Yakuzi
-
Posts
615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Yakuzi
-
-
On 8/12/2023 at 2:47 PM, Strawberry said:
Well yes what defines serious/good development will be heavily subjective, its close to impossible to objectively measure the quality and speed of development properly, and doubly so in a way that everyone will agree on, thats just the nature of these conversations
Right, that's why professional dev teams don't use your random definition when developing software.
On 8/12/2023 at 6:07 AM, Pthigrivi said:The question I asked was what is the actual point of rehashing 6 years of dev development 20 times a month on this board? I would like a direct answer to that specific question.
It seems like you're somewhat curious about why people keep mentioning the ~6 year dev time of KSP2. I'll give you my perspective:
Unsurprisingly, I was quite shocked at the state of the game when KSP2 released in EA. Between the original planned release date of the full game, the multiple subsequent delays and ultimately the shoddy EA release, it is clear something has gone very wrong during the development process. Since KSP is my all-time favorite game, I wanted to know if this was due to one or more isolated events or a more structural concern, which would give some insight into future development/viability of KSP2. Discussing the lack of progress has been difficult on the forums due to persistent mocking, gaslighting, white knighting and other forms of toxic positivity. One of the excuses that keeps coming up is that KSP2 has only been in development for a couple of years, because [insert random unsubstantiated reason here]. So until the forum community accepts that KSP2 has been in development for as long as it has, I'm afraid the rehashing is here to stay (or until all critics give up and leave I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯).
23 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:2) The original studio collapsed and was rebuilt half-way through development. No matter what you personally think about the politics of that it was undoubtedly incredibly messy and disruptive to the process and probably set them back a year all by itself.
3) Do people remember this all happened during COVID? Every business I deal with was set back at least a year cumulatively by the collective disruption that happened over the 2 years from 2020 to 2022.In June 2021 Nate claimed these events didn't affect progress substantially:
Ozzie: "It's been almost two years since KSP2 was first revealed. How has the game's development progressed since and how much of it was affected by the pandemic?"
Nate: "Well that's a good question. Uh, well, obviously there's been about two years of progress since last time we talked about the game."So according to the developer, KSP2 progress has been as expected since work started in 2017.
-
13 hours ago, Strawberry said:
When a development team gets into an actually decent pace for making the game.
So development has yet to start?
Jokes asides (?), that's one subjective definition. Whatever fits your narrative I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
13 minutes ago, Strawberry said:
snip
Everything you describe above is part of the development cycle. Again could you clarify what "serious" development work is?
-
35 minutes ago, Strawberry said:
For clarification, just because work started in 2017 does not mean development work started in 2017, big company projects can often spend 1-2 years just hiring and getting the team prepared before beginning serious development work.
Your post doesn't clarify much. Hiring the necessary talent, requirements engineering , financing, etc are part of the planning phase of software development. Additionally, Take-Two outsourced KSP2 to an existing studio that would likely have most of the needed experience in-house to produce the desired product.
Could you clarify what this "serious" development work is you're talking about?
-
14 hours ago, PDCWolf said:
we don't know how far ago they started development, but it could be as early as 2017
We do know. Work on KSP2 started in 2017:
QuoteIn 2017, Star Theory began working with Take-Two on its most high-profile project. Take-Two had purchased the rights to a popular flight simulation game developed by another independent studio and contracted Star Theory to make a sequel.
-
On 7/3/2023 at 2:50 PM, MechBFP said:
Now we are up to 6 years? In only a few short months from now the work on KSP 2 will have started 10 years ago.
4 hours ago, Alexoff said:So when did the creation of KSP2 begin? Physics was already working in that demo, rockets could fly, there were planets. Or are you just here to laugh?
"Star Theory began work on KSP2 in 2017, after Take-Two purchased the rights to the popular flight sim game from another independent studio, Squad." - source
"In 2017, Star Theory began working with Take-Two on its most high-profile project." - source
So at the time of the EA launch KSP2 had been in development well over 5 years, even if work on KSP2 started on the 31st of December 2017.
EDIT: If work started a couple of months after Take Two acquired the KSP intellectual property in May 2017, then today we're looking at ~6 years since KSP2 development started.
-
2 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:
Your own source, which you just quoted a couple of posts ago, used “work”, not “development”.
[snip] What do you think development means?
2 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:And yes, credibility of sources and quality of reporting does matter
Sure. Again, do you have any reliable info which would indicate that the Bloomberg or Videogameschronicle articles are not credible?
