Do you feel KSP is ready for 1.0?

[FlowerChild]

"There's no financial motivations or limitations hampering the team"... does NOT mean that the decision to release 1.0 couldn't be financial. It just means they are claiming no lack of money to continue the project.

I'm honestly not even particularly attached to this point man, and don't really feel compelled to continue arguing it. It was a simple matter of someone expressing confusion over why people still suspected it to be the case, me trying to offer an explanation about why it's a point of contention in return, and I've been trying to explain my explanation ever since

Beyond saying to Squad that it may be a good idea to offer a more credible explanation to the community to cut down on such speculation, I don't think dwelling on it further serves any real purpose. Honestly, if they are having financial troubles, it's not the kind of thing I would expect them to share, I just think it's worth pointing out the explanation they gave doesn't really make much sense and I think that's contributing to the discomfort some of us are feeling over the 1.0 announcement.

They may even be burning some of the credibility they are counting on right now in putting things that way.

Edited January 26, 2015 by FlowerChild

[rynak]

Now, keep in mind, a number of features they've mentioned we're already in the works before the announcement. Aerodynamics have made good progress already it looks like, female kerbals have been in the works for a while now, landing gear and the barn were almost done for .90, and a few other things I may have forgotten that were partially worked on. This will cut their work time down significantly, down to the possible 4-month time.

Point taken I didn't know that multiple of the mentioned features are already in a half-finished state. That indeed would speed up things - tight, but doable if they go into crunch mode.

EDIT: Just noticed something else - them announcing that they are now aiming for release and are out of beta, doesn't stop them from calling the next version a "release candidate".

Edited January 26, 2015 by rynak

[CptRichardson]

Biggest thing I can think of, once more, is getting a better tutorial system in place. Maybe some kind of interactive system of launch guidance for optimal trajectory that you can see somehow in-flight, or perhaps narrated in-game by Scott Kerbley.

[FlowerChild]

EDIT: Just noticed something else - them announcing that they are now aiming for release and are out of beta, doesn't stop them from calling the next version a "release candidate".

This does though:

Because of this, the next update will be our 1.0 release, and with it we will be leaving Early Access.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/326-Beyond-Beta

Hence why I was suggesting opening up a second stage of experimentals to *everyone* before they release earlier in the thread, as it allows them to stay true to these statements while still getting the community testing of the release some of us believe it will need.

[Pecan]

Summary anyone?

I've been away on post-christmas tour and really can't be ***rsed to read 51 pages of speculation. Does anyone know anything?

It seems very strange that without feedback on their only beta version Squad should declare 'done' and even perverse to announce new features at the same time (which will therefore get NO beta-testing), but you can't with management.

On the other hand there's a lot of software, especially games, where much is promised 'later' and we're just lucky Squad aren't pulling the plug on free updates yet.

I rest in the knowledge that I've already had more than my money's worth from KSP and it's all gravy (non-British = extra luxury) since about 6-months ago :-)

[Van Disaster]

Changing fundamental areas of the game ( like the entire aero model ) in the release version? what? even if there wasn't a public pre-release that's not a remotely sane idea, let alone when there's a huge body of public knowledge that will just confuse new purchasers when it's all wrong.

It's not feature complete until "it works properly" is also ticked.

[Caelib]

It seems a little bit odd to me that people are so up-in-arms about KSP going 1.0 at this point in time ... the game is more polished and has more substances than most other games.

The more I think about it, the more it seems like there's a lot of people that aren't ready to let go of the "early access" magic of KSP -- that somehow when it is "released" that things will change. *shrug*

[brdavis]

Does anyone know anything?

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: well, we know a lot of other people opinions… but beyond that, no.

[rynak]

This does though:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/326-Beyond-Beta

Hence why I was suggesting opening up a second stage of experimentals to *everyone* before they release earlier in the thread, as it allows them to stay true to these statements while still getting the community testing of the release some of us believe it will need.

