Necessary sacrifice or just money fraud...?

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, Jimbodiah said:

That logic backed by entitlement by OP. Like KSP comes out with a new version every year like all the AAA games. I've been playing since 2014 off a sale price, how spoiled and entitled do I need to be to attack a company for daring to bring out a new game after 5+ years.

I'm still paying KSP 1.3.1 and it works just fine, no one is forcing me to update every other week to follow Squads insane update schedule.. Over 10K hours into this game and I'm glad to spend money on it if it means an improved game engine and a fresh start. $40 is chump-change in comparison.

As for the DLC, it's not even required to play the game, so what are we talking about?

For years of fun, you are really moaning about paying another $30-40 for new and improved developments on one of the cheapest games out there for the amount of fun you get in return? Just WOW!

Like KSP comes out with a new version every year:o
Still waiting for TES 6. And yes KSP is old as Skyrim, granted first version prettys much count at pre alpha. 
Got on in 0.18 I think, used airship and KAS, landed Jeb on Jool but was unable to plant a flag so submitted an bug ticket while drunk. 
Don't do that. 

[CobaltWolf]

US GAMERS SHALL NOT BE OPPRESSED

[Stevphfeniey]

If you don't like it don't spend the money.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

For perspective, a game costs about as much as a tank of gas, a cheap night out, somebody's Tim Hortons for the week, etc. Yet you potentially get 100X's more hours out of a game than most purchases you make in a year. Some games are great deals, and I consider KSP one of them.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

People REALLY irritate me when they toss around words they don't understand; and from this thread I don't think you understand what Fraud means. 

Fraud is when I start a company with no intention of ever delivering a product, then proceed to make promises and claims I know I can't keep. Then after the money pours in from investors and other sources; I pack my bags and wisk myself away as the authorities bust my corporation wide open and realize there was nothing there to begin with.

Fraud is also when I manipulate or trick people into giving me money for a service and never provide it, or even better get their information and use it to create dozens of credit cards in their name and rack up the charges.

Fraud is not making a fairly solid game, then making two fairly solid DLC's while being fairly open with the development process the entire time. Fraud is not getting something different than you wanted; otherwise the entire software industry would have been sued into the ground well before 2019.

Fraud is a very specific term; for very specific actions and behavior. 

[Clockwork13]

6 hours ago, Vegatoxi said:

And what a sense to play it when KSP 2 have all better things???

KSP 2 will (hopefully) be created from the ground up, making it faster, overall better and will increase what they can do in future updates (though the fact that it's reportedly being created in Unity as well does somewhat bring that into question). i.e they said it would include interstellar travel which isn't really possible in a practical sense in KSP 1.

All these DLCs and now a sequel to the game does come off as greedy to me as well (and i probably won't buy KSP 2 unless it truely lives up to its hype), but it's by definition not fraud.

Edited August 20, 2019 by Clockwork13

[Nuke]

i think ksp1 has mostly run its course. ran longer than one would expect for a pay once and never again title. being finalized will be a boon to modding as we wont have to break all our mods every time i new version rolls out. ksp will never die. cant say that about a lot of modern games. 

as for fraud, no. ksp is not one of those games that will die because the devs are no longer want to maintain servers nor want to set players up with the means to run it on 3rd party servers. its not one of those crappy f2p titles that abuse the crap out of their player base. its not dependant on any centralized servers to run it. it will still be playable past its end of life. and its strong mod support will ensure its continued relevance. 

Edited August 20, 2019 by Nuke

[Concodroid]

12 hours ago, Vegatoxi said:

And what's problem to make use of KSP through DLC's?

