We're not paying enough

[Vermil]

One thing I've been thinking about recently, is how much I loathe MMO-games...

I don't want to see KSP becoming a game that finances itself by becoming an online-game. I don't want to see KSP be sold to a major publisher that ruins everything they get their hands on, by remaking game-mechanics things to become subscription services. Also, I don't think we full-blown fans have paid enough. I would certainly pay some kind of subscription to have my game updated, as per currently. 
What I'm specifically thinking of is a KSP 2? This would force us to pay for the game over again, and generate income for continued development.

 

[Rocket In My Pocket]

This is a non-idea.

You're basically suggesting a sequel to KSP that costs money, not exactly mind blowing, revolutionary stuff.

Also, you say you hate subscription fees but then a sentence later you say you'd be willing to pay one...I mean what is it exactly your trying to say in this post? That you don't want KSP to become an MMO? We don't even have multiplayer so I wouldn't worry too much about that... Or are you just suggesting they stop working on KSP 1 and jump right to 2? Either way KSP is obviously a financial success since it's development is still going strong, so all of these points are fairly moot.

If you are so desperate to give SQUAD more money, feel free to buy additional copies of KSP and hand them out to friends.

[Vermil]

2 hours ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

This is a non-idea.

You're basically suggesting a sequel to KSP that costs money, not exactly mind blowing, revolutionary stuff.

Also, you say you hate subscription fees but then a sentence later you say you'd be willing to pay one...I mean what is it exactly your trying to say in this post? That you don't want KSP to become an MMO? We don't even have multiplayer so I wouldn't worry too much about that... Or are you just suggesting they stop working on KSP 1 and jump right to 2? Either way KSP is obviously a financial success since it's development is still going strong, so all of these points are fairly moot.

If you are so desperate to give SQUAD more money, feel free to buy additional copies of KSP and hand them out to friends.

Buying extra copies is an excellent idea (and in fact one I've already employed for other games, so I definitely should for KSP as well). The problem is it won't really generate much income for SQUAD if only I do it, so it doesn't address my concerns.

As for you not understanding my comments on subscription services, it's not the subscription fee - that I have to pay money - I resent, it's what is done to the games to make people do it. The content and nature of the game changes. But no, I'd hate to "not own" the game and have to pay to play it. That's a bad idea. It's a widely abhorred business idea anyway, among gamers.

 

Edited February 28, 2016 by Vermil

[Waxing_Kibbous]

If you have some extra dough you want to put into KSP why not support your favorite modders? Quite a few have donation links.

[tater]

I'd happily pay for a sequel. Anyone against that should move out of their parents' basement.

[ToukieToucan]

1 minute ago, tater said:

I'd happily pay for a sequel. Anyone against that should move out of their parents' basement.

The point is that we dont need a sequel...

[Chemp]

I agree with you that it would be a shame to see such a great game ruined, but I think there are other ways to prevent that from happening: for one, there is the store where you buy articles, therefore not only supporting the devs but also making publicity for the game. Think of a KSP mug in your office or wearing the shirt at an occasion where you get attention anyway. If you're not comfortable stating your support that openly (which is not everybody's mug of coffee - err, cup of tea) I'm sure that buying multiple copies as has been suggested also goes a long way. And since you started this thread, you maybe even influenced some other forum users to do the same.

[Majorjim!]

2 hours ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

This is a non-idea.

You're basically suggesting a sequel to KSP that costs money, not exactly mind blowing, revolutionary stuff.

Also, you say you hate subscription fees but then a sentence later you say you'd be willing to pay one...I mean what is it exactly your trying to say in this post? That you don't want KSP to become an MMO? We don't even have multiplayer so I wouldn't worry too much about that... Or are you just suggesting they stop working on KSP 1 and jump right to 2? Either way KSP is obviously a financial success since it's development is still going strong, so all of these points are fairly moot.

If you are so desperate to give SQUAD more money, feel free to buy additional copies of KSP and hand them out to friends.

4 million copies sold so far, 2 million regular players.

[tater]

21 minutes ago, ToukieToucan said:

The point is that we dont need a sequel...

Sure we do. Ideally an add-on. Expand the scope.

Add colonization (building actual structures in situ). Add new game modes like:

a space race (this would require adding AI to run the competing program, and to pilot/gain science/repair competing craft).

exploration (random kerbol system that requires that the player actually explore it)

interstellar?

[ToukieToucan]

2 hours ago, tater said:

Sure we do. Ideally an add-on. Expand the scope.

Add colonization (building actual structures in situ). Add new game modes like:

a space race (this would require adding AI to run the competing program, and to pilot/gain science/repair competing craft).

exploration (random kerbol system that requires that the player actually explore it)

interstellar?

Space race seems interesting, how would it cope with timewarp though?

[tater]

12 minutes ago, ToukieToucan said:

Space race seems interesting, how would it cope with timewarp though?

Single player, hence the AI requirement.

Alternately, you could I suppose have a kind of hybrid turn-based system for this, with the game periodically making sure both players were in sync (the only real requirement for synch is to see who did what first).

 

[Vermil]

A few "close by" other solar systems  and interstellar spaceflight would make for a good add-on.

