Kerbal Space Program 2 now has more negative reveiews than the original game.

[mcwaffles2003]

9 minutes ago, Fullmetal Analyst said:

uhh...

the main problem with elden ring was that it was stuttering here and there.

ksp2 is completely broken.

 

where exactly are u drawing the connection here?

Well done in playing it down I  suppose to make a point but in ER that "stuttering here and there" is completely game breaking and the "mixed" reviews depict that just as much there as they do here. You can't play a game of 10ms differences in an exchange when the game randomly hangs for 5 seconds then fast forwards 8x to catch up with reality. As I already said:

50 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

FPS matters far more in ER than KSP 2.

Also you're dismissing the bug where easy anticheat wouldnt  launch locking players out of the game. Is that game breaking enough? Then the mouse sensitivity bugs that randomly sped up and slowed down turning randomly in a game about making timed precise movement. To cap it off, some versions of the game deleted saves.

Again, way to strawman.

[Fullmetal Analyst]

1 minute ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Well done in playing it down I  suppose to make a point but in ER that "stuttering here and there"

personally i was never having such issues, and i was playing on a GTX 1650S

[mcwaffles2003]

1 minute ago, Fullmetal Analyst said:

personally i was never having such issues, and i was playing on a GTX 1650S

So if it didn't happen to you it doesn't matter? Cool worldview

[Fullmetal Analyst]

3 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

So if it didn't happen to you it doesn't matter? Cool worldview

thx man, i appreciate the support  

[almagnus1]

The main thing, though, was that ER was largely playable by most people and the issues got fixed shortly after launch.

KSP2, OTOH, has some pretty nasty bugs in it that's making everyone equally miserable.  I shouldn't have to hack the parts files just to make rockets that aren't the KSP equivalent of:

[mcwaffles2003]

5 minutes ago, almagnus1 said:

The main thing, though, was that ER was largely playable by most people and the issues got fixed shortly after launch.

KSP2, OTOH, has some pretty nasty bugs in it that's making everyone equally miserable.  I shouldn't have to hack the parts files just to make rockets that aren't the KSP equivalent of:

no it wasnt... if it was then explain why did it have "mixed" reviews

also, again, it hasnt even been 2 weeks and there hasnt been 1 patch yet...

Edited March 7, 2023 by mcwaffles2003

[almagnus1]

Just now, mcwaffles2003 said:

no it wasnt... if it was then explain why it had "mixed" reviews

also, again, it hasnt even been 2 weeks and there hasnt been 1 patch yet...

IIRC it was review bombed.

[mcwaffles2003]

Yall got so many reasons to hate

Spoiler

 

 

[Fullmetal Analyst]

7 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

no it wasnt... if it was then explain why did it have "mixed" reviews

honestly most people at the time were whining about the game being too hard, and some abilities being too powerful, and some just didnt know how computers work and complained about the game lagging from their 100 background applications lol

[almagnus1]

Nah, I just want a kraken free experience where I'm not having my ship explode because I dared to undock.

I want to see the patch download and install, not hear about what they are planning.

If I get called a "hater" because I find the current KSP2 experience completely unplayable because I can't fly to the Mun and back WITH A PROBE without having the ship blow up, bug out, or RUD itself or lose my trajectory line during the flight.  It should not take me more than five hours of dealing with bugs and going through every workaround I can remember ever having to use in KSP1 short of Asparagus staging from 2013 to current just to get to the Mun and back when I have an Apollo style craft I know should be able to make the trip like clockwork - despite how much awesome is in this game.

But if it makes it easier for you to handwave my legitimate frustration at the state of KSP2 as a "hater", that's on you.

[LoSBoL]

6000 People sharing that in this point in time it is not recommended to buy KSP2.

I don't see a problem, they are right, I wouldn't recommend either, again, at this point in time.

KSP2 won't be ruined because of that, when bugs get fixed and the game being updated, reviews will turn and KSP2 will be selling like hotcakes again.

If current price scares casual player away right now, that's not a bad thing either, KSP2 in its current state does not need a big player base. It will grow again in time.

[mcwaffles2003]

37 minutes ago, almagnus1 said:

Nah, I just want a kraken free experience where I'm not having my ship explode because I dared to undock.