 

The problem is this is a really old game. It was built on DirectX9 - something discontinued 12 years ago. The game's buggy at best, and it was based on one guy's passion project. This is the best way forward. We can have optimization, so 50+part ships are actually feasible. KSP's still gonna be supported, and KSP 2's made by a different publisher. In short, think of it as rewriting a book, but on better paper, with more words, with a much easier-to-use and bolder pen. The paper's the DirectX12, the words are the new features, and the pen's the graphics and stability of the game. People will still buy the old book if the rewritten one is bad, and they'll still revisit the game - this is the best thing that could've happened. KSP can't be "overhauled" to look like KSP 2. It's really, really hard. And this game will die if it doesn't look or perform as well as it could.

[Vegatoxi]

22 hours ago, Concodroid said:

The problem is this is a really old game. It was built on DirectX9 - something discontinued 12 years ago. The game's buggy at best, and it was based on one guy's passion project. This is the best way forward. We can have optimization, so 50+part ships are actually feasible. KSP's still gonna be supported, and KSP 2's made by a different publisher. In short, think of it as rewriting a book, but on better paper, with more words, with a much easier-to-use and bolder pen. The paper's the DirectX12, the words are the new features, and the pen's the graphics and stability of the game. People will still buy the old book if the rewritten one is bad, and they'll still revisit the game - this is the best thing that could've happened. KSP can't be "overhauled" to look like KSP 2. It's really, really hard. And this game will die if it doesn't look or perform as well as it could.

The can make not a complete separate game and just merge it with KSP.

Call it KSP 2.0 or whatever.

Like NMS next/beyond.

Even in fact it would be a thechnically new game it wouldn't breake stucture line between old and new game.

 

And now it sound like "forget the old game. We have a shiny new one!"

[Kerbart]

On 8/20/2019 at 12:50 PM, Vegatoxi said:

And what a sense to play it when KSP 2 have all better things???

• Existing mods
• Existing game saves with hundreds of hours in it, not willing to give it up yet
• No desire to rush into a brand new version; let others find the bugs first
• Not willing to spend $60 on the new version
• Not willing to spend $800 on a machine that can actually run the new version
• And the biggest reason: KSP 1.7 is here, and KSP  1.8 will be here, long before KSP 2 will be here

In the long run there will be little compelling arguments to play 1.x over 2.x. But for now, 1.x is all we have. 2021 is a long time away and if new DLC is announced in 1H20 I'll be more than happy to fork over $15 for that.

If Squad would pack up right now, “what's the point with KSP 2 around the corner” you'd probably accuse them of "taking our money without doing any further work." Instead they continue to support the version we all love, and you accuse them of fraud because of that. Nice. Really, really nice.

[TBenz]

23 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

The can make not a complete separate game and just merge it with KSP.

Call it KSP 2.0 or whatever.

Like NMS next/beyond.

Even in fact it would be a thechnically new game it wouldn't breake stucture line between old and new game.

 

And now it sound like "forget the old game. We have a shiny new one!"

"I want them to go through all the work of creating an entirely new game for me, without paying them for it."

You do realize these people need to eat and stuff right?

[Vegatoxi]

6 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

• Existing mods
• Existing game saves with hundreds of hours in it, not willing to give it up yet
• No desire to rush into a brand new version; let others find the bugs first
• Not willing to spend $60 on the new version
• Not willing to spend $800 on a machine that can actually run the new version
• And the biggest reason: KSP 1.7 is here, and KSP  1.8 will be here, long before KSP 2 will be here

In the long run there will be little compelling arguments to play 1.x over 2.x. But for now, 1.x is all we have. 2021 is a long time away and if new DLC is announced in 1H20 I'll be more than happy to fork over $15 for that.

If Squad would pack up right now, “what's the point with KSP 2 around the corner” you'd probably accuse them of "taking our money without doing any further work." Instead they continue to support the version we all love, and you accuse them of fraud because of that. Nice. Really, really nice.

Mod makers move on KSP 2 asap.

Because again - no sense to make mods for old game.

Game saves vs new game and much more new possibilities - obviuos choice.

bugs is legit reason for 1-6 month. And only if it will be REALLY bugged.