 

[Wjolcz]

Go buy some merch if you really want to support the game. My wallet is pretty thin already and I'm super happy that I paid 15 bucks for the game. A paid subscription for new content would be the worst thing to do and ruin the company's PR. If you want to have new content go play with the mods. There are plentybof quality ones.

Though there's one thing I would happily pay for... And it's not Kerbal Space Program 2, but rather Kerbal Aircraft Program. With the building capabilities we have in KSP, better aerodynamics, procedural parts, proper missions and multiplayer (and weapons, of course) on a planet that is Earth-sized. I would be super happy to throw another 15 bucks into SQUAD's pocket.

Just imagine how much fun would that be! There's a conflict you have to take care of, so you and your buddies build yourselves planes, take-off from a nearby carrier and either go wreck some AI guys or dogfight real people who are trying to defend them! Break the sound barrier, build a superfast spyplane and take some pics over enemy's territory, go biplanes or WW2 on a different continent, go race other people through canyons, or just build your tiny Cessna and have a sightseeing trip over the mountains! I would play the hell out of this thing!

Edited February 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[lukeoftheaura]

24 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Go buy some merch if you really want to support the game. My wallet is pretty thin already and I'm super happy that I paid 15 bucks for the game. A paid subscription for new content would be the worst thing to do and ruin the company's PR. If you want to have new content go play with the mods. There are plentybof quality ones.

There's one thing I would happily pay... And it's not Kerbal Space Program 2, but rather Kerbal Aircraft Program. With the building capabilities we have in KSP, better aerodynamics, procedural parts, proper missions and multiplayer (and weapons, of course) on a planet that is Earth-sized I would be super happy to throw another 15 bucks into SQUAD's pocket.

Just imagine how much fun would that be! There's a conflict you have to take care of, so you and your buddies build yourselves planes, take-off from a nearby carrier and either go wreck some AI guys or dogfight real people who are trying to defend them! Break the sound barrier, build a superfast spyplane and take some pics over enemy's territory, go biplanes or WW2 on a different continent, go race other people through canyons, or just build your tiny Cessna and have a sightseeing trip over the mountains! I would play the hell out of this thing!

I agree. I would certainly buy that! (as long as there was a GoG release)

[Vermil]

2 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Go buy some merch if you really want to support the game. My wallet is pretty thin already and I'm super happy that I paid 15 bucks for the game. A paid subscription for new content would be the worst thing to do and ruin the company's PR. If you want to have new content go play with the mods. There are plentybof quality ones.

 

I will certainly buy merchandize, and I appreciate your point of view. I agree that a paid subscription would be awful. Actually, I think I said that.

I don't really have anything to add, but I feel you have missed the spirit of my post.
This is what typically happens to all my really favorite game: The game is purchased by a big publisher, often the developer as well. From then on, they proceed to utterly ruin the game.

I don't know why, but big publishers absolutely insist on two things: Simplify them and make them into console action games. They're very determined about this. The fact that they don't have any success doesn't matter. They continue to slog along on the same path. They just kill off the now unsuccessful franchise and buy another.

For me, for my tastes, good games are really very, very rare these days. To me, it's important that Squad stays independent.

 

[nobodyhasthis2]

On 2/28/2016 at 11:10 AM, Vermil said:

One thing I've been thinking about recently, is how much I loathe MMO-games...

I don't want to see KSP becoming a game that finances itself by becoming an online-game. I don't want to see KSP be sold to a major publisher that ruins everything they get their hands on, by remaking game-mechanics things to become subscription services. Also, I don't think we full-blown fans have paid enough. I would certainly pay some kind of subscription to have my game updated, as per currently. 
What I'm specifically thinking of is a KSP 2? This would force us to pay for the game over again, and generate income for continued development.

 

First off we don't even have it working on Unity 5 yet. They are improving game-mechanics right now. Why the hell would we need a second game when the first one is still being developed?

When we do get it working in Unity 5. It is going to spread beyond the current PC user base. Generating lot more finances without alienating the original fans. In terms of software development Squad might be newcomers. In terms of marketing and generating extra revenue. They considerably more experienced.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squad_(company)

Once the game spreads they be sitting on a very lucrative brand.

On 2/28/2016 at 4:31 PM, Majorjim said:

4 million copies sold so far, 2 million regular players.

Yes indeed. That is just from a single platform market that is not saturated yet. You can of course help to get there .....

On 2/28/2016 at 1:08 PM, Rocket In My Pocket said:

If you are so desperate to give SQUAD more money, feel free to buy additional copies of KSP and hand them out to friends.

Which is a cool idea.

An alternative way to help out. If you don't mind paying for a subscription like service. Consider some very cool modders here on the forums. They volunteer their free time to make KSP great. Most can quite happily rake in a decent income from not working on KSP mods. Letting them do their hobby and still earn is friendly and benefits everyone. Even Squad because in maintains consumer interest in the long run.

 

Edited February 29, 2016 by nobodyhasthis2

[Majorjim!]