I want to see the patch download and install, not hear about what they are planning.

If I get called a "hater" because I find the current KSP2 experience completely unplayable because I can't fly to the Mun and back WITH A PROBE without having the ship blow up, bug out, or RUD itself or lose my trajectory line during the flight.  It should not take me more than five hours of dealing with bugs and going through every workaround I can remember ever having to use in KSP1 short of Asparagus staging from 2013 to current just to get to the Mun and back when I have an Apollo style craft I know should be able to make the trip like clockwork - despite how much awesome is in this game.

But if it makes it easier for you to handwave my legitimate frustration at the state of KSP2 as a "hater", that's on you.

Dude I get it, I really do. Im sorry if I come off as handwaving your genuine concerns. I'm dealing with the same bugs as you and can't wait for the fix. But it's another thing when people come off like KSP 2 is entirely bad and has no redeeming qualities. Even worse when it seems some people come off like theyre rooting for the game to fail so they can see the devs in shame as if watching people fail at something a whole community anticipates is enjoyable. Ive said this in other threads but Ive just had to realize playing the game like its a working game is just an exercise in frustration so Ive just been flying simple planes and cars enjoying what of the game does work so far.

As frustrating as the experience can be right now , the game just came out, we all knew it was borked, but after waiting so long we, or at least I, couldn't wait any longer and are sad that the unripened fruit is sour instead of sweet. after we've envisioned a bottle of syrup.  Just have patience, the devs don't want the game in this state either and rushing patches will only lead to more bugs and worse code in the long run. The game was born premature and it needs care right now not to get screamed at and thrown off a cliff like we're in a spartan village.

 

If anything, this launch is about as kerbal as it gets

Edited March 7, 2023 by mcwaffles2003

[ILikeIke]

Funny you should say that - 'kerbal' is how I would describe the gameplay experience at the moment (which admittedly isn't very helpful if you don't already know the franchise ).

[Lisias]

18 hours ago, Fullmetal Analyst said:

the devs literally said they were having fun playing multiplayer together, its hard to imagine how that would work out with the build we got, not even the singleplayer works properly.

I'm a developer. So I have a good idea about it.

Game devs use really beefy machines, 20K to 30K USD professional workstations.  Perhaps more.

They don't use RTX GPUs, they use Quadro.

Everybody in the pipeline has way powerful machines. They are expensive workmanship, the employer don't want them stalled on a progression bar half of their day.

So they don't have performance issues.

And since they were the ones that coded that damned thing,  they instinctively knows what to avoid doing when playing to prevent being hit by the bugs. It's the very reason developers rarely are good testers, and definitively why the developer that coded something NEVER should do the QA of that code.

 

20 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

So why didn't they release a finished, mature product? 

Because they didn't had one at the release date!

Oukey, this is less than ideal. It's definitely something they need to sort out internally - not only due KSP2 itself, but to detect any flaws in the development process and fix them so this doesn't happen again inside TTI.

What leads to the next question: why the thing was launched anyway?

This is another good question. The state of the product was already known for a month and, yet, the dude responsible for the "Go / Abort" decision choose to launch it anyway. Why?

This is not a single dude mishap. The whole structure failed.

 

20 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

KSP1 didn't go onto Steam right out of the gate - it instead was released as a free demo.   

Exactly. And that early free versions were pretty wacky too.

IMHO the real problem is not the state of the codebase,  but the expectations they created on the price tag.

I think that a Demo release with 10% of the content and selling at 10 bucks would had had a way better reception.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Lisias
Entertaining grammars made less entertaining.

[Vl3d]

3 minutes ago, Lisias said:

The whole structure failed.

I don't agree it's a fail. Yes they could have used 2 more months of debugging, but that's always the case. Sometimes you have to look in the mirror, grab your hydrogen tanks and just do this.

Reviews will turn around in no time. I don't even care about the bugs and performance anymore, I'm looking at the game as it is with everything solved. And it's a solid game.

[mcwaffles2003]

3 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I don't agree it's a fail. Yes they could have used 2 more months of debugging, but that's always the case. Sometimes you have to look in the mirror, grab your hydrogen tanks and just do this.

