KSP 1.9 in face of KSP 2

[Raptor9]

Since there are a lot of personal assumptions being thrown about (some of them reasonable, some of them not), I'll add another.

My personal take on why T2 is having a different developer produce KSP 2 is because they want to consolidate the team under one roof. IIRC, as the dev team at Squad grew and morphed over time, some of its members that came on board are at various parts of the world, even though the majority are in Mexico City. Consolidating the dev team into a single time zone, let alone a single location, most likely was a decision based on efficiency, rather than competency.

Edited February 14, 2020 by Raptor9

[sturmhauke]

5 hours ago, archiebald said:

Why is No.2 unrealistic?  Who said I have 10 year old hardware?  I have a 6 month old high spec notebook and an eGPU, but I play KSP1 at 4K on just about the highest available quality settings.  If I can do that it KSP2, then fine.

You and I and many other longtime players have nice, modern hardware, but KSP wasn't targeted at our machines. It was written for mid-level machines as they existed a decade ago.

Star Theory is most likely targeting modern mid-level machines, which while better than they were 10 years ago are still not as good as ours. Also, as has been discussed in other threads, the major bottleneck with KSP isn't graphics but physics. While it is possible to use multithreading and other forms of parallel processing to help speed up physics calculations, there is a significant amount of overhead which is not always worth it.

Will KSP 2 eventually perform better than KSP 1? Probably, yeah, once they start getting real feedback and can fine-tune it. Will it perform better right out the gate, for players like us who like to push the envelope? I sure wouldn't bet on it.

2 hours ago, Lisias said:

I beg to differ.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_2600_homebrew

All that matters are the intended target audience. You are not the one defining the hardware constraints of your project - your target audience is.

Ok that's impressive, but also super niche, even compared to KSP. I doubt Ed Fries is making a ton of money on that. I'm talking about studios who are at least trying to reach a broader audience.

[Vegatoxi]

2 hours ago, DeadJohn said:

Where will money to pay the KSP 1 team come from? New and most old players will shift to KSP 2; too few people will be buying KSP 1 and its DLC. I fully expect KSP 1 development to stop shortly after KSP 2 comes out. It's a fair, reasonable, sane, and smart business decision.

KSP 1 has been around a long time and met its obligation to customers. It will continue to run forever (until operating system changes break it). KSP 1 development could theoretically continue if they go to a subscription model, but I don't think there would be enough subscribers to make it feasible.

 

Smart for business

But bad to players

[Lisias]

1 hour ago, sturmhauke said:

Ok that's impressive, but also super niche, even compared to KSP. I doubt Ed Fries is making a ton of money on that. I'm talking about studios who are at least trying to reach a broader audience.

You are right. He didn't made money on that. He makes a lot of money due stunts like that.

More or less what Musk did kicking a Tesla into an orbit around the Sun.  https://www.whereisroadster.com 

It's essentially "This is what I do when I'm bored. Now try to figure out what I can do working for you".

We don't make money distributing business cards. We distribute business cards to make money!

[sturmhauke]

20 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

Smart for business

But bad to players

Bad for business means it loses money and gets cancelled at a minimum. Worst case is the studio goes out of business altogether; it's happened plenty of times in this industry.

So, you tell me, which one is worse for players again?

[DeadJohn]

39 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

Smart for business

But bad to players

I assume you expect to be paid when you show up to work. That's smart for you, but "bad" to your customers/clients. Squad's developers need money to pay rent, eat, etc. We didn't pay enough for KSP 1 to last forever after new people stop buying the game.

 

 

 

 

[Klapaucius]

8 minutes ago, DeadJohn said:

I assume you expect to be paid when you show up to work. That's smart for you, but "bad" to your customers/clients. Squad's developers need money to pay rent, eat, etc. We didn't pay enough for KSP 1 to last forever after new people stop buying the game.

 

 

 

 

Judging by the amount of retexturing and other improvements over past several months, I am guessing the DLC did well for them, and gave them a shot of capital to keep things going. Of course, I don't know for sure, but they are not behaving like a company on the ropes.

[Vegatoxi]

1 hour ago, DeadJohn said:

I assume you expect to be paid when you show up to work. That's smart for you, but "bad" to your customers/clients. Squad's developers need money to pay rent, eat, etc. We didn't pay enough for KSP 1 to last forever after new people stop buying the game.

As i say before - they can easly get money by releasing DLC's and improving the game.

But in face of KSP2 KSP have no sense

Besides KSP2 developed by Star Theory. Not SQUAD

 

[DunaManiac]

New thread, old message.

[razark]

45 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

As i say before...

What, exactly, is your point, anyway?

[klgraham1013]

6 minutes ago, razark said:

What, exactly, is your point, anyway?

