Do you feel KSP is ready for 1.0?

[metl]

Where did this tourism comment come from? I didn't read that anywhere. It does make me wonder if maybe Elon Musk offered Squad a stupid sum of money for rights to the finished product...

[Vanamonde]

Let's please not scatter this discussion across multiple threads. (Merged.)

[Guard13007]

The game is NOT bad. To put it on such a list is mind-blowingly stupid in my opinion. It could be a big disappointment to those who were expecting so much more, and he could be one of those.

I would just like to say, as much as I wish for all these amazing dreams to go into the game, I never expected it. I took every release as potentially the second/third to last. I might have finally been accurate with that expectation with 0.90. (Although at that point I expected us to at least get 2 beta updates..I mean, how can you go into beta and then never have a beta release?)

Really, my main point is that I think we should have had one beta with these new features, or bug fixes, or two releases (one for each of those), and THEN 1.0 could be declared.

I want to point out because some people have forgotten, KSP was initially a smaller concept than it is now. It is about to reach being done according to their original goals. That doesn't necessarily mean it's over, it just means they got to the first dream's result.

Edit: Sorry if I am saying things that have already been pointed out or are downright wrong (please tell me!). I have skimmed over part of this thread, but not all.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Guard13007

[metl]

Here is what worries about about this sudden shift:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/313-Beta-Than-Ever-The-Future-of-KSP

Specifically:

"Q: You’re not pulling the plug on KSP, are you?

A: Of course not! We still have a long way to go. We just want to let everyone know we’re going to reach a new stage of development soon."

And did anyone else notice Multiplayer was not included on the next update?

[GusTurbo]

Eh, this is a lot of new stuff to add. It seems like it will take a really long time to get it all in AND fix the most pressing bugs. Might make sense to split it into 2 updates, .95 (or something), then 1.0.

[Jarin]

I swear, if I see one more damn update without them fixing decouplers...

[SkyRender]

Here is what worries about about this sudden shift:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/313-Beta-Than-Ever-The-Future-of-KSP

Specifically:

"Q: You’re not pulling the plug on KSP, are you?

A: Of course not! We still have a long way to go. We just want to let everyone know we’re going to reach a new stage of development soon."

And did anyone else notice Multiplayer was not included on the next update?

It's not included in the next update because multiplayer was never planned for the 1.0 release. It's part of the "extended scope" of the game, and was announced as such during the last official KerbalCon.

[hoojiwana]

Here is what worries about about this sudden shift:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/313-Beta-Than-Ever-The-Future-of-KSP

And did anyone else notice Multiplayer was not included on the next update?

Presumably it's coming in one of those post-release updates. Interesting that you link that devblog actually, since one of the answers even says they'll have multiple Beta updates before 1.0:

Q: I’m still concerned this means you’re going to abandon KSP.

A: We know, and this is why we’re doing this announcement now. We want to give everyone as much early notice as possible about what’s coming up, so nobody runs into any surprises. We’re not even in Beta yet actually. There’s still the next update to go, and after that, a period of Beta updates until 1.0, and even after that, we still have more stuff planned. So worry not, we’re going to be at it for quite a while.

Emphasis mine.

So plans changed an awful lot since October it seems.

Edited January 24, 2015 by hoojiwana

[razark]

And did anyone else notice Multiplayer was not included on the next update?

Well, they also stated that it was something that would come after 1.0.

[spacetoddity]

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/313-Beta-Than-Ever-The-Future-of-KSP

There’s still the next update to go, and after that, a period of Beta updates until 1.0, and even after that, we still have more stuff planned. So worry not, we’re going to be at it for quite a while.

a period of Beta updates until 1.0

At this point I really get the impression that either (a) Squad is deliberately misleading the community and attempting to rush out a release so that they can wash their hands of the game, or ( Squad is completely mismanaged and/or incompetent, and the left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing.

Neither are very encouraging. I will be seeking a refund if this is going to be the final release version, since I can only play the game for around an hour before the memory leaks get out of control and it crashes. Apparently the glaring stability issues are less of a priority than female kerbal skins.

Edited January 24, 2015 by spacetoddity

[RocketPilot573]

Eh, this is a lot of new stuff to add. It seems like it will take a really long time to get it all in AND fix the most pressing bugs. Might make sense to split it into 2 updates, .95 (or something), then 1.0.

