moeggz
-
Posts
316 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by moeggz
-
-
Can’t take pictures tonight but can share transcript later. He replied to someone saying no sound video for three weeks, and not to expect any video until the end of summer but may not have meant the same summer most mean.
-
The CM Nerdy Mike thread. Search in the general chat. He says the ama and sound video aren’t to be expected for three weeks and then when asked about the reentry video for clarification he just says that they’ve done some filming.
so looks like I mixed one reply for being about reentry effects, but also I think I’m still accurate as nothing else is to be expected for 3 weeks.
Yeah the one saying no sound video for three weeks is what I thought he was saying about the reentry video. So my bad I had it wrong.
However, saying not to expect all the other things in three weeks while I misread his reply I bet I’m still accurate and we don’t get it for 3 more weeks.
-
Discord in the dev tracker and then in follow up messages
-
They just delayed the re entry heat video, not the update, the video.
until after summer.
a video.
delayed.
their apology was meaningless they can’t even just screen record their wip vfx for the next three weeks.
If I wanted to anger a community and burn most of the goodwill I honestly don’t know what I would do differently then what they are doing now.
-
I voted reentry heat. I think there’s a good chance for some science to be implemented, but I don’t think they’ll have finished it and bug patched it completely in 6 months. But I’m confident we will have at least visual heat effects in 6 months.
Also, this mirroring of polls is very interesting and a good example of selection bias (granted, comparing a 1,500+ response to ~30 isn’t perfect.) I don’t know who’s right here, we’re all just guessing, but this is a much more narrow bell curve centered on science while the Reddit one is wider and while the bell curve was first on reentry it has moved to center on bug fixes.
So if the devs finish science within 6 months they will meet expectations here, and greatly surpass them on Reddit. That should do a lot to sway public sentiment positively. And it can now be pointed out concretely that they have surpassed expectations if they get science in 6 months.
-
@Periple yeah Reddit for sure has a slant. Some on the discord mentioned it too, so I launched an identical (and anonymous) one here. So we can see how far apart the sun communities are.
-
It’s not working without text here so here is text
-
24 minutes ago, Periple said:
I think we’ll get it in 2-4 months and there’s a good chance of getting colonies and in the next 6
If they can achieve this I think they’ll change the sentiment not only on Reddit but also solidly get steam reviews back to mostly positive. And we’ll have tons to talk about on the forums.
25 minutes ago, Periple said:There’s no way for us to tell when 0.2 is ready to roll out because they’re not saying (and wisely so).
Yes this is how I would prefer as well. I thought they were solidly on this strategy after tweeting out the apology and timeline… and then they missed the one date they gave.
Community trust is low, the reviews are more negative these days there’s no reason to give dates you can’t make 100%.
Whatever happened in the past is the past, and I was ready to move on to their new developments but then those new developments were more “promise things” and then not deliver those things on time. Combined with communicating the delay on Twitter, and the update on the new “date” on the discord. So, from my perspective, they tried to start a clean slate with an apology (which I bought in on) and then proceeded to follow the SOP that got us into this mess.
All that said, from the poll on Reddit it seems most responding to the poll (skewed by sample selection bias I’m sure) don’t expect science within 6 months. So, the good thing about low expectations from the community is that surpassing expectations is a sure fire way to regain good will (see no man’s sky.) Right now we’re all just guessing, but I hope it plays out the way you think it will.
I just, 6 months ago, even with the buggy launch, was having fun (assuming the bugs to be short lived) and definitely thought we’d be in a better position by now.
-
9 minutes ago, regex said:
Oh sorry, I deleted my account because I couldn't use RIF anymore. vOv
I almost deleted but Lemmy doesn’t cover all communities I frequent well yet. Basically Reddit is just another KSP forum for me.
Apollo user here, but yeah anything
iswas better than their native app. -
On the subject of EA, if you would like, please share your votes on where we will be in 6 months on the 1 year anniversary of launch below.
it’s a Reddit poll, so not really super scientific but I’m trying to do my due diligence and at least try and get a broader spectrum of responses than just the Reddit. Thanks for considering!
-
Oh yeah that’s today.
Which means I was wrong for saying that the first major update in duplicating features would be 1/2 a year from release date. That update will take even more than 1/2 a year.
And I was way to optimistic in that comment too because I didn’t even mention reentry heating, expecting that to come out well before now. So I was crazy, unbelievably wrong because I wasn’t nearly pessimistic enough.
When that debate was happening I was heavily disagreed with not just here but also on the still mostly positive Reddit for being too pessimistic. And I wasn’t pessimistic enough.
Go through launch threads, and early dev updates. It’s time to admit that the gaslighting and goal post moving was slow enough lots haven’t even realized how much their expectations have been lowered with time, but it’s undeniable now that the state of the game is worse than anyone expected for 6 months in. And we’re supposed to be excited about a bug patch. Not a feature update, they’ve beat us down so far to hype a bug patch as a big deal and they can’t even meet their own deadlines on that.
