Do you feel KSP is ready for 1.0?

[Unabled]

I know the Early Access environment has so far been... well, not great, but I like to believe that we have so far delivered and will continue to do so. There's no financial motivations or limitations hampering the team. We simply are not comfortable being an Early Access game anymore. If the game at 1.0 is truly at a state where bugs and balance issues outshine the gameplay to the point that critics slam us, then so be it. Frankly, I believe we can do better than that, and I will do my best to deliver on that promise.

All I needed to see.

While I think its still a lot to pull off in one update and jumping to 1.0, you guys obviously feel its doable.

So be it. Go get 'em, can't wait to see what Squad pulls off.

[Nachtwind]

I bought it off potential, yes. I saw something unique and not catering to the typical gamer. ...

With every pasing update, my vision and Squad's vision grew farther and farther apart. ,... I'm highly disappointed that the game I imagined will never exist.

(quote taken as example of a lot of stuff i read here.. it is a nice summary and not meant to be personal)

Sorry for bein rude now - but that is just the danger of buying a product before it is done. It is not Squads fault if a player made wrong assumptions. Stay away from Early access or Kickstarter and similar pages if you cant life with the danger of wasting $15.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Nachtwind
Rephrased

[Decho]

Most people I know with KSP in their libraries have already given up on it after 1 or 2 hours.

Likewise, though it should also be noted that for me, all those people who've given up think the game is fantastic, they just can't get their heads round it. But then if tutorials were too explicit, allowing people to progress, much of the fun of learning what to do would be lost.

[klgraham1013]

Sorry for bein rude now (and this is not aimed at you but to those who say tha KSP is ** since it doesnt do X or include feature Y) - but that is just the danger of buying a product before it is done. It is not Squads fault if a player made wrong assumptions.

I'm not blaming Squad for having a different vision for the game. I'm merely saying, I thought we were of like-minds and turned out to be wrong.

This is also a good warning to myself to not get to enthused about early access games; to be more cautious about giving money to games that are still in development.

[GusTurbo]

(quote taken as example of a lot of stuff i read here.. it is a nice summary and not meant to be personal)

Sorry for bein rude now - but that is just the danger of buying a product before it is done. It is not Squads fault if a player made wrong assumptions. Stay away from Early access or Kickstarter and similar pages if you cant life with the danger of wasting $15.

That's still the wrong way of thinking about it though. If someone paid $15 and got 90% of what they were expecting, then the most they can be said to have "wasted" is $1.50.

[Superfluous J]

Also, in general, adults value money, as it is the reward for (hard) work, so every cent is somewhat important to someone who feel he is earning his money, especially when it seems that it was "wasted".

Actually, in general, adults understand that once you pay for something and use it for years, you don't get to demand a refund.

[Sage]

Sorry for bein rude now (and this is not aimed at you but to those who say tha KSP is ** since it doesnt do X or include feature Y) - but that is just the danger of buying a product before it is done. It is not Squads fault if a player made wrong assumptions.

Well, some "assumptions" were promised or at least considered features. And while we know the dangers of early access, this doesn't mean that the Dev cannot be faulted? I guess that all the people that bought Starbound were just dumb and the devs for that game just changed what he wanted to make along the way.

Now, the situation is way different and less tragic than there, but still SQUAD could spend some of the dev time putting this stuff in the game, especially when those people helped in starting the game. Some of the stuff would take even less time to implement than career mode, the admin building or the contract system.

EDIT: @5thHorseman and adults make sure to have understood a post before replying. As I have said, I don't want a refound in the material sense, I want refounded my hope in SQUAD making updates with content I might enjoy and treating the game development in a sensible manner. This update was almost a step in the right direction, as while it have something that I don't really care about, it has some exciting news, but I am a bit puzzled about rushing the final relase of the game, or dumbing down the resources system to a single type one a la karbonite, thus destroying it's original purpose of making different planets varied and meaningful.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Sage

[PDCWolf]

Actually, in general, adults understand that once you pay for something and use it for years, you don't get to demand a refund.

Doesn't apply to software, there's no quality loss because of use or time and if there were limited copies, a refunded one, given its digital nature, could be sold as new again.

[BrainiacBlue]

I honestly do not see this game as ready for release.

-Too many bugs

-Not enough parts for science, rovers, stations, landers. You've got the rocket and plane bits down - but that's it.

-Limited solar system (What happened to those two gas giants, those moons, that asteroid belt etc.)

-The tech tree is crude at best

-The strategies system needs more complexity, balancing you are doing, but a button and a percentage isn't great for an entire mechanic of the game

Don't get me wrong, I love this game, but there is no way that this is ready for 1.0. I get the feeling you're about to do an Elite Dangerous and turn your 0.9 into 1.0 without doing enough for players (and the gaming press) to go 'yeah, this is great' rather than 'this... feels like 0.9 with some new flight models'.