Reviews will turn around in no time. I don't even care about the bugs and performance anymore, I'm looking at the game as it is with everything solved. And it's a solid game.

i think he's referring to the strucure of the development and distribution corporate system responsible for the game moreso than the game itself

[Lisias]

3 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I don't agree it's a fail. Yes they could have used 2 more months of debugging, but that's always the case. Sometimes you have to look in the mirror, grab your hydrogen tanks and just do this.

So the whole structure didn't succeeded.  

[Vl3d]

2 minutes ago, Lisias said:

So the whole structure didn't succeeded.  

Didn't succeed in what exactly?

[Lisias]

25 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Didn't succeed in what exactly?

On delivering an Early Access product that would bring value to the franchise - it's exactly the other way around, to tell you the true.

I don't have the slightest idea about what would be the real intentions on this launch - but there're people around the Net already talking about conspiracy theories, power play or whatever, because the perception people are getting from this launch is really that bad.

It's not impossible that someone got what they wanted from this Launch (perhaps giving the Team someone a Reality Check?) - but, by the Krakens, at what cost?

Edited March 7, 2023 by Lisias
second thoughts

[Jacke]

14 hours ago, Lisias said:

IMHO the real problem are not the state of the codebase,  but the expectations they created on the price tag.

I think that a Demo release with 10% of the content and selling at 10 bucks would had had a way better reception.

13 hours ago, Lisias said:

On delivering an Early Access product that would bring value to the franchise - it's exactly the other way around, to tell you the true.

I don't have the slightest idea about what would be the real intentions on this launch - but there're people around the Net already talking about conspiracy theories, power play or whatever, because the perception people are getting from this launch is really that bad.

It's not impossible that someone got what they wanted from this Launch (perhaps giving the Team someone a Reality Check?) - but, by the Krakens, at what cost?

I think @Lisias is right on the mark for what happened here in those 2 posts.  The devs had very powerful machines; I've heard of shops turning out code that have the devs work on bottom-of-market machines just to prevent this sort of artificial performance impression.  If it can be done, it should be, maybe with a fast network and remote compilation machines that do that well.  I even wonder if there was *any* independent QA on machines more like the market, as some of the bugs, though variable, are so common they should have been identified a while ago.

This bad release--and EA is not an excuse for this mess--reflects poorly on Intercept Games, Private Division, and Take Two, but mostly on IG.  The date almost certainly was forced upon them.  I'm surprised that IG wasn't coding/QA-ing defensively in the last few months to have a better version available so that when they were pushed into a demo and then release in February, it would have looked better.

I'm thinking now that the delay in getting out the first update is that IG is really wanting for it to be a significant improvement and making sure they're not also introducing new bugs.  I'm not saying everything depends on that update, but the best way to relieve the most of the bad impact of the release is with a significant and very good update.  Whether or not that happens remains to be seen.

[RocketRockington]

I think there's a more likely answer than the devs working on 30k work stations for why performance sucked despite them claiming they're having fun with it.

First, the OP who stated devs work on extremely high end machines like that is just flat out wrong...I've worked for half a dozen studios and none of them give their devs machines that high end unless there's a very specific need like rendering.  Why?  Because systems with quaddros and HPC chips are non standard for the user base. Any special code written to make the game work on those is a waste of time.  Yes, devs do get 5k machines at the top end - but it's still going to be standard commercial hardware, which would be 3/4k series Nvidia GPUs/i7 12k series CPUs.  Though most devs don't get yearly hardware upgrades either - 2-3 years is more standard, so many will be lower than that.  And it's not even a purely a matter of cost.  I can have a $30k Playstation dev kit sitting on my desk if I need it.  It's a matter of efficiency. . Is it even worth having someone resetup thier machine and lose a day for whatever marginal productivity benefit they'd get?

No, the real answer to how devs manage to 'have fun' despite the plethora of bugs and optimization issues is because you can 'have fun' doing things in the office that wouldn't be entertaining if you weren't using it to goof off. 

Heck you can even have fun laughing at all the derpy bugs, that's certainly been the case at projects I've been on.  As a dev, you don't care about maintaining a campaign or losing progress or a restart - you'll enjoy something funny happening to distract you from work, and then get back to work.  You don't have any immersive investment - you used debug tools to get where you are.  You know how the sausage is made.  You don't care about it as a full game inasmuch as how you're playing kt.