He doesn't want to shell out $60 for a new game and wants the game he already owns to receive updates infinitum so he doesn't have to shell out $60 for a new game.

[Vegatoxi]

2 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

He doesn't want to shell out $60 for a new game and wants the game he already owns to receive updates infinitum so he doesn't have to shell out $60 for a new game.

I bought both DLC's for KSP

But obvious after i buy KSP2 i dont care about KSP anymore besides the fact that i sponsored game which already dead.

 

Edited February 15, 2020 by Vegatoxi

[razark]

44 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

But obvious after i buy KSP2 i dont care about KSP anymore...

And you've made that clear.  My question is why you feel the need to keep telling us you feel that way.  Plenty of people have made it clear they intend to keep playing KSP after KSP2 is released, and more have made it clear that they will wait to see if KSP2 is worth the money.

But you seem to have some personal vendetta over the fact that KSP and KSP2 will exist at the same time.  Why?

[kerbiloid]

12 hours ago, Vegatoxi said:

they can easly get money by releasing DLC's and improving the game.

Unless KSP-1 has a tail of bugs and patches making the improvement equal to rewriting.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Vegatoxi said:

the fact that i sponsored game which already dead.

Nope, you paid for the access to the game, and if you bought a DLC you paid for that specific content.

You never paid for extended support and you're not in any way entitled to it. 

It's something the devs are giving you for free and you should only be grateful for almost a decade of continuous improvement you never paid for.

[XLjedi]

On 2/12/2020 at 9:49 PM, Vegatoxi said:

Does it have any sense?

Obvious when KSP 2 is out, nobody will play KSP

Given what I've seen happen in the past, I would not make such assumptions...

The specific game example would be Silent Hunter III and it's mods/expansions that are played to this day.  

Silent Hunter IV was OK, and with mods and expansions became just as good as SH III.

Silent Hunter V, by sharp contrast, was a complete debacle that no one plays today.

So, it's not an automatic slam dunk.

Edited February 16, 2020 by XLjedi

[Vegatoxi]

4 hours ago, XLjedi said:

Given what I've seen happen in the past, I would not make such assumptions...

The specific game example would be Silent Hunter III and it's mods/expansions that are played to this day.  

Silent Hunter IV was OK, and with mods and expansions became just as good as SH III.

Silent Hunter V, by sharp contrast, was a complete debacle that no one plays today.

So, it's not an automatic slam dunk.

Ofc. if they make KSP2 bad everyone stays in KSP

IF!!!

But anyway thats exactly what i'm talking about

 

It's "loose - loose" situation.

If KSP 2 will be good - everyone leaves KSP

If KSP 2 will be bad - everyone stays KSP

Both cases one of it is RIP

[XLjedi]

Just now, Vegatoxi said:

Ofc. if they make KSP2 bad everyone stays in KSP

IF!!!

But anyway thats exactly what i'm talking about

 

It's "loose - loose" situation.

If KSP 2 will be good - everyone leaves KSP

If KSP 2 will be bad - everyone stays KSP

Both cases one of it is RIP

Silent Hunter III and Silent Hunter IV are both still very popular and equally active...

[DeadJohn]

48 minutes ago, Vegatoxi said:

Ofc. if they make KSP2 bad everyone stays in KSP

IF!!!

But anyway thats exactly what i'm talking about

 

It's "loose - loose" situation.

If KSP 2 will be good - everyone leaves KSP

If KSP 2 will be bad - everyone stays KSP

Both cases one of it is RIP

That's overly dramatic. If KSP 2 is good we get a another new game to play. People who don't like KSP 2, or have an old PC that can't run it well, or have higher priorities than $60 USD for a new game can still play KSP 1; none of them are harmed. There's nothing bad about that. Someone else playing KSP 2 doesn't harm your KSP 1 game.

Even if KSP 2 wasn't coming out, sales for KSP 1 are slowing because most people who will buy it have already done so. Squad and Take 2 will eventually discontinue updates.

 

[Incarnation of Chaos]

Why is this excrements so loveing hard to communicate? Why is anyone replying to this loveing thread? This guy got all the answers in his previous one, and none of them he so much as considered.

Yes i'm being crass, but i don't give a loveing excrements. Let him stew in his own thread; don't feed the troll.

But since i decided to reply anyway and i won't waste much more time typing 3 paragraphs than 2 sentences; lets set "IsRantModeEnabled" to 1 and go for it.

This isn't a reply to the OP specifically, but just the current expectations of people.

I'm so loveing tired of people feeling entitled to new excrements just because they plunked down a 20 loveing 2-3 years ago; no other loveing industry works like this. When i go to the store and buy 20 dollars worth of food i don't expect 3 loveing years of food from that point onward; i expect that i'll have to buy another meal a couple loveing hours later. And food is food; it isn't constantly loveing updated by large teams of well paid professionals. It isn't getting new features all the time; it's the same loveing excrements today that it was yesterday.