Also legit reason, but i think KSP players is not under poverty line.

Same here - KSP isnt potato game which can easly run on every calc. So player who play KSP constantly already have $800+ PC.

KSP 1.8 is here now, i'm talking about time when KSP 2 will be released ofc.

2 minutes ago, TBenz said:

"I want them to go through all the work of creating an entirely new game for me, without paying them for it."

You do realize these people need to eat and stuff right?

Why without paying?

Making Hystory and Breaking Ground isn't free. So what's problem?

[Kerbart]

4 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

KSP 1.8 is here now, i'm talking about time when KSP 2 will be released ofc.

No, that's not what you're talking about. Let me refresh your memory:

On 8/20/2019 at 10:54 AM, Vegatoxi said:

So what a sense of current KSP anouncements?
And i say even more - what sense of KSP in face of KSP 2 announce?
You just wanna take a little more money for already dead game?

I stand by my answer. The sense of current KSP 1.x announcements is that KSP 2 isn't here yet. If you feel like you need to stop playing 1.x for the next year and a half until 2.0 is released, fine. Don't mind the rest of use enjoying the existing 1.x version.

As for mods becoming available for 2.0 -- sure. But that'll take time, as they will have to be developed against a completely new API. And it assumes the mod creator is willing to work overtime to rush out an update. I have mods that were developed for 1.4 -- there might not even be a 2.0 version.

Is Toyota committing fraud by selling 2020 models knowing fully that they are going to sell 2021 models next year? How would that be different?

[Vegatoxi]

17 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

No, that's not what you're talking about. Let me refresh your memory:

 

I stand by my answer. The sense of current KSP 1.x announcements is that KSP 2 isn't here yet. If you feel like you need to stop playing 1.x for the next year and a half until 2.0 is released, fine. Don't mind the rest of use enjoying the existing 1.x version.

As for mods becoming available for 2.0 -- sure. But that'll take time, as they will have to be developed against a completely new API. And it assumes the mod creator is willing to work overtime to rush out an update. I have mods that were developed for 1.4 -- there might not even be a 2.0 version.

Is Toyota committing fraud by selling 2020 models knowing fully that they are going to sell 2021 models next year? How would that be different?

Cars not games.

Cars is about comfort

Functionality is same for all +/-

[TBenz]

1 hour ago, Vegatoxi said:

Why without paying?

Making Hystory and Breaking Ground isn't free. So what's problem?

So, what? You'd be fine with them selling a $60 full rewrite of the game as an "expansion"? 

[KerikBalm]

IMO, this thread should be locked.

Its not squad making the game. Its not Fraud. Its a new engine and a new game. The presence of a new alternative doesn't prevent you from using the old.

What else is there to discuss?

[razark]

Why do I have to keep paying Microsoft for new versions of Windows?  It was originally released in 1985!  Why do they charge so much for fancy graphics and a few minor new features?!?

[Raptor9]

Let's all stop lying to ourselves and be honest about this:  People want free stuff.  Not because the stuff is actually "free", they just don't want to pay for it.

Now that I've said that, I need to get back to the real world, and go to work to earn a paycheck so I can pay for the things I want or need.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Raptor9

[Concodroid]

17 hours ago, Vegatoxi said:

The can make not a complete separate game and just merge it with KSP.

Call it KSP 2.0 or whatever.

Like NMS next/beyond.

Even in fact it would be a thechnically new game it wouldn't breake stucture line between old and new game.

 

And now it sound like "forget the old game. We have a shiny new one!"

They need a complete rewrite. Squad's still gonna sell and support KSP 1. And while it might sound like that it's best for the game because people will buy the "shiny new game", making it possible for the devs to keep selling it and developing it. Squad isn't making KSP 2, so they''re focused on KSP 1. And Squad isn't a games company, it's a marketing one. They can still make KSP 1 even if they don't sell it due to DLC's. KSP 1's not getting forgotten.