Go ahead and debate me saying how it’s probably a misunderstanding and they read it as one or two years and not one half of a year. But recognize you’re arguing for a more pessimistic take than anyone had 6 months ago and if they keep it up here pretty soon even that misinterpretation will prove to be accurate. Do we really believe we’re getting science in the next six months?
-
2 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:
Them going radio silent for two days" is a very harsh way to phrase "they had a weekend".
So I said “basically went radio silent” and two days, as I have already clarified, I only counted the business days. Man I would love 4 day weekends every week, if weekends aren’t Friday-Tuesday please discuss what I actually said.
And also very harsh? I listed their actions. If you take that as very harsh criticism I don’t even know what to say. In my world, I receive negative feedback from coworkers, my boss, customers, and my family. When that feedback is just “heres what you did” and “here’s what I would like for you to do” I consider it constructive feedback.
-
56 minutes ago, razark said:
more news on Tuesday. I count three, or one if you skip the weekend.
The news came late Tuesday, which is why I edited my comment as I would also count it as just 1 full business day with them making the statement late Tuesday. 1 full day and most of a second.
56 minutes ago, razark said:Expecting constant updates every few days is somewhat unreasonable. Is it that much of a loss to not know what's going on for a few days?
Agreed that that expectation would be unreasonable. But that’s not my expectation and nowhere did I voice that expectation. A company fresh off an apology for the game not meeting expectations and promising to keep clear communication going quiet over the delay for the very next patch isn’t a great way to start off (imo). I’m not expecting updates every few days, but if something is announced with a date the date should be met. This is why I prefer no dates and for updates to just drop, but they shared the date. If it’s not met then open communication, to me, would include at least a rough estimate on the length of the delay.
I wasn’t as interested in the reasonings for the delay as in the length of the delay.
56 minutes ago, razark said:Knowing is not going to make the wait any shorter, and any explanation they give is going to be scrutinized and declared to be signs of incompetence or malice, or at best misdirection
This is the result of their own actions. Community trust was high up to launch, if they want to get back to community goodwill they are going to have to start meeting some of the expectations they intentionally created.
56 minutes ago, razark said:1And it happens on both sides. People literally called a sale an "insult" and "slap in the face".
As far as your broader point here goes yes all people (myself included and not just KSP2 fans of either side of this debate) make exaggerations at times. Constructive conversation (to me) involves pointing out when these and other leaps are made to stay on the same page.
As for the specific point, they’ve apologized (not for that but in general) so I don’t really want to get dragged into debates of past actions of the devs.
-
8 minutes ago, razark said:
They released news on Friday, and went quiet for a couple days.
That's just called "a weekend".
Gods forbid they have some downtime, rather than be chained to their desks.
And I said two days, not four. I only counted Monday and Tuesday and edited my comment when Dakota made the announcement.
I never implied that anyone should be chained to their desk, I think such exaggerations are unhelpful and are a big part of the reason the forums are such an unwelcoming place.
-
Glad to hear!
-
1 hour ago, The Aziz said:
"simply added" (while having no insight at all on how long it took to develop) (and forgetting that it needed serious fixes in subsequent patches because it was broken) (also forgetting that said patches over the next several months added a bunch of new features of the system that were absent on release)
3 months. It was three months, two patch fixes and 1 major revision from the first introduction to the final version still in the game.
It was supposedly ready for release a “brief window”after launch. Even if we give them 2 months, that’s 4 months then from when it should have been ready.
One whole extra month than what KSP1 took to bug fix and revise the system to its final form.
No matter how you slice it, KSP2 is taking longer to develop and the devs have repeatedly misled (assumedly unintentionally) about timeframes.
They added it after two less years of development then the KSP2 devs have taken, and took (at least) 3 months less then the KSP2 devs have taken to refine and bugfix. Given that context, “simply added” is an accurate phrasing.
They apologized, and I’m happy to move along. But then they immediately delayed the patch and have gone basically radio silent on that delay for two days now. If they don’t want a grumpy community at some point they have to “overdeliver” for the “under promise overdeliver” strategy to work and so far they can’t even deliver.
Edit: timing for 0.1.4 just announced so that’s appreciated.
-
25 minutes ago, The Aziz said:
I don't think the x domain works well with embeds
But it means the QA was doing their job well.
I noticed that too. Tweets used to embed but I fiddled with it and couldn’t get it to appear.
-
-
2 hours ago, PDCWolf said:
Do we get a thread for the stuff on the sidebar or do we discuss it here?
Let’s try! I got the perfect title.
-
I like Kerbals as competent and driven engineers who try and try again until success. Their little quirks and silliness are nice, but I agree with you i wish the missions were treated a little more seriously.
I usually played with perma death, and hope that is still an option, but I think most want a happy game with Kerbals not being mortal and sad, and think that should be the default.
-
7 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:
@moeggz Hey and you got a question in to the AMA. Is it really "MO EGGS" or have I been imagining "Mogues" this whole time?
I wasn’t able to watch it live so I’ve been waiting for the transcript. And yeah it’s MO EGGs as in more eggs. Yoshi was my main on smash bros and child me was very creative with usernames lol. I’ve kept using it tho since it’s short and so far I’ve never had to adjust it on any new platform. Of course now that’ll be jinxed tho
-
3 minutes ago, Periple said:
As long as both are having fun, where’s the problem?