Meanwhile in KSP we've gotten new parts, new UI and even new loveing gameplay systems for loveING FREE!!!! Even if you didn't buy breaking ground; you got the enhanced manuever nodes, new textures and better performance FOR loveING FREE!!! All of this will still be available 5 years from now; heavily loveing discounted from even the absurdly low price it's available for today.

KSP2 won't change ANY of this; if you want to keep playing the copy of KSP 1.9.2 you sailed the loveing high seas for until the goddamn heat death of the universe then you loveING CAN! With all the free loveing updates on top; that you are still loveing poodleing about.

Also i'm loveing tired of people feeling like they know excrements they loveing don't, and i really get heated especially when it comes to software.

If you truely think that KSP1 could be updated easily to KSP2's standards then loveing grab the unity SDK and do it; if it's that loveing easy then it shouldn't even be a problem. But it isn't is it? Because otherwise you would've loveing done it already?

I'm NOT a prolific software developer, but i HAVE made incredibly SIMPLE programs in CPP/Java and SQL. And even with these pathetic loveing programs that only take up 3 loveing pages of code are incredibly hard to just change on a whim; EVEN WHEN I CODE THEM TO BE MODULAR. Functions don't just magically autocorrect themselves when you change their names; you have to hunt down each function call and manually change that excrements.

And if one function uses the output of another function? Then if you modified that function to do something that no longer provides that? Garbage; plain and simple. So you end up rewriting 2 functions minimum for even BASIC changes, and spending several minutes just manually changing loveING TEXT. And that's with a BASIC program that is easily understood by ONE person.

And this is before you realize every programming language isn't static; they evolve and change just like the software written with them. So all this loveing code you think is easy as pie to change likely has CORE dependencies and Libaries that have been loveING DEPRECIATED!!!!! So now you have to figure out what equlivilant libaries or functions to replace them with IF THEY loveING EXIST!!!!

They likely WONT, so guess what!!!! YOU GET TO WRITE A ENTIRE NEW PROGRAM TO REPLICATE THAT ONE'S FUNCTIONS!!!!!!!

THIS is why KSP2 is a thing, and why it'll be worth every loveing dollar of 60. And if you can't understand that; or don't want to understand that it's your loveing right to.

But THIS THREAD shouldn't exist, and you damn well know it.

[micha]

On 2/13/2020 at 11:49 AM, Vegatoxi said:

Obvious when KSP 2 is out, nobody will play KSP

Hardly obvious.

For the foreseeable future I'll continue to play KSP1 because, at a minimum:

1. Linux.

2. Loads of mods

3. Existing savegames

 

Eventually I may buy KSP2. IFF it gets released for Linux (native, not emulated), has similar moddability support compared to KSP1, and improves on KSP1 in several critical areas (for me) such as: overall performance, build freedoms (eg, allowing loops in the craft), new and interesting gameplay.

I have ZERO interest in multiplayer. This isn't limited to KSP, but in general.  For example, I never play in Open in Elite Dangerous. Life is too short to play with (or, rather more likely, against) people who don't share my interests in how a game should be played. (Not saying my way is the correct/better way to play, but it is the way I personally enjoy to play).

KSP1 is even more awesome now than when I first got into it. Don't see that suddenly stopping only because a sequel is released.  I really hope Squad has more plans for DLC. In the meantime I am enjoying the FREE upgrades they put out.

[Guest]

On 2/15/2020 at 3:44 AM, Vegatoxi said:

But obvious after i buy KSP2 i dont care about KSP anymore besides the fact that i sponsored game which already dead.

You joined the KSP forums in 2015. Presumably you've been playing KSP1 for about five years straight, during which time it's been getting continuous updates as well as DLCs. 

Few single-player games live that long. In my view you're being completely unreasonable if you're upset about it eventually being mothballed due to a successor coming out five years after you bought it.

[sturmhauke]

3 hours ago, Brikoleur said:

In my view you're being completely unreasonable if you're upset about it eventually being mothballed due to a successor coming out five years after you bought it.

...and 10 years after it launched. (Get it, because it's a game about rockets? Eh? Eeeeeh?)

[Meecrob]

On 2/14/2020 at 6:44 PM, Vegatoxi said:

I bought both DLC's for KSP

But obvious after i buy KSP2 i dont care about KSP anymore besides the fact that i sponsored game which already dead.

 

Dude, with the amount of time you've spent complaining about how a 9 year old game is getting a sequel, you could have gotten a job and earned the money to purchase KSP2.

[~snip~]

Edited February 20, 2020 by Starhawk
Redacted by moderator

[DunaManiac]

Am I the only one who has no idea what @Vegatoxi is complaining about? I am so dumb.