*sigh*

So they're convinced they can get everything important right on the first try, without larger testing. The folks at mode7 thought that too: "Seriously, what's wrong with you Rynak? We've been testing the server for months." Rynak: "12 People online at a time, isn't a stress test i think." M7: "You're just too worried about everything. Relax."

Release day: Server crashes from too high load, as a thousand people log in at the same time. Stays down for an entire day, as the devs order better server hardware.

[Brotoro]

Summary anyone?

SUMMARY:

Squad says that they will be ready to end Beta and Early Access with the next release of KSP (version 1.0).

Squad says the 1.0 release will include many new and improved features (see lists elsewhere).

Squad says there will be a massive stomping of bugs before release of 1.0.

Squad says they will continue development after 1.0... this is not an end.

The reaction of the forum members ranges from belief to utter incredulity that the above can be accomplished in the estimated timeframe with no additional Beta releases.

The main concern of many members is that the 1.0 label will open KSP to disastrous reviews, and that the Reviewers will rip Squad a new nozzle.

Some forum members claim that KSP could never be 1.0 ready without some particular feature (not on the list of features Squad plans to include).

Poll was 5 to 1 No/Yes, but has shifted to 4:1 No/Yes.

Human Sacrifice, dogs and cats living together...mass hysteria. You know...business as usual.

[FlowerChild]

The more I think about it, the more it seems like there's a lot of people that aren't ready to let go of the "early access" magic of KSP -- that somehow when it is "released" that things will change. *shrug*

That's way too broad a generalization about people voicing concern man. All I would personally really want to see is one feature complete update before they go release, to give the community a decent chance to hammer on it and make sure it's ship shape before it hits prime time.

I have zero attachment to early access, and on a personal level as a modder, I am actually quite looking forward to the release version of KSP as that likely means less drastic design changes for me to adapt my mod to with each release. Modding early access games can be a real pain as you're essentially chasing a moving target.

So they're convinced they can get everything important right on the first try, without larger testing.

Yup, that's what it looks like to me too.

Edited January 26, 2015 by FlowerChild

[klgraham1013]

The more I think about it, the more it seems like there's a lot of people that aren't ready to let go of the "early access" magic of KSP -- that somehow when it is "released" that things will change. *shrug*

I don't think this is the case at all. *sigh*

[Robotengineer]

It seems a little bit odd to me that people are so up-in-arms about KSP going 1.0 at this point in time ... the game is more polished and has more substances than most other games.

The more I think about it, the more it seems like there's a lot of people that aren't ready to let go of the "early access" magic of KSP -- that somehow when it is "released" that things will change. *shrug*

I want KSP to leave early-access. I just don't want it to leave prematurely. What other games does KSP have more substance than?

[Pecan]

...Human Sacrifice, dogs and cats living together...mass hysteria. You know...business as usual.

Ahhh.

I watched 'Unstoppable' again yesterday.

This is the hype-train everyone wants to get off of then :-)

I think someone recently said KSP is "awesome" ^^. If Squad're happy with that so am I, it's their call, even if it seems odd to us - otherwise they could go on for another four - or forty - years and still not reach 'perfect' for everyone.

[basic.syntax]

Addressing some comments that KSP .90 is "like an alpha." If KSP were "alpha" quality, we would be playing (actually, not enjoying playing) with un-textured cylinders labeled "fuel tank 1" attached to "engine 1" that silently rise from a big X start position, on a flat green plane, up through the big blue sky, toward the gray sphere labeled "Try to land on this without bouncing off." (If we are lucky, because the day before, the cube-space we play in was 50% gray on all sides, and you couldn't see the gray sphere, because of it.)

Which brings me back to 16,000 positive comments on STEAM, (less than 300 negative) that suggest (when taken together) "there may be a few problems, but I had a great time anyway!"

I'm confident KSP will survive the slings and arrows of 1.0, and put new smiles on new faces, even if some bugs still need working out. Go Squad!

