Do you think they'll add anything else to the game?

[Tyko]

On 6/30/2018 at 7:18 AM, StarStreak2109 said:

So my prognosis is kinda two-fold:

* The recent DLC did at least okay and some money is still trickling into the company. In this case we'll probably see a couple more DLCs.

* The DLC was a dud, in which case we'll probably see no more iterations.

In both cases, I think we should expect that the number of patches that will be made might also be limited to a very low number, especially if sales are dwindling, since the team must be paid for...

Which in turn leads to the final question: is there a business case for a KSP 2? If not, I'll hope we're being left with a halfway stable final version, which we can enjoy for some time to come, being over time rejuvenated by a host of mods, that add new features and content to the base game.

If MH didn't do well I hope they'll at least consider that maybe it wasn't a case of "DLC = bad" but rather "mission builder wasn't what most players cared about". Also, it would have done better if all the bugs and delays hadn't caused their Steam rating to plummet.

I hope the lesson learned would be listen to what the community wants and do a better QA job before releasing...I really love this game, but it's been since March that I've put any real time into it because it's gotten so frustrating.

[StarStreak2109]

I think the major issue here is not the content of a DLC. At least not immediately. The challenge is how to keep up the interest in a game, which has almost all functions added to it you can think of by way of free mods.

Of course there are users who reject mods, but they are only a fraction of the clientele.

So putting out a DLC that really, really works will challenging in any case. If you put out such an underwhelming, bugged and rushed to release thing like MH it's IMHO bound to not be a blockbuster.

We'll see whether or not there will be more DLCs. I do hope that however for now they will focus on getting the base game relatively stable and bugfree...