[snip]
-
1 minute ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:
Fair enough. I’d gone to Wikipedia for the timeline. Quibbling about credibility of sources and definitions of work (in my line of work there’s years of prep before we put metaphorical boots on the ground) aside, I expect that the quantity and quality of Star Theory’s work might have had something to do with their replacement. We might be better served by looking at when work on the IG version started. But again, this is all still pointless speculation. Until somebody talks all we have is uninformed guesswork.
There's no quibbling on my end, I'm solely referring to sources that state that development of KSP2 began in 2017.
Additionally, why are you now including assumptions about the 'credibility of sources' and 'quantity and quality of ST's work'? Unless you can provide any sources that prove otherwise, it seems like you're just trying to move the goal posts.
-
23 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:
The mistake you’re making is confusing acquisition of IP with commencement of actual development work, unless you’re including the underlying commercial and legal work in your definition of “development”.
The development work proper would have started at some point after Private Division engaged Star Theory (then Uber Entertainment), and Star Theory ramped up to begin work - planning, reassigning resources, hiring new ones, getting them organized and set up to work. Speculating about that on zero evidence is pointless. I don’t know that we’ve got a date for Star Theory being hired, but given the timing and lack of technical detail of the first Star Theory announcement (August 2019) I doubt a lot of actual coding happened before August 2019. Can’t say for sure, though, and those who know aren’t talking.
I hope that somebody breaks NDA at some point. The story is probably pretty interesting.
Before you continue to make baseless assumptions and accusations I suggest you actually read the sources (edit: again source1, source2) I included in the very post you're quoting:
QuoteStar Theory began work on KSP2 in 2017, after Take-Two purchased the rights to the popular flight sim game from another independent studio, Squad.
QuoteIn 2017, Star Theory began working with Take-Two on its most high-profile project. Take-Two had purchased the rights to a popular flight simulation game developed by another independent studio and contracted Star Theory to make a sequel.
Appreciate the irony of your post though. The forums definitely have become more... interesting... since KSP2 has been released.
-
On 6/27/2023 at 2:45 AM, MechBFP said:
You complain about bad faith arguments, and then say that. Not very consistent.
Not sure what you're on about. KSP2 started development in 2017 after Take Two acquired the IP in May (source1, source2). Even if they started on the 31st of December 2017 that puts development well over 5 years before they went into EA.
-
5 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:
To this point, check out this video. It shows the development of KSP from 2011 onwards, warts, wonkiness, and all. The pace of development is informative (IG launched a far more complete EA and are progressing faster). But more importantly, it’s a great trip down memory lane for those of us who’ve been playing for years and for those who haven’t, the jank, wonk, and crudity of early KSP is a good laugh:
If KSP succeeded as it did with beginnings like that, I’m sure that KSP2 will do just fine.
This is a bad faith argument. The development of the two games is vastly different in multiple ways. If you still insist on comparing them, you should do so from the start of development to get some indication of relative progress made per unit of time:
KSP1 went into EA less than 1.5 years after one passionate dude started development and the game was generally received well. KSP2 went into a EA after 5+ years of development by a dedicated professional software studio with nearly 50 employees, which had full access to KSP1's source code and the backing of a multi billion dollar producer, and clearly it's a mess. Early Access KSP1 was a buggy mess too you say? Sure thing, but after 5 years of development KSP1 was fully released and had received multiple additional updates (v1.0.5 ), after 5.5 years we had KSP1 v1.1.3 and were well on the way to KSP v1.2.
-
2 hours ago, Spicat said:
Mostly linkedin:
[snip]
So let me get this straight: based on your social media searches you're suggesting that an official spokesman from the company that makes KSP2 lied?
-
5 hours ago, Vanamonde said:
I'm finding it somewhat surreal that the KSP1 bugtracker, which was always widely hated and frequently complained about, is now being help up as the shining example from the good old days that would save KSP2.
I find it somewhat surreal that being critical about the UX and functionality of a tool apparently means it will get abolished. It's especially surreal since it concerns a tool which is integral for getting your software in a decent state, and extra especially surreal since KPS2 was released as EA because the community needed to "provide feedback to shape this exciting game through development" (and fork over $50).
* Bonus surrealism that this is coming from a mod.
-
9 hours ago, Strawberry said:
This analysis drastically overestimates the continuity of Uber entertainment to intercept games. When Take two took over, every producer besides one got fired from ksp2, most of the engineers (especially the senior ones and leads) were gone. And of course the CEO and all of Uber's other management was gone too. Unless there's some secret cabal of artists controlling the game, the actual management and technical implementation side of ksp2 is pretty close to a fresh start.