[diegzumillo]

I think it's actually YOU who's confused what 1.0 means, which is defined, generally and in this case specifically by SQUAD itself, as the release version. You actually then mention release so it's curious where the confusion is

I'm not confused. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning

In short, they decided to leave the early access category with a feature rich update. That qualifies to turn the version number to the next integer. What's wrong with that? You guys are too stressed, chill out. This community wasn't like this, all flaming each other.

[Hanuman]

This does though:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/326-Beyond-Beta

Hence why I was suggesting opening up a second stage of experimentals to *everyone* before they release earlier in the thread, as it allows them to stay true to these statements while still getting the community testing of the release some of us believe it will need.

Man, that's what he means by Release Candidate.

As in version numbering:

0.90.00

1.00 Release Candidate 1 - Note: This release still has Early Access tag. Before they flip the switch with Steam.

1.00 T Minus Zero: Launch of your Kerbal Space Program 2015.

On another note:

I want to believe what Harvester is really asking for here, is to officially pick up his bonus check, and maybe take a couple days off. Because really, what else do you think he's going to do but party and then sleep in for a few after release 1.0? I doubt that I'm right, but that's sure as anything what I'd be wanting to do.

Double Also:

I think "T Minus Zero: Launch of your Kerbal Space Program" would make a great name for the actual launch version.

[NWDogg]

I voted Yes, because I honestly believe this game is ready to finally leave Early Access. It's been lingering there for too long anyway, I think, and if Squad accomplishes nothing but bug fixes for the next update it will still be ready.

My only concerns for post-release KSP is that Squad will wash their hands of it after 1 or 2 more maintenance updates and call it done. Obviously this isn't the plan, but I suspect the possibility is there regardless. Even so, if Squad decides to leave KSP the way it is at even v.90, there is not a single thing I could legitimately complain about, as I've already gotten my money's worth 10 times over from this game.

If, and I strongly emphasize the hypothetical 'IF' part here, Squad does decide to leave KSP as it stands at 1.0, then the only thing I ask of them is to leave the community with access to mod the game further than is currently possible. For example, a proper means of implementing new planets instead of having to resort to workarounds like is currently required. I really would like to see at least 1 'Planet Pack' DLC (charge me for it, I'll gladly give you more money) before the game is left 'completed' for good. Once the devs are done, the community won't be for a long time...so give us some access to the hard-code so this game can live on well after its final days (only after the devs are done, though of course.)

Until then, I hope I'll be buying DLC and expansions for a long time to come.

[UncleCorgi]

I neared that there will be female kerbals, there is female kerbals and tier 0 buildings but still no mk3 cockpit iva. Ever since iva was released the mk3 cockpit needs an proper iva, a pitch black iva is horrible, do hopefully squad adds a proper mk3 iva, hopefully based off of Nasa's space shuttle iva cause the exterior looks like a nasa shuttle. Also there should be mk3 inline clamp o trons which would be helpful for the mk3 docking

[NathanKell]

Those of you who are quick to blame the testers, consider that bugs have been noticed and yet persist in the KSP stock game for multiple releases. Indeed, bugs have been fixed by modders and yet remain in Stock KSP. Please don't assume the testers are incapable.

[rabidninjawombat]

I voted Yes, because I honestly believe this game is ready to finally leave Early Access. It's been lingering there for too long anyway, I think, and if Squad accomplishes nothing but bug fixes for the next update it will still be ready.

My only concerns for post-release KSP is that Squad will wash their hands of it after 1 or 2 more maintenance updates and call it done. Obviously this isn't the plan, but I suspect the possibility is there regardless. Even so, if Squad decides to leave KSP the way it is at even v.90, there is not a single thing I could legitimately complain about, as I've already gotten my money's worth 10 times over from this game.

If, and I strongly emphasize the hypothetical 'IF' part here, Squad does decide to leave KSP as it stands at 1.0, then the only thing I ask of them is to leave the community with access to mod the game further than is currently possible. For example, a proper means of implementing new planets instead of having to resort to workarounds like is currently required. I really would like to see at least 1 'Planet Pack' DLC (charge me for it, I'll gladly give you more money) before the game is left 'completed' for good. Once the devs are done, the community won't be for a long time...so give us some access to the hard-code so this game can live on well after its final days (only after the devs are done, though of course.)