 

To get to a solution please make a list of everything you don't like about ksp 2.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Concodroid

[Kerbart]

22 hours ago, Vegatoxi said:

Cars not games.

Cars is about comfort

Functionality is same for all +/-

I asked how it’s different. You didn’t provide a well supported answer. How are cars not games, in the context of “selling the current product is fraud because a new version is announced for the future.”

Let me refute your claim in a similar matter: it’s not fraud. There. Since I said it, it must be true.

If you want this to be a meaningful discussion you’ll have to come up with better arguments, or people will stop responding to a discussion that isn’t very sensible.

[Drakenred65]

lets drop it, someone is trying to argue that he wants and is entitled to a free game,

 

There's lots of Free games out there for him to play.

 

unfortunately all of those "free to play" games have a catch in that most of them they really suck if you insist on them being free, and they have lots and lots of ways to get you to pay and pay and pay.

Or its pokemon go.

Wot for just one example?? Totally free to play! so long as you don't mind being stuck in a hell of a slow grind unless you pay them 14 a month oh and even if you do your stuck having to play teir 7s at best. and when that shuts down well your Left with memories because its ALWAYS ONLINE. oh and grinding up the tec trees in that game is loaded with crap tanks you have to grind through, or they can sell you tanks that even the developers have admitted are overpowered for cash. that is if you can avoid buying the crap tanks they also sell for cash....

 

 

[Kerenatus]

Might i suggest that we leave this thread fading in peace?

Reasonable responses have been made by many, yet OP insists to be upset about KSP2.

There's no point to argue against anything anymore.

[Vegatoxi]

2 hours ago, Kerenatus said:

Might i suggest that we leave this thread fading in peace?

Reasonable responses have been made by many, yet OP insists to be upset about KSP2.

There's no point to argue against anything anymore.

I'm not upset.

I just cant understand what  sense to make a complete separate game.

What could go wrong if they say that KSP 2 will be a 60$ DLC for KSP 1???

Call it KSP 2.0 or whatever as i suggest earlier.

Structure line is safe, everyone is happy.

 

Now they have two separate games and one of them not worth anything because second is better in any case.

[Spaceception]

32 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

I'm not upset.

I just cant understand what  sense to make a complete separate game.

What could go wrong if they say that KSP 2 will be a 60$ DLC for KSP 1???

Call it KSP 2.0 or whatever as i suggest earlier.

Structure line is safe, everyone is happy.

 

Now they have two separate games and one of them not worth anything because second is better in any case.

Now, I'm no expert, but I don't think you can sell a complete rewrite of the game as a 'DLC' and expect it to work

And if said DLC just worked within the limits of the current game, just adding many of the features of KSP2, everyone probably would've complained about all the bugs and performance issues it may cause due to various factors people have said here and elsewhere.

You could have the rewrite as a paid update, but then you either have no new update after 1.4.x because they've been focusing on 2.0, or, because of 1.8, we wouldn't see 2.0 until like 2021/22. But since it changes so much you may as well just sell it as a separate game, and continue supporting the first

 

Look, I get it, sequels are the scourge of the Earth, but c'mon. If a game doesn't shoot out sequels every year, and could greatly benefit from a complete rework after years of working with meshed old and new software, why is it a problem?

Edited August 23, 2019 by Spaceception
Last reply

[GoldForest]

43 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

I'm not upset.

I just cant understand what  sense to make a complete separate game.

What could go wrong if they say that KSP 2 will be a 60$ DLC for KSP 1???

Call it KSP 2.0 or whatever as i suggest earlier.

Structure line is safe, everyone is happy.

 

Now they have two separate games and one of them not worth anything because second is better in any case.

Ksp 2 cant run in Ksp 1. Ksp 1's code is too old and unstable. 

A fresh new game will allow them to correct problems with KSP 1, while also allowing KSP 2 to become better.