9 hours ago, Spicat said:In summary, I wouldn't trust this guy too much (and the source in the description is a paid article so I can't check the validity). What we have from Uber Entertainement is some devs (a lot less than the 50% stated in the video), and the management seems to be very different because it's under Take2 and Private Division.
Do either of you have any sources or are these just assumptions? AFAIK there's no evidence supporting a "fresh start" or discontinuation of management or the game after the Take-Two poached Star Theory's KSP2 team. The sources I found (which includes a statement by a T2 spokesman) described that more than 50% of the development team working on KSP 2 made the move from Star Theory to Take-Two, including three leaders who immediately made the move (source 1, source 2):
SpoilerDespite reportedly encouraging their employees to stay at the company in an attempt to secure a new project, more than half of KSP2’s development team are claimed to have eventually joined Take-Two’s new studio Intercept Games.
[snip]
Brian Roundy, a spokesman for Take-Two’s Private Division publishing label, told the publication: “More than half of the team is now at Intercept Games. In doing so, we are empowering our deeply passionate and talented team to focus on quality, and we are thrilled with the progress that they are making on the game.”
Star Theory began work on KSP2 in 2017, after Take-Two purchased the rights to the popular flight sim game from another independent studio, Squad.
Spoiler“More than half of the team is now at Intercept Games,” Roundy wrote. “In doing so, we are empowering our deeply passionate and talented team to focus on quality, and we are thrilled with the progress that they are making on the game.”
[snip]
Three of Star Theory’s leaders—Jeremy Ables, the studio chief; Nate Simpson, the creative director; and Nate Robinson, the lead producer—departed for Take-Two’s new studio immediately.
[snip]
About a dozen of Star Theory’s 30 employees wound up leaving for Take-Two’s new studio, while the rest stuck around in an attempt to save the business, they said. By January, the remaining team had a plan in place: Each employee would spend the next two months brainstorming new ideas and building prototypes. Then they would pitch the best ones to publishers at the Game Developers Conference in mid-March in the hope of securing a new deal, the five workers said. The annual conference is always full of publishers looking to make investments in indie studios with proven track records.
Then came the pandemic. The conference was canceled, leaving Star Theory with nowhere to take its pitches. Publishers, sensing an economic downturn, tightened their spending. On March 4, Star Theory shut down. Each worker received a month’s pay and two months of health insurance, said three former employees. A few joined their former colleagues at Take-Two’s Intercept Games.
Kerbal Space Program 2 remains in development at Intercept. The game had been set to come out this year, but the company said last month it was delaying the release until the fall of 2021.
-
13 hours ago, Strawberry said:
I do wonder why this update came out longer then I expected. The previous two patches had pretty good pace, the main causes I can think of is 1. probably lots of people taking vacations right now, and 2. Switching over to a new workflow will slow things down temporarily as the team adjusts. I think its mostly the latter??
3. Some bugs were already fixed before launch, but didn't make it to the release for whatever reason, but made it to the first two patches. And now we're being shown the actual development
pacecadence. -
19 minutes ago, The Aziz said:
Counterpoint: inability to see the ground below is a gamechanging mechanic. You don't know if after your deorbit burn you're ending up in the ocean or mountain slope.
Counterpoint: IVA perspective is a gamechanging mechanic. You have a lot less overview than a chase cam and you have to pay more attention to maintain situational awareness of your surroundings.
-
34 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:
...the actual number of non-Steam players was about 75% of the Steam players. Meaning if Steamdb showed 10k playing, you could expect the actual number to be 10,750 ish.
I take it you meant 17,500-ish?
-
6 minutes ago, AtomicTech said:
Where might I be able to find this?