Agreed. But a binary fill (of the capped storage unit, possibly coming with an equivalent reduction in the amount of the resource at the mine, still thinking about my thoughts on depleteing material sources) means both play styles get equivalent access to resources. The player who wants to plan his missions based on what the next available transfer window is isn’t hampered in resources compared to the one who is ok warping through it all.
6 minutes ago, Periple said:The resource economy is going to be a crucial and complex design and I’m sure they’ve thought a lot about it and I certainly wouldn’t presume to know how to do it off the bat.
Yup. The ideas are fun to talk about in the abstract, but the specifics of balancing it all will be quite tough.
7 minutes ago, Periple said:why is that a problem?
I was never one who wanted very complex life support in the game, but in late career saves I always felt guilty warping a great length of time and leaving several kerbals in tiny tin cans in orbits or on planetary surfaces. I would rather there be some incentive to not do that, but recognize I may be in the minority on it. A “this command pod is good for 6 years, then will be inoperable due to Kerbal death/hibernation” would imo lead to more intentional and planed gameplay decisions. I still don’t think that needs to be in the base game.
However, for those who like to keep those considerations in mind binary fills would allow that style (even if just player limited) to not be hindered while, from my perspective, not taking anything away from the other side. They can still time warp as much as they want, there’s just no need for the more timeline methodical style to do so.
Make the limiting factors the other ones here discussed, and I can approach advancing those limiting factors with a goal of minimizing Kerbal time in tin cans while others can disregard that.
-
1 minute ago, regex said:
KSP does have some time-based mechanics inherent to the solar system which means time isn't exactly meaningless, and that also means that resource rates can have meaning. However, I again argue that resource rates really shouldn't be used for practical limits when we have much better mechanics, especially since timewarp heals all (and we're going to be timewarping a lot when it comes to interstellar travel).
Transfer windows are only meaningful when there is some punishment for them warp. As life support or part decay aren’t likely to be in the game, that leaves RTG’s basically and I don’t think that’s a big enough hindrance. If you miss a transfer window you warp to the next one. If the resource extraction rate is both gradual and transfer window dependent, I think again players will just warp to the next one. As you say, time warp heals all. I do think some punishment for time warping too much would have cascading benefits across the game, among them making a resource extraction rate make a bit more sense gameplay wise. But that’s not really on topic for this thread.
I think your ideas on the other ways the devs can limit progression are much more interesting then limiting the resource extraction rates. Have enough resources of varied difficulty to get, have them expand and unlock various parts of colonies/rocket parts and you have a pretty engaging core loop. No need for money imo.
-
14 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:
Part of the puzzle is storage limitations, where you can warp forward a short time and the tanks fill up and anything after that is a waste. So its not really infinite and binary. Ideally this would happen naturally and you’d fill up for your next mission as you fly your current one. Its a little hard to predict given wild scale changes as you go interplanetary and then interstellar. Fuel types and tech unlocks will come into it. Im going to take a day and think on this though.
I agree storage/colony VAB limitations (coupled with ways to expand those limits as you progress through the game) are the key to making the core gameplay loop fun and engaging. I guess whether or not the tanks are binary or gradual isn’t a huge issue, as I’m sure there will be mods to let you do whichever method the devs don’t chose.
Balancing all of this is going to be one heck of a challenge tho with the many different ways people play KSP1. Hopefully they pull back the curtain on these systems soon, they’ll be more to talk about with a general idea of how this system will work.
KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.
in KSP2 Discussion
Posted · Edited by moeggz
The quote here applies “never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.”
I’m not blaming any individual, they all seem like good people who believe in KSP who are doing their best. But the company is big enough that every individual can be competent and smart but if the system is set up bad a lot of good people’s efforts could be wasted.
I think even the most optimistic among us now admit something has gone wrong for it to stay in the state it is in for so long.
So assuming incompetence (of the company, again thinking that everyone we have interacted with is intelligent and capable) for me what could satisfy me is simply results. Make the game better. If you just give dates or raise expectations meet them. That proves competence. I get that in game design dates can be hard, so I’d rather no dates but they keep giving us them just to miss them.
This is why, even tho I misread his posts (which I do apologize for) I think my emotional reaction isn’t changed much.
They still gave us a date and some videos to look forward to with their apology. They then missed the date and not only that they delayed the video and have now gone a week without even mentioning what happened to it. How hard can a 10 minute screen capture of some vfx of the reentry hearing and a 10 minute video of a dev discussing it be?
They said 2 weeks ago we could expect this video in the coming weeks and it’s now confirmed it won’t be until at the soonest 3 weeks after that statement.
This isn’t a delay on the patch for performance reasons, this is straight up promising a simple video, delaying it, and then ignoring it exists the next week.
All his other replies seemed to imply that the community should not expect much for the next few weeks, so even tho I misread him I still think the video will be closer in time to what I read his response as then not.
You had an apology, a date, and some videos to look forward to. When the last two are delayed and then seemingly forgot about the apology isn’t worth much.