What else needs to go on the mountain of content for 1.0?

[BrainiacBlue]

So... 1.0 is shipping kinda early. The jury is very much in on that.

They already have the mountain of content in the form of some new physics and adjustments. But to call this game 'complete' is many steps too far in the eyes of the majority. Both in here and in the wider press.

Somewhat astounding is that the game has effectively skipped Beta. No updates have been given since 0.90 and well... 0.90 was not brilliantly recieved: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/12/23/kerbal-space-program-beta-review/

1.0 sounds unfinished. So what is needed to finish it. Whist there is an element of 'I demand feature X' quite honestly that is what we want, and if large numbers of players want it it is probably (pending engine limitations and whether it fits your 'vision' - which isn't entirely clear btw) a good idea to put it in.

So vote for the stuff you want that won't be there!

Please note that I can only fit 10 on here. This 10 has been compiled from requests and the features of popular mods that fill gaps in the core game and that have not been ruled out by SQUAD.

Edited January 24, 2015 by BrainiacBlue

[Zuqq]

As I have said in the other, giant thread about 1.0.

The game doesn't need to be "complete" in YOUR eyes. The fact of the matter is, KSP feels they have met all of their initial goals, and therefor can call it a full release. That doesn't mean they are stopping development.

All these threads trying to either a) get more things included in 1.0 release or want 1.0 release pushed back are just absolutely rediculous. Those features you want so badly? There is nothing saying they wont be released in 1.1, 1.2, or whatever. If you are that upset about 1.0 release either start making mods, make your own game, or stop playing.

Squad doesn't owe the players.

[Baenki]

I think at some point a overhaul of the discovery mechanism was planned to work with planets?

I would like them to implement that. Wasn't that a precondition for new planets?

[BrainiacBlue]

The game doesn't need to be "complete" in YOUR eyes. The fact of the matter is, KSP feels they have met all of their initial goals, and therefor can call it a full release. That doesn't mean they are stopping development.

The problem is that 1.0 will get reviewed by us and by the press. And in the views of us and the press, it is not ready and will get slammed as possibly the most promising waste of 'full' release in a long long time.

It is also that the devs themselves have said that there is alot they would like to go over and do before release such as finish the Kerbol System which will not be done before 'full' release.

Edited January 24, 2015 by BrainiacBlue

[Bekiekutmoar]

For me personally, a complete planetary system. Some more gas Giants with moons around them, that may reflect our Solar System or not. I'd really like to see multiple solar system, but I assume that's far out of the scope of Squad by now.

[klgraham1013]

I had to choose quite a few of those considering the next update is supposed to be 1.0. To much for any single update.

[asheft]

I chose x64 and optimization (and yes, I realize that much of this is dependent on Unity) because all of those other things can/are added with mods. The limiting factor on number of mods is often the 32-bit RAM limit.

[Renegrade]

The game doesn't need to be "complete" in YOUR eyes. The fact of the matter is, KSP feels they have met all of their initial goals, and therefor can call it a full release. That doesn't mean they are stopping development.

It's not our approval they need. It's the reviewers. And most of them are part of the "40 IQ" crowd that seems to be the majority of the 'net. Do you think Squad will make it past the one-star stage with these reviewers?

[Zuqq]

It's not our approval they need. It's the reviewers. And most of them are part of the "40 IQ" crowd that seems to be the majority of the 'net. Do you think Squad will make it past the one-star stage with these reviewers?

This is not like a shootem game, where the reviews really come into play because there are so many FPS games. You have to remember, KSP is in a very niche market where the playerbase is generally more intelligent than your average gamer. I doubt the people that really want to play a semi-realistic spaceship building game are going to just disregard KSP because it MIGHT get a bad review.

[klgraham1013]

It's not our approval they need. It's the reviewers. And most of them are part of the "40 IQ" crowd that seems to be the majority of the 'net. Do you think Squad will make it past the one-star stage with these reviewers?

I could see KSP getting a 3 out of 5 for uniqueness alone. No higher than that, though.

[RocketBlam]

I think it's common practice to have at least one full version, with all features, tested before going live. That is just how it's usually done. You shouldn't add features that have never been tested to the first version. I hope they reconsider and at least have one full beta version with all features installed.

[Torquemadus]

I think that Squad should implement a stock version of Olympus Mons. If they make the mountain bigger, everyone can have a slice!

[I_Killed_Jeb]

I really want custom kerbals..