Nate Simpson replying to concerns/criticism on the Human Resources kickstarter (since the earlier released Planetary Annihilation was still underdeveloped and had major issues, link to thread ):
SpoilerHowdy ataraxic, This is Nate, the art director for Human Resources. Hi. I just wanted to address your comment, since it sounds like you think HR is a cool idea, but you're concerned that we won't be able to deliver on the promise of the pitch. I am stoked that you liked our idea, first off. I was genuinely worried that folks would think HR was too nuts, so it's a relief to discover that the idea has traction. I've written this in a couple of other places, but I want to reiterate that Uber is for the first time choosing to grow to accommodate two equal-sized projects simultaneously. I am one of several people who were hired explicitly to build this new project. PA is remaining fully-staffed, and that staff is committed to continuing to deliver on the promises made in that Kickstarter. The nice thing is that with a multi-project structure, the company will be better able to support all of our offerings, regardless of their short-term economic viability. With two games on a staggered schedule, we can afford to bring every game to a good level of polish. That's a whole lot harder to do when you've got one team working on one project. If that project hits a rough spot, you've got to scramble to figure out how to keep the lights on. There are other benefits to the two-project structure -- namely, that because Human Resources is being built on the PA engine, any improvements we make may also improve the PA experience. We just have more brains working on the problem, and that's good for both projects. I hope that all made sense. Personally, I think Human Resources is going to be a great game, and it's existence will help ensure that PA gets the full gestation that it deserves. A vote for Human Resources is a vote for a better PA. We'd love to have your support. Because monsters and robots. Thanks, Nate
Nate Simpson replying to the fallout when Human Resources got cancelled (link to thread):
SpoilerI get why you feel this way. I think we had a little less control over the timing than many suppose. But regardless, PA will continue to receive upgrades, and I hope very much that it meets your expectations at some point.
I'm seeing this comment enough on these postmortem threads that I'm going to copy-paste my way-too-long explanation of the timing from the kickstarter comments. Apologies in advance, but I hope it sheds a little light on the timing:
"Cancel the current project, finish PA, come back to HR later."
The way game teams work, different people come into play at different points in the pipeline. It starts with a small team doing design and concept art, and then as prototyping gets underway, engineers begin to roll on. Then content starts to get made, which means artists and animators and scripters and more engineers. And once the bulk of that stuff is done, there are loose ends to tie up, bugs to hunt, random UI tweaks to do, visual effects to polish. There's marketing art, trailers, music and sound effects. In the case of PA, there are also lots of rewards to complete (the art book, custom commanders, etc).
But if you look at the way the actual hours add up, it resembles a boa constrictor with a wild boar inside it -- narrow at the ends, fat in the middle. And all those surplus people at the ends need to either do something else or go find another job. This is why medium-sized studios often develop two or more projects at a time. If you do it right, you can sort of rotate your crops so that the land is always growing something.
PA is at a point where there is still lots of engineering to do, and there are a bunch of engineers dedicated to making that game as awesome as possible. No engineers are working on HR right now. Part of the reason we are doing the Kickstarter is so that we can afford a few engineers to get us to alpha.
We did, however, get help from several PA artists to make the HR trailer. This is a good thing, because the bulk of the art for PA is complete (not all of it, but the bulk of it). I am the only new full-time hire for Human Resources at the moment.
Human Resources is its own project, separate from PA, and as such is expected to pull its own weight financially. Ideally, it will eventually bring in enough revenue that it can make the company more stable and more able to lavish the sort of polish on PA that we want, even if financial winds start blowing in an unfavorable direction.
The existence of HR, while it may seem impertinent or poorly timed to some observers, is actually a thing that A) is necessitated by the distribution of occupations within the company and B) good for PA in the long run, both as a financial buffer and as an incubator for further development of the PA engine.
I know this answer was long, but I hope it gives you some insight into why we can't just stop a thing that we've already dumped a bunch of time and money into, teach a bunch of artists how to fix bugs, push them onto PA, send me off to go find another job somewhere, fund the entire company for a year with a single project, and then have me quit whatever other job I got to come back to Uber and try to resurrect a project that has completely lost its momentum.
Human Resources lives or dies by what is happening right now. PA will continue to improve and thrive, and our communication with the community will continue to improve (as you've seen with Jeremy Ables). Clearly, there are major perception issues right now -- after all, here we are in a thread that's supposed to be about Human Resources, and we're talking about a different project.
Is Uber's past performance a legitimate topic of discussion? Of course it is. Do we have room to improve? Absolutely. Do I personally think we are a company that is committed to quality and able to deliver on ambitious goals? I absolutely believe it, or I wouldn't have taken this job.
This is the only place that an idea like Human Resources could have thrived, and these are the only people that I know of who have the right combination of expertise, passion, and technology to get the job done. If we get to make this game, it will melt faces.
If you need to wait for a while before your faith in Uber is restored, I get it. PA gets better every day, as the recent spate of major updates has shown. I hope we win back every person who feels we've let them down. But we don't have the luxury of putting Human Resources back on the shelf until everybody agrees we've atoned enough.
We go to war with the army we have, for better or for worse. It's up to you to decide if you want to be a part of this particular fight."