Just now, nobodyhasthis2 said:

First off we don't even have it working on Unity 5 yet. They are improving game-mechanics right now. Why the hell would we need a second game when the first one is still being developed?

When we do get it working in Unity 5. It is going to spread beyond the current PC user base. Generating lot more finances without alienating the original fans. In terms of software development Squad might be newcomers. In terms of marketing and generating extra revenue. They considerably more experienced.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squad_(company)

Once the game spreads they be sitting on a very lucrative brand.

Yes indeed. That is just from a single platform market that is not saturated yet. You can of course help to get there .....

Which is a cool idea.

An alternative way to help out. If you don't mind paying for a subscription like service. Consider some very cool modders here on the forums. They volunteer their free time to make KSP great. Most can't quite happily rake in a decent income from not working on KSP mods. Letting them do their hobby and still earn is friendly and benefits everyone. Even Squad because in maintains consumer interest in the long run.

 

I will buy a few more copies for other people when the game is finished and working well.

[regex]

What is this thread even about?

Squad has plenty of cash; the fact that they've hired on a few extra developers from the community should be ample evidence of this.  If you're worried about them "selling out" Minecraft-style I don't know what to tell you.  Owners can do that at their whim and whether someone wants to buy for the right price probably comes down to brand popularity, customer loyalty, and a host of other factors which all boil down to just how much filthy lucre the brand/game is perceived to be worth.

In short, giving Squad more money and strengthening their brand might actually increase the chances of them selling the KSP brand

On 2/28/2016 at 3:10 AM, Vermil said:

Also, I don't think we full-blown fans have paid enough.

I paid $17 USD.  I wouldn't mind throwing them another $13 to make $30 but it's really hard to price sandbox games.  For instance, I paid $10 USD for Minecraft back in 2010 and I'm still playing it and receiving updates.

[frizzank]

As nice as they are Squad is a business. They sell a KSP for a profit. If KSP, no longer returns a profit...  Then no more KSP.  At some point sales will start to drop off (its probably already started) and later, at some point, it will no longer be profitable to support the game.

One of these things will happen before the money train stops.

1. My personal guess is that KSP 2 is already in the works in house, with fun things like multiplayer built in it from the ground up.
2. Squad could contract out development of the KSP license to another studio and they will do something completely different with it.
3. They could sell the license Minecraft style to someone else for a ton of money.

Also KSP is made by people, not robots, and people get tired of working on the same project for years on end.  The developers WILL get tired of KSP and move on to other things, and new people will replace them.

So yes everything you fear will come to pass....

Edited February 29, 2016 by frizzank

[Vermil]

42 minutes ago, regex said:

...whether someone wants to buy for the right price probably comes down to brand popularity, customer loyalty, and a host of other factors which all boil down to just how much filthy lucre the brand/game is perceived to be worth.

In short, giving Squad more money and strengthening their brand might actually increase the chances of them selling the KSP brand

 

True...   I suppose.

[Kerbalmann]

I understand this is like the feeling when you think you have a perfect game to enjoy but are afraid that its too perfect and too good to be true so it might be ruined somehow.

Squad could also make some expansion to the game to prolong its longivity if it comes to finance. But then there are a lot of other stuffs to be done with KSP right now. In the worst case scenario when your nightmare would become true (which is certainly not) that Squad sells the franchise and the game is not what it is right now, there will be other new titles to fill its place (there are already simple planes, simple rockets on the market, ofc more will come).

If you really want to pay more, buy more copies as a gift for your friends.

And all in all, relax and enjoy KSP.

[mattinoz]

On 28/2/2016 at 3:08 AM, ToukieToucan said:

The point is that we dont need a sequel...

So true all the fertile ground in the Kerbalverse is in Prequels.

Think of all the tycoon games of old would be so much cooler with Kerbals build your own mechanics. Not to mention the Kerbal way of doing things

Kerbal Airlines, Kerbal Kart Racing, Hype Train, Komand and Kerbal, Korn (the kerbal farm sim), Kolony....  Better still if they all work within the same Kerberverse Server.

If Squad spent a couple of years focused on each and rolled back minor patches as the core engine improved, I'd guess 60-80% of us would pay for the titles as the rolled out and new players come in based on expanded appeal. Squad could have a very profitable decade ahead.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

Yeesh, I think I paid my share. $45 CAD, which, though I might be mistaken, is the price that @Starhawk, and @GDJ paid as well. Correct me if I'm wrong, you two!

 

Currently, with the canadian economy, I paid $33.24USD. Heh, it was WAY orver worth it anyway...... I logged 300 hours in my first week...

[TriggerAu]

40 minutes ago, SpaceplaneAddict said:

Currently, with the canadian economy, I paid $33.24USD. Heh, it was WAY orver worth it anyway...... I logged 300 hours in my first week...

I'm concerned here - theres only 168 hours in each week in Australia. Has Canada got a time machine?

Edited March 1, 2016 by TriggerAu

[Waxing_Kibbous]

6 minutes ago, TriggerAu said:

I'm concerned here - theres only 168 hours in each week in Australia. Has Canada got a time machine?

It's because time gets delivered from the atomic clock via the internet, and everyone knows you guys have crappy internets down there