It's massively different than trying to engage immersively in a product, vs a dev having a laugh.

And also because it's entirely in a PR shills interests to feed the hopium, so if Nate saw some dev enjoying building a plane, even on a slideshow, a couple times, he can spin that into the whole team loving playing the game all the time.

Even if you don't think Nate shades the things past the point of even subjectively possible truth, he could just be a victim of being the boss.  You think he goes to the QA pit and asks people 'How are things, you have any fun with it' and gets told by all the low-level QA staffers "It's a garbage fire, we hate what you've made'?  No, they probably give him an extremely qualified yes that he can spin into 'my developers enjoy playing it'.

Edited March 8, 2023 by RocketRockington

[RayneCloud]

On 3/6/2023 at 12:29 AM, Turtlegirl1209 said:

KSP 1 current negative reviews : 5,852

KSP 2 current negative reviews : 6,000

oof

Yes, thank you for posting something literally everyone knows and can see as though it's some sort of news. Congratulations.

[kerbiloid]

4 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

No, the real answer to how devs manage to 'have fun' despite the plethora of bugs and optimization issues is because you can 'have fun' doing things in the office that wouldn't be entertaining if you weren't using it to goof off. 

Heck you can even have fun laughing at all the derpy bugs, that's certainly been the case at projects I've been on. 

Long ago, when I was a pupil, a sponsor gifted to our school a multistation computer which appeared to be broken.

However, we, the pupils, were successfully having fun with it because a broken and even switched off computer still reflects a tennis ball not worse than a top-end working one.
Several system units even do this more interesting thanks to variety of reflection angles.

Btw, it made system requirements rather low, no top-end hardware, just a tennis ball.

P.S.
I remember something like a giraffe in the IG studio.

[Lisias]

21 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

First, the OP who stated devs work on extremely high end machines like that is just flat out wrong...I've worked for half a dozen studios and none of them give their devs machines that high end unless there's a very specific need like rendering.  Why?  Because systems with quaddros and HPC chips are non standard for the user base.

Well, the one AAA game developer I know (and I can't say who it is they are without their authorisation) told me once the specs of their machine, and that thing was beefier than most server grade hardware I was working on at that time.

The whole question, if I remember correctly, is that their machine should not only be able to run the game, it should be able to run it and at the same time have all the software development stack in memory too for analysis and debugging and hot changes at runtime to see what happens.

Running the thing on the target machine is a secondary task, something they only worry about once the algorithm of whatever he's developing is done. And, obviously, he use a real sample of the target machine to run the code at this phase (using his workstation for the compiling and deploying and remote debugging)

But… Granted, this person is the only one I know so… They may work on a different level on the food chain.

 

21 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

Even if you don't think Nate shades the things past the point of even subjectively possible truth, he could just be a victim of being the boss.  You think he goes to the QA pit and asks people 'How are things, you have any fun with it' and gets told by all the low-level QA staffers "It's a garbage fire, we hate what you've made'?  No, they probably give him an extremely qualified yes that he can spin into 'my developers enjoy playing it'.

I want to stress again that this is not something on the KSP2 dev team. I had theorised before, and now I openly affirm, that there's some structural problem on TTI or at least on PD.

The revamped version of the hell of game Outer Words, also from PD, was recently released and is being chewed on Steam too.

https://www.pcgamer.com/the-outer-worlds-new-version-is-getting-slammed-on-steamspacers-choice-edition-now-with-200-more-performance-issues/

I'm afraid we can't blame Nate for this one. Neither Intercept Games...

Edited March 8, 2023 by Lisias
Whoops. :P

[Nuke]

ksp1 - came out of nowhere. game was cheap, simple, and fun. players expected nothing and were impressed. 

ksp2 - sequel to now popular game. was expensive, buggy, and somewhat fun. players expected everything and were disappointed. 

you really need to manage expectations. people expected ksp2 to be instantly as good as ksp currently is, not realizing that it took ksp1 several years to get to version numbers > 1. that's a really unrealistic expectation. 

Edited March 9, 2023 by Nuke