Nate's rhetoric seems quite similar to what he's been using to describe the pre-release and current state of development of KSP2. As such I don't think anyone would be over-cautious to take anything he says with a proverbial grain of salt.
-
2 hours ago, uglyduckling81 said:
At least they won't have any more bugs being discovered if no one plays it.
Everything goes according to plan.
-
I agree with most of the OP, especially the main point. I was also primarily looking forward to a KSP2 with a performant and relatively robust codebase. A game engine that could run interstellar motherships bearing landers and satellites, while managing the logistics of a host of colonies and space stations on and around multiple planets and moons in different star systems through high-fidelity physics simulations... of 16 players in multiplayer. This has effectively been what Take2 and its subsidiaries have been communicating over the years. The state the game was released in after over half a decade of development does not... to put it mildly... give me much hope to ever see that vision realised.
5 hours ago, VlonaldKerman said:- We don't know what the new science system is going to be, but I suspect it will be fine, so not much worry there.
I disagree here. Based on what the company has been hinting at KSP2 will have a similar science experience as KSP1, which wasn't good at all.
3 hours ago, VlonaldKerman said:It’s also been a common point raised by people who defend the state of the game that they scrapped the initial vision of the game in 2020 when T2 took over, and that the initial vision did not include revamped core systems and was a reskin like you described, and that the game is in an early state because they decided to start over with a more ambitious, ground-up development that fundamentally altered game mechanics and systems. However, this doesn’t seem to be true, which casts doubt on the idea that development was restarted. If dev wasn’t restarted, then that means that the game was in an unbelievably early state when they claimed to be < a year away from release.
Are there any sources that support the claim that KSP2 development was restarted? The only source I could find, that June 2021 interview , hints at quite the opposite. When asked about KSP2's development since its reveal in 2019 (prior to the poaching of Star Theory devs by Take2), Nate Simpson mentioned they made about 2 years of progress. He didn't mention anything about regress, discontinuation or a restart. Here's the relevant part of the dialogue:
SpoilerOzzie - "It's been almost two years since KSP2 was first revealed. How has the game's development progressed and how much of it was affected by the pandemic?"
Nate - "Well that's a good question. Well obviously there's about two years of progress since last time we talked about the game.
[snip]
Nate - "And obviously were in the final stretch. We're releasing and we're releasing next year."
-
1 hour ago, GGG-GoodGuyGreg said:
I would love to see more similarities with the NMS launch.
Seems like KSP2 is more on a Planetary Annihilation-like trajectory.
-
If you're willing to take the risk of not being able to refund... x_x
Green Man Gaming sells KSP2 at 15% discount. Click
IndieGala sells KSP2 at 13% discount. Click
Edit: also available at Fanatical at 13% discount. Click
Guess Space_Scumbag aka SWDennis was right after all:
EDIT: Changed the title to indicate that these sales are not on behalf of Private Division.
-
On 2/24/2023 at 7:23 PM, regex said:
I find it amusing to see the comparisons to KSP1 considering just how little KSP1 had at 0.7.3 release. People have some really short memories.
I agree, it is kinda amusing comparing KSP1 to KSP2:
KSP1 went into EA less than 1.5 years after one passionate dude started development and was generally received well. KSP2 went into a EA after ~5 to 5.5 years of development by a dedicated professional software studio with 48 employees (as per Intercept Games LinkedIn page), which had full access to KSP1's source code and the backing of a multi billion dollar producer, and it's a mess in more ways than I can be bothered to sum up here. Early Access KSP1 was a buggy mess too you say? Sure thing, but after 5 years of development KSP1 was... *checks notes*... fully released and had received multiple additional updates (v1.0.5 ), after 5.5 years we had KSP1 v1.1.3 and were well on the way to KSP v1.2.
Amusing but also a bit sad don't you think? People have some really short memories indeed and will resort to some hefty mental gymnastics to keep ignoring the red flag parade.
-
21 hours ago, whatsEJstandfor said:
Seriously, I feel like I'm the only one who still pronounces it "Mün". I always forget it's no longer spelled that way canonically anymore. It's like that spelling was suddenly abandoned at some point and everyone just started pronouncing it boringly
There's dozens of üs!
KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.
in KSP2 Discussion
Posted
While I appreciate your commitment, we all have biases so I'm genuinely curious how you decide what is bad faith and what is not. On this forum for instance, have you noticed bad faith arguments from KSP2 critics only, or also from its praisers and its developer?