• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2981 Excellent


About Kerbart

  • Rank
    Mun Marketeer

Profile Information

  • Location Elmwood Park, NJ
  • Interests Rockit sience
  1. The time it takes to execute these plans is longer than a presidential term. Which is why every president over the last 20 years has announced similar plans. that never came to fruition.
  2. Mind = blown

    While it's exciting that technology changes so fast, it's also important to realize that the technology revolution we've seen has already peaked. Sure, we're still seeing a lot of new stuff appear, but the revolutionary aspect of it is long gone. The service live span of military aircraft used to be merely years, before they were completely outdated and needed replacement with newer ones. Now, our frontline aircraft are decades in service (and take equal amounts of times to be developed). Spacecraft, same thing. We've been spending double the amount of time, it seems, on SLS/Orion/Whateveritiscalled than it took to develop and complete three programs: Mercury, Gemini and Apollo. Compare the way cars looked in 1960 with how they looked in 1970. Now compare cars from 2000 with those from today. The sad reality is that 50 years from now we won't say "oh, that is so old and primitive" but rather "yeah, that's when it came first into service."
  3. Why does KSP need to be extremely expensive

    Most games cost you $60 or more and require that for every major update. If Squad had applied EA's pricing strategy you'd have spent something like $300 since the game came out. You'd also get considerable less playtime out of most mainstream titles. KSP is a lot things, but "expensive" or "not worth the money" it is not.
  4. KSP Acquired by Take-Two Interactive

    You’re making a lot of assumptions there. ”a half decent sum of money,” indicates that Squads owners agreed to a fee compared to the true monetizing potential of the game. Aside from the fact that accounts have an incredible hard time coming up with a reliable number in regards to that, we don’t even know what T2 paid. I doubt Squad ownerships main interest was making a succesful game; they just want to make money. And they did, and they got a nice stack on top of it. Us having a great game is a neat side effect, but it’s not really what they care about. I’m with the tiny group that thinks T2 ownership is good. They’re a computer game company, compared to Squad’s marketing/advertising background. They now have a stake in making KSP a lasting succes, something that doesn’t involve, as many seem to think, deliberately alienating its paying customers. There’s a certain market where micropayments work, and KSP is not that market. And T2/is not so stupid to think it is, they wouldn’t be where they are if they were.
  5. Forgive my ignorance, what does FPS stand for? In regards to computer performance the only thing that comes to mind is “frames per second” but that would be utterly nonsense—no one would play computer games on a landed Venus probe. And obviously this term is more meaningful that the word “performance” (or that would have been used).
  6. Retro Gaming and Emulators

    Your taste is too newfangled. I have no problems with playing Volcano Hunter or Penetrator that run in an emulator that runs in javascript.
  7. KSP Making History

    But you didn’t say that initially. There’s an important and not-so-subtle difference between “It’s not worth it for me” and “it’s not worth it” — the latter will evoke a reaction from people who beg to differ.
  8. KSP Making History

  9. KSP is dead?

    Well, if the game is dead, why would you? There wouldn't be any weekly announcements if the game is dead, right? A good thing Schrödinger proved that the game can be dead and ruined by T2 at the same time. As long as you don't look at it.
  10. Why weren't there any camera's on the galileo probe?

    On the other hand, if you want future missions to be financed, you need public engagement. Pictures are a lot better at creating that than, say, magnetosphere readings. Or pretty artist impressions.
  11. Not even that. Recurring revenue stream. Could be micro transactions, could be DLC. The claim that it’s only microtransactions came from a journalist who got what he wanted to have; attention.
  12. The question is not how the game would be distributed. The question is how micropayments would be implemented. What would stop players from editing save files (which are plain text)? Would would stop them from using mods that provide the same functionality as what the micropayments offer? Yes, the game can be modified. Save files can be encrypted. Maybe you can prevent mods from providing such functionality without killing mods in general (although that will be tricky without a proper API). Consider the cost involved with realizing such changes. Consider the reduction of the userbase (95%of the players will likely just stick to the last MP-free version). Consider the revenue stream from the reduced user-base. I’m pretty certain that that is what @regex meant. now, with that in mind, consider “plan B” for a “recurring revenue stream:” selling DLC. How viable is that? Oh wait, they’re already working on it. So what’s the more likely option for recurring revenue with KSP: DLC or micropayments?
  13. Bazinga! Stupidly enough I never, ever thought this argument through. Think about it. Go ahead. Take a minute. Maybe two. Maybe five. And then you'll see why I just switched over to the “Yeah, micropayments in KSP, BRING IT, T2, BRING IT!” camp. (Hint: once you see it, it's stunningly obvious)
  14. So, based on the interpretation of an interpretation “Gamasutra listened in to the 50-minute call and managed to stay awake long enough to get some hints about the dark (yet unsurprising) future which lies in wait for all of us” you’re ringing the alarm bell? Look up the meaning of the phrase “telephone game”first. All I get is “after our customers buy a title, we want them to spend more money on it.” Now, the funny thing is, in any other field this wouldn’t be news. Waterman sells pens. No one, no one is upset over the fact that they sell their ink instead of giving it away. Nike sells shoes. No one, no one is upset over the fact that they sell their socks instead of giving them away. Nikon sells cameras. No one, no one is upset that you have to buy memory cards or film for them, instead of them supplying you with it for free. But as soon as it comes to games we expect ongoing development to be free of charge, eternally? Wake up call: if consumers are not willing to pay for ongoing development, it’s duration is going to be shorter than eternal; a lot shorter. T2 didn’t say micropayments in every game; they spoke about “recurring payments” for every title and they explicitly said that the specific form in which they would do that would differ from game to game. For some games that will be micropayments; for others it will be DLC. Fearmongering on the claim that T2 wants more money is pointless. Acting like it’s unreasonable to expect more than one paycheck for work delivered... if you think that’s how the world should work, let me know. My employer would love to offer you a job!
  15. KSP Weekly: Godspeed, John Glenn

    Wow a lot of reactions already for this week's update. Oooh wait. Someone's slacking!