I like that idea of splitting the update, Minecraft did a similar thing. Furthermore, this update is simply too large to release all at once and come out of early access. I would recommend that the community is allowed to give input on the at least part of the update before KSP is fully released (hence splitting the update). There have been accidents in the past which could be harmful to KSP's reputation for a 1.0 release, for example asteroids and the claw part from .23.5 were completely broken (in fact, they are still broken to this very day), and in .21 the new SAS was not quite what everyone wanted (was fixed in patch). As GusTurbo pointed out, there would be too many bugs.

[metl]

Well, they also stated that it was something that would come after 1.0.

You are correct. I misread it.

[FlowerChild]

I honestly think this 1.0 "release" thing is pretty nuts, and my only objection to the poll options is that there isn't a more emphatic "No way in hell!" one

Just on the basis that we haven't had a single real beta (as in: feature complete) release here. Everything else aside, they're still adding major features, probably bigger ones than ever with this next release where they're going to have to rebalance the entire game around them, and they want to put those out to the public largely untested the very same day they officially release? Sorry, but that's crazy town and pretty much nullifies the entire point of a game being released in early access to begin with.

And that's not even taking into account the current state of the game, which is frankly extremely buggy. Even if they somehow managed to fix all of those (doubtful), then they'd still be left with all the ones they are inevitably adding right now.

If anyone wants to see the damage coming out of early access too early does to a game's reputation, just take a look at what has happened to Planetary Annihilation. There are plenty of games that have suffered from this on Steam recently, but that one really stands out as one of the biggest "straight to the bargain bin" disasters as of late.

I really think KSP deserves better than to be pushed out the door like this. It's a great game and it's been coming together splendidly as of late, but man, this 1.0 release thing sounds like a just plain terrible idea.

I swear, if I see one more damn update without them fixing decouplers...

Amen to that

[iFlyAllTheTime]

It makes no difference to me!

1. I already own the game

2. I'm having a TON of fun in .90

3. They are adding a ton of cool features for 1.0

4. Their next version is going to be even MORE fun than the current version

5. The code will be the same regardless of whether they slap a 1.0 label or a .91 label on it.

6. They're going to continue patching the game after 1.0

Maybe it makes a difference to someone considering buying the game, maybe it makes a difference to reviewers, but it makes absolutely no difference to ME. I'm going to play the next update and I'm going to love it. DEEP SPACE REFUELING IN STOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course it doesn't make a difference to me or others that already own the game but I, like many others here, want to see this game do well.

I want it to stand up to critical reviews, which I honestly thought it would have no issues tackling until recently. But this announcement worries me a little. Of course, I'll continue playing it, but I'd like my favourite game to be well received and get a bigger player base.

[Jovus]

This move is redolent of the marketing side (i.e., the native 'this-is-what-the-company-actually-does' side) pushing the game development side to wrap things up quickly because they don't feel they'll get their money's worth if they have to pay for too much more development. I hope I'm wrong, but nobody anywhere ever releases anything other than maybe a couple of bugfixes after 1.0, unless they're using a service model rather than a product model. I don't expect Squad will be any different.

I suppose this is goodbye to outer planets and reentry heating. Alas.

[Camaron]

If the next version is "Full Release", We had better get the rest of the planets!

[MartGonzo]

It makes no difference to me!

1. I already own the game

2. I'm having a TON of fun in .90

3. They are adding a ton of cool features for 1.0

4. Their next version is going to be even MORE fun than the current version

5. The code will be the same regardless of whether they slap a 1.0 label or a .91 label on it.

6. They're going to continue patching the game after 1.0

Maybe it makes a difference to someone considering buying the game, maybe it makes a difference to reviewers, but it makes absolutely no difference to ME. I'm going to play the next update and I'm going to love it. DEEP SPACE REFUELING IN STOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!

Number 6 is dependent on Squad making money on this game, and I fear that is by no means guaranteed with the game in it's current state.

[Northstar1989]

Have to agree that it's not ready for full release, but they've already announced it, no turning back now.

They're SQUAD. They can easily change their minds about it if they want. Sure, it might disappoint a few people, but the damage will be *MUCH WORSE* if reviewers get their hands on a "release" with bugs in the new features that we still haven't seen yet... It's common sense- a 1.0 release should NEVER contain major new features (and several of these features are indeed major- or will be perceived as such by reviewers...)

SQUAD should go back and reverse their decision IMMEDIATELY. There's no time to lose. They really need to allow at least one update cycle for the general community to catch any bugs their QA process missed before declaring KSP "ready". Oh, and there are still a large number of long-standing bugs that I doubt they'll have gotten around to fixing if they're adding this many new features.

