (and update) a part pack in a whim and squad battles to include 5 kspx parts per update? And I'm using parts as example, you can basically just use every feature in the game to talk about this level of incompetence.

Ok. So what's preventing you from completely modding the game to something that suits you better?

"If you can't do better then don't criticize" is, again, an invalid argument when there are clearly visible examples that something can be better.

Maybe it can. But it isn't. Do you think posting in the abrasive way you are is going to help anything?

Jesus, this part was just too much, not even bothering. Show me a rocket that wobbles in real life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogo_oscillation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slosh_dynamics

Yeah, lets complement a stupid argument with sarcasm, that'll sure show him.

The quotes above show it's a perfectly legitimate argument. Apparently what only makes it stupid is that it undercuts your argument.

You are wrong, this game is more for me than anyone else because I want it to be the best. I get my balls together and criticize everything because I want it to be the best it can possibly be. I know they are doing stuff wrong and I'm not the only one that can see that. I don't see myself blinded by brand or game fanatism, and that's why I have the balls to criticize as so do a lot of members (that for some reason are on the "DON'T LISTEN TO" list).

But you don't criticize things in a constructive manner. You're undercutting your own cause. That's why I don't believe that is your cause.

Once again the people here show their retardation when they can't take an idea behind an insult. Not everything is a hugbox. Go out and live freaking life, nobody is going to compliment you for your work except for fans, and guess what, fans are the last people you want to listen to because they are going to approve everything you do, even if it's wrong. Why do you think artists listen to critiques that pretty much destroy their work? because they want to be better.

No, the rest of us just use constructive criticism. That's because we want to help our cause, not hinder it. Also, I imagine you'll be getting a forum infraction shortly.

Do try to remain civil.

[Alguien]

They did, with the SAS upgrade. If your rocket wobbles, it's designed bad.

They didn't, the problem comes from the part connection being one single joint, specially notable in tall rockets, forcing you to relay in struts, SAS and wide rockets.

Fix what exactly? I don't see anything broken.

Really?

So you dont see control surfaces and winglets creating lift from nothing? or how a giang cube will fly better than if you put connes because it depends of the mass instead of the form? You find this to be perfect and without need of fix?