[Liowen]

For me it is some sort of cloud detailing, even if it is only seen from orbit, to give the planets some life, rather than relying on a mod that is now 2 updates behind. I would be happy with most of these ideas, but for me I would love some life given to the what we have right now.

[KerbMav]

1. I do not understand why the Kerbal system is seen as incomplete - if these are the planets in the Kerbal system ... it is complete.

2. The blog spoke about more free updates after 1.0 KSP - so there is still room for more planets/moons/stuff in 1.1, 1.2 ... not necessarily in 1.0, no?

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

Win 64 is unity not us as usual, and most of this can happen with mods, so I'm gonna go for optimization.

[r4pt0r]

Gas planet 2

[BrainiacBlue]

1. I do not understand why the Kerbal system is seen as incomplete - if these are the planets in the Kerbal system ... it is complete.

2. The blog spoke about more free updates after 1.0 KSP - so there is still room for more planets/moons/stuff in 1.1, 1.2 ... not necessarily in 1.0, no?

It's more that the devs themselves have said they want to re-do much of the Kerbol system before release and that we were very much under the impression that this would happen. Not fixed in stone of course, but it seems odd that the devs are leaving out things they wanted to do. It has been known for years that the Kerbol system, according to SQUAD's vision of it, would feature an asteroid belt, at least one more gas giant with Eeloo as a moon and potentially other things such as comets - though those were more recent musings from the devs.

The basic thing is for this poll is that these are things that SQUAD has said for a long time that they want to do before relase. And now they are not. And that is odd and disappointing.

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

I really want custom kerbals..

Use texturereplacer, unless of course, you have some lame stock-only rule.

[Renegrade]

This is not like a shootem game, where the reviews really come into play because there are so many FPS games. You have to remember, KSP is in a very niche market where the playerbase is generally more intelligent than your average gamer. I doubt the people that really want to play a semi-realistic spaceship building game are going to just disregard KSP because it MIGHT get a bad review.

I agree with the niche market and playerbase analysis, but it's become quite clear that this is not the final, finished product that "1.0" often tries to imply. Maxmaps specifically said there will be 1.1, 1.2, etc going on etc.

So I have to assume then based on what Maxmaps said, and based on past updates/work rates/etc, that we're really just seeing 0.27, but Squad has decided to arbitrarily call it 1.0.

Here's how I see the consequences of that:

- I will scoff and go 'meh' quite a bit. This will happen regardless of what they do so no biggie right?

- The FPS reviewers will note that the shaders look like something from before the age of unified shaders (or will depart the Earth on a hyperbolic trajectory of hyperbole and say it's as bad as the software-rendering days), and that while the exploding rockets are fun, the rest of the game is too complicated and unpolished etc, thusly scaring away some (not a lot, but some) of the potential customers. Not good.

- The people who are in the niche market but are holding off for the actual 'finished game' will be shocked when 1.1 adds Life Support or whatever. Also not good.

- People who like the continual-improvement of the forever-early-access model may become frightened and apprehensive that no more updates are coming. Very not good.

- There will be hype. Good, I guess?

So as far as I can see, the only (possibly) good point is that there will be hype.. but given that there's always hype anyways, I'm not getting much of an upside here.

I could see KSP getting a 3 out of 5 for uniqueness alone. No higher than that, though.

Right, good point

[micha]

While I'd love to see more stock content (KAS, KAC, KER, EVE, ..?) the far more important point is that of polish - one simply CANNOT implement a slew of new features and expect them to be balanced and bug-free. On top of that there's huge scope for performance optimisation as well as some graphical improvements. I'd love to see at least one more early access release just to ensure that the 1.0 release is as polished and well-received as it possibly could be.

Squad deserves glowing reviews for this game; it'd be a crying shame if it was let down at the end due to a rushed release schedule and some unfortunate bug.

To me the sudden rush to release smacks of marketing/management having had enough and wanting it out the door.

[KotDemopan]

Definately Rover Parts.

[Dizzle]

The two big ones for me are x64 and a more complete Kerbol system.

[Lheim]

Visual enhancements. Clouds make this game such a nicer experience it isn't funny. I'd think launching without a few good atmospheric effects would hurt first impressions. Ditto with something like chatterer.

Personality is a hard to define thing. Don't shirk it when you're going for first impressions, though.

[Hodo]

One word, 3 letters....

F

A

R

Nuff said.