It's too early, and defeats the purpose of calling 0.90 "Beta". They might as well have skipped "Beta" altogether if they were only going to spend one update there... What happened to the frequent "mini-updates" SQUAD talked about for Beta before?

Regards,

Northstar

[AbhChallenger]

Thinking about this more. I worry that this is a move that is happening because Squad is running out of development funds. If that is the case and the game gets panned by reviews it could mean that we can forget about future official improvements.

I just can't see anything positive out of this. Waiting for Unity 5 alone is worth it. Much less another half year or so of bugfixes and balancing.

[FlowerChild]

Thinking about this more. I worry that this is a move that is happening because Squad is running out of development funds.

Yeah, I agree with you here. I can't think of any other reasonable explanation for this, as Squad must know that it's an incredibly risky move to go feature complete at the same time that you release. It's common developer wisdom, and common development practice to not do precisely this kind of thing.

Heck "feature complete" is precisely what "beta" used to mean, and while Squad has definitely been stretching that definition to the max, the reality is that if they're still adding major systems like resource processing and an entirely new aero system, both of which will almost certainly require major testing and bug fixing, there's no way they can seriously consider it to be feature complete yet.

Edited January 24, 2015 by FlowerChild

[toric5]

i think that the game has been ready for a while, but i am slightly fearful of the steam reviews, as once it is fully released, they can blame everything on squad. when people go buy a game, the expect everything to work perfectly when they first load it up. i do not think that it would be a good idea to publicly release it as finished before at least doing possibly an opt in beta? (using the steam dev releases features) and seeing what problems our modern can find.

[Jovus]

Additionally, I worry that, even if they get everything right in this next release and don't release more bugs (hah, right), they've already done a bit of screwing the pooch by making this announcement. They've gotten a fair bit of favorable publicity so far, but it's all been in the vein of "Here's this really cool indie game that's still in early access that is really good for early access! (But don't forget, it's early access, not complete.)" Effectively what they're doing by moving from 'first beta' to 'version complete' is sending a really big signal to the gaming community that KSP is

even if that's not true. (Which, if we're honest, we don't have any real indication of, other than Squad's promise to do more development after 1.0)

And that could come back and bite them in the wallet really hard.

[The Yellow Dart]

I really thought reentry heating would get added to stock, it is such a central part of space travel for me. As in even if you managed to get into orbit, you can't even come back home without surviving a sustained blast of 3000° plasma. That is a disappointment. Also, I kind of assumed that squad, at some point, would go look at the parts that the stock-a-like supplemental part mods add, and at least consider adding some of those part ideas into stock to fill the more glaring holes in the stock part catalog.

So I guess I find myself in the "too soon" camp, just based on the level of polish in 0.90. I'm talking about all the little things that you think seem clunky or unprofessional but you say to yourself "it's an alpha/beta, they're not done yet, they can change it". Sure there will be big improvements in 1.0, but it is hard to believe that they will be enough to make this feel like a finished game. So to Squad I say this: Definitely take your time on this one we don't need a rush job, and just like you said that list isn't definite and somethings may not be included, also think about including some other things that aren't currently on it. Also, thanks for a great game.

[basic.syntax]

KSP is getting great press exposure lately, and Kerbal EDU is out now, putting KSP in front of thousands of kids. Reviews referring to performance or bugs can be balanced against KSP's long series of updates and improvements. Money must keep rolling in, because Squad hasn't stopped yet. The 1.0 goal post is feature-packed! If Squad were really having problems, I think 1.0 would just be the stuff already promised: Aero, some bug fixes and a balance pass on .90.

I voted Yes because... if they say they're ready, they're ready. Announcements like this don't come out of nowhere, I think many of the arguments being made here, were likely made around their release planning meeting table. HarvesteR says they aren't stopping at 1.0... I want more features and fixes like many of you, but I'm not worried about the future of KSP

[Unabled]

I strongly disagree with the decision to leave early access with version 1. Long story short it means that these brand new features that are only tested internally will be fair game for reviewers to tear apart if they don't work right.

Worse than that it means the game is going 1.0 with Unity 4. Unity 5 sure is taking it's sweet time but it's benefits are absolutely worth it for KSP.

Before people start saying "KSP is ready!" I invite you to go look at reviews of other games. A reviewer is NOT going to give the game the benefit of the doubt.

Agree 110%

Get KSP as polished as can be.. Not saying add a bunch of extra stuff, there doesn't even need to be more planets.

Polish what's there, and implement Unity 5 when available to allow KSP to be more presentable at 1.0 to reviewers who won't be so kind to 1.0 as they have been to previous versions.