Please, for press reasons if nothing else, call it 0.95 rather than 1.0. The game is not ready for 'full' release.

This poll should really be enough for you to take a step back and assess the situation more thoroughly.

[whiterafter]

I find it just wonderful that the game has reached its point. However, I do thing the Beta stage was rushed through. Maybe it's just a matter of numerics and 0.20+ could have been 'Beta' but as an official term I think it was too short. I think that people are overestimating the term 'full release'. Unlike other games people are able to easily download Beta and Alpha KSP and SQUAD has built such a full program to back up KSP through forums, store, etc, that I think the game could easily qualify as a full release.

I love that they are finally improving the aerodynamics, better timewarp, refueling, females, and sound, it's just fantastic. I can't wait to get 1.0

[Seshins]

What happened to the IVA's where we could move around in? And the discovery mechanic. Those were two of the original features that really pulled me in.

i heart KSP and SQUAD regardless.

[Robotengineer]

After reading through most of this thread, and the poll results, it appears as though NO is the consensus.

I'm going to try to lay out the reasons the community believes that the entry into public access is happening much to quickly, in no particular order.

Unity 5.

Unity 5 will bring many new features, the features that the Kommunity has the most interest in will be optimization and PysX 3.3 (Multithreading?). Many players, myself included, believe that 1.0 should use Unity 5 and wait until it is fully released, or do another Beta with the Unty 5 Beta.

Marketing, Reviews and Publicity.

One thing I have sen in my own experience of reading gaming news/blogs sites about KSP is people in the comments saying they don't want to pay for an early access game, because they want a fully fiinished and polished product. If 1.0 is on-par with the 2 previous releases, it would be good enough for the Kommunity, but not potential buyers who are unfamiliar with the quality of early access releases. That would lead to reveiws such as, "I have waited for the full release of this game for more than a year. I was quite dissapointed with the quality of this game, as it does not feel complete, the art assets are not uniform, the career mode is somewhat hard to understand and it crashes often on my computer." There have probably been reviews like this, but Squad has had the 'Early Access' shield to deflect these critcisms by saying that things will be fixed in the next update. Potential buyers would be turned off, thinking (incorrectly) that this is something of a final update. While the continous post 1.0 development has worked for some games (minecraft), I don't think it would work that well for KSP and Squad.

Widely requested features.

These are some features that I have seen requested and have not been mentioned in the Beyond Beta blog post, and I have seen mods made for that are widely used.

Planet overhaul, more Planets.

There are to sides to the Planet debate, those that want the current system to get an art overhaul, and those that want the addition of Planets. IMO, both would be good. On the overhaul side, if clouds will be added, it would be best to do clouds and Planet overhaul at the same time, mods that have been made for EVE and TextureReplacer are examples of overhauls. On the new Planet(s) side, GP2 is the most requested planet, and there are 10+ mod packs for the Kopernicus mod, and most of them have a Gas Giant beyond Jool.

Stock Revamp.

With the integration of Porkjet's excellent space plane parts, the other parts look dated and low quality. Ven has addressed most of the stock parts in his Ven's Stock Revamp mod, which while not admired by all, is a significant increse in quality over the current parts. NecroBones has also created a texture replacement for stock tanks that makes them look much better. The assets issue is not becoming of a game entering 1.0, and I suggest that all of the parts be remade by hiring a skilled modder.

Realism.

The most hotly debated topic, realism appears to be getting addressed with the Aero overhaul. However there are many other Realism features that have been requested, though the top ones are re-entry heating, ISP scaling, and some sort of antenna/communication overhaul. Re-entry heating has been on the to-do list for a while and will hopefully be included in the next update alongside the now atmos. Antenna/Comms are less popular, but something along the lines of AntennaRange or RemoteTech, the latter being a lite version. Thrust varying with atmospheric density, rather than ISP varying, has been largely requested by the realism community as well.

Career mode overhaul.

In my play throughs of career mode since .23, I have found that repeatable science is much more fun than one-and-done experiments, like the way that the Goo Container and Materials Science bay parts have been made.

Science experiments inspired by real science experiments, as found in Dmagic Orbital Science mod, have made career mode seem more realistic, and more meaningful. The addition of FinePrint to the game was a good way of adding content without just lumping it into the game.

Suggestions.

These are my own suggestions, and likely will not reflect those of the general Kommunity.

Have at least 2 updates before 1.0, one a public release similar to previous ones, for the Kommunity to test the new features. The 2nd, a test release using Unity 5 Beta. IMO, GP2 can wait until 1.1+ but the all the assets need an overhaul. Career mode definitely needs an overhaul, and I suggest that Squad would refer to the suggestions sub-forum, and popular science/career mods, Like DMagic Orbital Science, SCANsat, Station Science, Mission Controller 2, etc.

Summary.