Until then, I hope I'll be buying DLC and expansions for a long time to come.

Completely agree with what you posted here Sitting at over 1000 hours im down below a penny per hour when it comes to entertainment, which is by far the best buy ive made in a long time. Not to mention all the things of learned from it. (im looking at your orbital mechanics) Inspiration to learn blender/C# to mod the game even more, etc, etc,etc.

And if they decided to release a planet pack as a DLC i would grab it up in a hot second. They deserve the money and ill gladly pay for more content. (hell ive purchased the game about 4 times to give to friends, and give away for contests on twitch and reddit)

As far as 1.0 goes, I think the whole issue is that while the game may not be optimized to the fullest, or completely bug free (Stock game is stable enough though) The game is definitely ready to leave early access, being as feature complete as it is and compared to most Early acess games. The problem is with Steam, there isnt anything between early access and release.

From the perspective of the KSP uninitiated, there are alot of Steam users who wont buy games in early access (due to bad experiences with other games) I'm sure Squad would like to bring their product to those folks as well. So i honestly cant blame them for moving out of early access.

[tsotha]

It seems a little bit odd to me that people are so up-in-arms about KSP going 1.0 at this point in time ... the game is more polished and has more substances than most other games.

This. I write code myself, and there's no nontrivial program anywhere, ever, that's "finished" in the sense there's nothing left to do. There are always features you'd like to add and always bugs you couldn't find or aren't worth fixing. All you're doing as a developer when you "release" software is signalling the user it's good enough for its intended purpose. That' they'll get their money's worth. Unless it's a twenty line script that does something simple, If you wait until it's perfect you'll never release.

Particularly when it comes to features. "This game isn't finished until it has X" isn't a practical attitude to take. KSP is playable. It's fun. Most likely if X is really important to you you can already find it in a mod. The only reason anyone would be justified in demanding features for the release version is if they said "now that it's released we've disabled all mods", and they're not doing that, obviously.

[Vanamonde]

People, please knock off the hysteria about Squad supposedly running into financial difficulties. 1) They're not. 2) Changing version numbers won't make money magically rain from the heavens.

[FlowerChild]

People, please knock off the hysteria about Squad supposedly running into financial difficulties. 1) They're not. 2) Changing version numbers won't make money magically rain from the heavens.

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree on both points (or at least disagree the 1st has been established, and outright disagree on the 2nd), and I do not believe any of the comments on it were hysterical.

Is it really necessary to try and belittle a point of view through derogatory language that I've tried to represent civilly and rationally? I can only assume you're referring to me with the above given I'm the only one that's been representing that opinion over the past few pages.

I've also already stated my desire to drop that line of conversation, so not sure what purpose bringing it up again serves.

Edited January 26, 2015 by FlowerChild

[The Joker]

I would just like to say that it's ultimately Squad's choice on what they want to do.

They made the game, their word is final. I respect that.

But it's the majority of the community's opinion (over 2/3rds) that do not want KSP to go into 1.0 immediately. Have we ever seen an update the size of what Squad proposes before? No. At the same time, I'm not saying its bad to have these new updates. The game deserves these features before it can be considered finished. Still, Squad needs to understand that with a mountain of features comes a mountain twice as high of bugs. The game, as it stands, is already poorly optimized. It crashes, it lags, and many underlying features have not been actually implemented (Terrain Scatter, anyone?).

All I can ask is why Squad is so rushed into releasing everything in 1.0. Why can't we have a .91? This way has worked and many features have been fleshed out for the past few years throughout Alpha. I'm not suggesting that Squad is doing this because of some ulterior motive or money troubles, but I'd like them to come clean in their decision-making process and in why they have so far chosen to immediately go to 1.0. If it's a valid reason, I'll accept it without complaint.

Squad, so many things have been made better in KSP because you listened to the community. Do you want to turn your backs on them now?