Buzz313th

I was thinking "Combo Parts" instead of larger parts of a particular type and function. Like a hab section part that has RCS, resource and other parts baked in to increase the functionality but not "Part Count". Hopefully it's only larger versions of particular parts as you say..

It's two tweets that have presented this "IVA" image. Not just one, so they made the same mistake twice? And then there is this.....

This concept is so revealing that it's impossible for me to understand how anyone can not consider it misleading.

Won't gigantic parts dumb down the engineering depth and challenge and dilute the potential ship diversity that we all loved with KSP1? Are gigantic parts the solution to a performance limit on vessel part count?

I am here regarding the thread topic. I honestly thought that there were IVA's in the upcoming 0.2.0. Cheers

Without analog control the player can only set pitch, roll or yaw to full or off. It’s absurd that a game about flight has no analog controller support.

I respect your faith and loyalty.. How about, "Try this in KSP2"? Again, I appreciate your loyalty Yes I do feel that you are being conned. I also have a tremendous amount of respect for the small community that is left here and still shows the loyalty that I believe is not deserved. I am not Anti IG, but I am a diehard when it comes to opposing corporate greed. I once had the faith and hope you all have.. And to prove it.. here is one of my first posts on the KSP2 release state...

I could pick apart your reply above, but I'm not going to do it.. mostly, because, You or anyone else reading this thread is not the target demographic for those two twitter posts... To further justify my opinion on this topic, please see this reply I just posted....

And one thing I completely missed, which kinda shows the true intent of that twitter post... The video header states... "Try this in the 0.2 update next month" What exactly do they mean by, "Try this in the 0.2 update next month?" Can't we already move the camera into the model and "hack" an IVA view now? Do we need version 0.2 to do this? Or can I just load up KSP2 right now and get that same view? I can do it now.. Without version 0.2. So if this is the case, then what exactly in that video are they showing that 0.2 will allow us to do that is not already possible? This is why I am so frustrated. I see the writing on the wall. I believe there is more effort trying to "Con" then to produce.

Your a biased observer. Ask someone else to look at those two twitter posts that knows nothing about KSP2 and enough about gaming to recognize the word "Clipping". I believe that both of those posts are purposely riding a fine line that is fraudulent marketing practice. Ask yourself this.... Were both of these two twitter posts targeting KSP players, or the general public? If your answer is, "The General Public", then ask yourself as the "Marketing Director" of KSP2, why wouldn't your disclaimer be written to inform and communicate better to the general public? There is a clear pattern here.

The video header clearly states..... "Try this in the 0.2 update next month",....... Inferring that what you see will be available to do as a player if you own KSP2 and apply the update next month. My questions as a potential buyer after seeing this is... 1. Does this mean that I will be able to fly from inside the cockpit in this game? It sure looks like it. If I am satisfied with what I saw and I am just breezing through twitter posts then I will likely miss or ignore the cryptic disclaimer posted afterward... If I read the marketing disclaimer, then I have more questions, assuming I am even motivated enough to try and answer these questions through google searches... KSP Twitter account states the following disclaimer in a post following the original video post. "p.s. clipping the capture camera into the cockpit creates a pretty convincing IVA (intra-vehicular activity....or first-Kerbal) view. actual IVA view for KSP2 is on our feature list though!" 1. What does all this mean to the uninformed? 2. What is "Clipping" 3. What is the "Capture Camera" 4. What is an "IVA View"? "Intra Vehicle Activity"? 5. "First Kerbal View"? 6. "actual IVA view for KSP2 is on our feature list though"? Who that has not played KSP knows what any of these terms are? Even if you have played KSP as a casual user, then you still might not know. The entire disclaimer is cryptic. Why so cryptic? Why not just say the following to make it clearer to the public, if your true intent is to notify the public that this is not a feature that is included in the 0.2 update? "p.s. We had to move the user adjustable camera inside the game asset model to achieve this cockpit view. The game does not have any functional cockpits, nor any first person views yet, but we have plans to start development on this feature in the future!" Because arguably, the marketing department is riding that fine line of truth to hopefully sell more copies of KSP2 to a demographic that they haven't already sold copies to.

I am afraid to answer this as I realize further discussion on the topic of the release trailer may pull this conversation off topic and result in getting the topic placed "Under Review". Maybe we can start another post on this topic... Again, my bad for going off on a tangent in my previous post.. Let me explain with a following post I was working on before you posted your reply. Standby......

Last thread was closed because it went off topic and one of the forum mods recommended to start a new one and stay on topic... From Vanamonde "So the subject of this thread was joystick support. (Really! Go back and look!) But since it's been about everything else but, why don't we all just move on? Anyway whoever has any concrete news about joystick support can feel free to start a new thread for that. As long as it stays on-topic. " So I don't have any concrete news about Joystick Support, but maybe a developer can comment, since they would be the ones with the info? Maybe? Please Cheers

When you hire Halon Entertainment to make your EA release trailer, your writing a huge check... Huge check = Big effort. When your socials and marketing team runs out of relevant content to show for your holiday release of "For Science" and starts relying on pushing the external camera in to the model of assets to make it look like an IVA, and posts it on twitter twice.. Then there has been a conscious conversation regarding and there has been an effort made. When there is a disclaimer added after the post, then there has been effort in "Cleaning it up". Their "Socials" dept is also choosing trending content on twitter that has nothing to do with gaming.. And tagging them with their "IVA" posts to hit a demographic that loves space, but would not know about KSP or the reputation of the KSP2 development. Which is a fair marketing strategy, but that demographic will have no idea what "Clipping" or "IVA" is. They just see the NASA post and then the KSP2 post of an astronaut POV and become a potential buyer of KSP2 thinking they will get to experience virtually what they see in the post. It's poor form and should be called out. But back to our topic so this thread doesn't get "Locked For Review".

Best is subjective. But I have produced content for 30 years in the advertising industry and I’m well aware of how it works. Cheers

Large marketing efforts usually indicate the producer knows the product sucks. It's when the marketing is low key, then the producers know that word of mouth will sell the product.

They kinda did it here too... This one also has Flight controls written all over it...

Most people on twitter and other socials just look at images.. And most people who advertise on twitter know this. A current marketing course will outline the interesting hooks of social media. The disclaimer will not make it to most and never make it to the person who knows nothing of KSP.

But misleading to someone who knows nothing about KSP and is looking for a space game where you can fly from inside the cockpit.....?

So they took the time and developed a way to move the external camera in to the model to make a "Half Baked" IVA? Why not just take that same time to develop a proper 1st person view and a proper cockpit? Seems to me a bad use of developer time... Edit.. Just saw Aziz's post...

Being on twitter and all. And with Twitter being such a powerhouse for advertisement and exposure.. Isn't this a bit misleading?

So you mean that this is not a first person view from inside a KSP2 cockpit?

Or, somebody doing the right thing and saying the quiet part out loud like, “Hey folks, we have an incredible potential to continue the legacy of an amazing product, but it’s going to take some unpopular internal decisions. I think it’s time to dig in and realistically execute a solution and at the same time be forthcoming with the people who are willing to support those decisions.” it’s a job risk, but it shows integrity and could be the right thing to do.

Sounds like every production in the entertainment industry..