KSP is not ready for 1.0. The art assets need to be brought up to the standard of bac9's space centre, Porkjet's parts, and the many good texture packs for TextureReplacer. Career mode needs to be fully polished, to where you can play through career mode start to finish without getting extremely bored. I am saying this as a concerned player of KSP, and not trying to tell the Devs how to do what they have showed they have been mostly good at before.

[Zuqq]

I don't understand why everyone is so upset.

The game isn't stopping development in 1.0. We will still see improvements and developments.

Who cares what the version is called or numbered. You already own the game. It makes no difference to us, as players, what the version is called. Leave it to Squad to decide what to call each version, and whether the version is an alpha/beta/full release. Did everyone get this upset when Beta was released? I wasn't on the forums really so I wouldn't know...

You have to remember, Squad set out a list of goals when they started to develop KSP. They knew for the game to be "complete" in their eyes, "X" items needed to be implemented. Well guess what, they are. Therefor, it's a "complete" game. If it's not complete in your eyes, join Squad or start your own damn game.

If they planned to do all of the exact same updates, but called it 0.91.0 or whatever, would everyone have their knickers in a twist? I doubt it.

Stop paying attention to what the version is called, and enjoy the game you paid peanuts for.

[BrainiacBlue]

I don't understand why everyone is so upset.

The game isn't stopping development in 1.0. We will still see improvements and developments.

1.0 is the release. The one that gets reviewed. The one that the world will remember this so far awesome game for. From what we have seen and heard it will not be up to scratch.

[klgraham1013]

1.0 is the release. The one that gets reviewed. The one that the world will remember this so far awesome game for. From what we have seen and heard it will not be up to scratch.

Exactly. As the game is now, it will get shredded by reviewers. The UI, career balance, the need for YouTube tutorials to even play the game.

1.0 means no more excuses.

[Bekiekutmoar]

For me also a loud 'no' in this matter. Bugs and a lack of content are the most heard reasons in this thread why KSP isn't ready for version 1.0 yet, and I agree. For me personally, the huge lack of planets is the greatest concern. Yes, Squad stated more content will be added after the release of 1.0, but what if reviewers shred apart the game after release because of (many) bugs and perhaps an unpolished state of KSP? It could utterly destroy the momentum of development and eventually result in a game that's still enjoyable for a limited audience (including me), but with only a fraction of its potential and being loathed by the big public.

[Zuqq]

1.0 is the release. The one that gets reviewed. The one that the world will remember this so far awesome game for. From what we have seen and heard it will not be up to scratch.

So hung up on the semantics.

"The one the world will remember".... Do you remember the first release of Elder Scrolls? It was full of bugs, and a sucky game. But, that didn't tarnish the success of Oblivion or Skyrim.... No one is going to look at KSP and say "Wow, that 1.0 sucks Im not playing this game and telling everyone it sucks".

You liked it before 1.0, Im sure new players will be more than satisfied with the 1.0 release.

And what do you all care what the reviews say? You already play the game!!!

[klgraham1013]

More planets can easily be a waste of development time. Unless each planet offers something unique, they don't really add anything to the game. I don't feel quantity equals quality in this matter.

[Renegrade]

If they planned to do all of the exact same updates, but called it 0.91.0 or whatever, would everyone have their knickers in a twist? I doubt it.

I would, the 0.90 thing was dumb too (not saying it wasn't a good update, just the version number hype was puerile garbage).

Any mods I release will not support the new version number gap. Say Hi to Horrible Nerf 0.27~

[klgraham1013]

So hung up on the semantics.

"The one the world will remember".... Do you remember the first release of Elder Scrolls? It was full of bugs, and a sucky game. But, that didn't tarnish the success of Oblivion or Skyrim.... No one is going to look at KSP and say "Wow, that 1.0 sucks Im not playing this game and telling everyone it sucks".

You liked it before 1.0, Im sure new players will be more than satisfied with the 1.0 release.

And what do you all care what the reviews say? You already play the game!!!

Your comparing sequels to version numbers? Seriously?

[Zuqq]

Your comparing sequels to version numbers? Seriously?

I exaggerated to make my point clear.

You're not going to see people turn down the game in V1.5 (or whatever version it is...) because 1.0 wasn't up to snuff in your eyes.

[klgraham1013]

I exaggerated to make my point clear.

You're not going to see people turn down the game in V1.5 (or whatever version it is...) because 1.0 wasn't up to snuff in your eyes.

Remember Counter-Strike 1.6? It has happened.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

Yet another game that exits early access because the dev felt like it, as opposed to being an actual 1.0

[Fleb]

Personally I would think that one more beta with the new features, and then a step up to V1.0 with a following bug fix release would be best, but I am not a programmer and trust that Squad know better than I do.

[Zuqq]

Yet another game that exits early access because the dev felt like it, as opposed to being an actual 1.0

And what in your all knowing eyes constitutes as an actual 1.0?

If Squad listened to these threads, 1.0 would NEVER be released because there is apparently about 1400 things that need to be changed, fixed, and added before it would be considered an "actual 1.0".