moeggz

I’ve had that one too but that one (or at least multiple similar bugs) is in the bug reports. I don’t think the “map is out of fuel” bug has been but may be a variant of the same base bug.

[snip] Has anyone else encountered the “map is out of fuel” bug? That one was a new bug I saw from this video. Also, he has better success than I do with quick loading to make a separated vessel actually count as two vessels, does anyone know anything I can do to make that workaround work more consistently ? Of particular note to me is how often the workarounds don’t work. The “quickload into a vessel spinning out of control for no reason” doesn’t always actually reset it.

I wouldn’t even call Matt Lowne bitter, he has a pretty positive overall view of the game compared to me. Which you would know. If you watched the video this topic is about.

Please feel free to discuss how similar or dissimilar his mission attempt goes to your attempts. I will not be summarizing his video as I will be accused of giving it a slant if I do. Watch the video if you would like to discuss. For me, it goes about the same as my mission attempts go. Some bugs I encounter aren’t present but some others he experiences I have never seen like the “map is out of fuel bug.” So I’m curious how similar his experience is to you all because it is overall similar to mine.

I don’t think I care particularly more than you. I would like it completed because I like KSP but it’s not like I’m claiming if it’s abandoned it will be the worst thing ever. I’m aware that it’s a video game and care enough to share my views on it on the forum, just like you. I don’t know how you’re getting the impression I’m on the ledge or some such. Player counts on steam are abysmal and the reviews are at 50% and dropping. Pointing that out and coming to the conclusion that it may not reach 1.0 without drastic changes in development speed and quality doesn’t mean I’m going to become depressed if the game is canceled, or lose my mind if they do turn the corner and make it good.

@regex I’m in a similar holding pattern. Got tired of a simple station I was trying to build as it kept self-destructing. Trust me I want the game to succeed. I bought the game and can’t return it. Nothing I can do. But the more the general sentiment goes negative the fewer sales happen the more likely KSP2 development is stopped before we reach all of the promised features. Less people are saying “wait to buy it will be good later” than are saying “don’t buy” right now on most platforms.

These do not say the same thing. The comment on the post implies that even those bugs without a status update have had “general progress” Nestor’s comment implies they have been confirmed, but have yet to be scheduled to be worked on. It’s still not clear. A simple “yes” or “no” to @Alexoff question would have cleared it up. This is the forum and the place to get clarity, I don’t think it’s ridiculous to ask for clarification.

Don’t think you’ll get an answer, we’re now at the “under promise and either underdeliver or never deliver” stage. Back in April they said the update cadence was slowing down to provide “more robust” updates, and (paraphrased, read the April 28th dev update “shine on you crazy planet” for original source) that it would allow for more resources for science and to progress down the roadmap quicker. Since then they’ve released an update with a game breaking bug that should’ve been found immediately but somehow wasn’t and… have provided no shown-to-the-community progress on science or any pictures or gifs or anything to show us what it will be like. Let alone thermals. A whole dev update on them with no in engine videos or even images. The patience is running thin even here “negative” comments are getting more likes than “positive” ones. Discord is still majority positive, but I think that’s the last place and that’s where they interact with the community the most. They say they want honest feedback and then ignore any feedback that isn’t singing their praises.

If the dashes mean that last sentence why not just put “investigating” on those boxes? If they’ve had “general progress” than surely that means they’re at least at the investigating step yes? What other “general progress” is earlier than that step? Cuz if it’s not at “investigating” then it hasn’t been started. The dash seems to imply that while they are still important bugs to the team, you “have nothing to share” and that it “does not imply a lack of general progress.” So pick one. Either all of them have been at least started, and every box should be at “investigating” or later or some of the top 20 haven’t been started yet and can have the dash. Those positions are contradictory. Y’all aren’t even getting criticized much here for game breaking bugs persisting for 5 months after launch and still being in the “investigating” phase. If two (relatively) minor bugs haven’t even been started yet just be honest. Honest bad news is taken way better than good news that proves to be false, as you should know by now.

Him sharing his thoughts on KSP2 is the theme yes but he doesn’t do this by comparing and hyping up Kitbash. He never said, “Kitbash is better because it doesn’t have wobble.” He just pointed out the fact that Kitbash doesn’t have it and he wanted to implement a feature like that in KSP. He didn’t then say, “and this is why Kitbash is better” He left the comparison to us. Edit: early here and I misunderstood comment. If his point was “he’s trying not to compare so taking his time” that’s fine, I just don’t think he would have to do that as the questions were just, “thoughts on KSP2?” And “Do you worry about KSP2 future?” Neither led to comparisons and at that point Kitbash wasn’t being brought up.

And he didn’t. Which you would know if you watched the video or read the transcript in the comments generously provided by @PDCWolf Matt asked him a few questions about KSP2. He never compared games, just gave his responses then at the end mentioned how Kitbash handled wobble. So he wasn’t hesitating to compare games because he was never asked to. At no point is Kitbash presented as a spiritual successor to KSP. It’s much a smaller game the only similarity is how parts are constructed in a VAB like menu. And that’s the part he comments on only by saying Kitbash doesn’t have wobble.

I’m not prepared for paradoxes today And yeah. And my opinion I think has followed the tide of most. I was very hyped and positive at the beginning and here we are now.

I can see that point of view. To be fair, I should have been more clear earlier that I don’t think he hates KSP2, wants it to fail or anything like that. So I read him as more critical than you, but far from a “hater perspective.” The lack of any real praise is telling, to me at least. The main point I’m trying to make is that he has a system that solves wobble that he was unable to implement in KSP1 but has in his new game. To me, it’s not a jump that he would’ve solved wobble in KSP2 in a similar way to the way Kitbash has. And yeah I was disinterested in his last game but this game is making me nostalgic of old PC battlebots games and I think I will have to check this one out. @regex I have remained respectful of your opinion and discussed with you without mocking you or your intelligence. If you want to discuss with me in a respectful manner than please do. If my views are so ridiculous to you that you feel there is very little discussion to be had than you are welcome to ignore my profile so that I do not upset you anymore, as that is not my intention.

If the game was without significant bugs and progressing down the roadmap I can agree with this view. But it’s not. It’s both progressing at a snail’s pace and still faces major game breaking bugs. But if still KSP2 was built from entirely new code as originally implied I could see your point as well. That’s also not the case they have admitted (see PQS+) using parts of old code. I don’t think it’s that ridiculous to have consulted him at least once on his experience with making the first game a playable game. And if he was currently an Apple farmer then sure his viewpoint is meaningless. But he’s currently programming a game that faces very similar challenges as KSP2, and in my opinion, has found a far better solution to the those challenges. That I think is worth a consultation call. Agreed. At that point KSP was too far along for such a change. However, it would seem that, as the physics are similar enough, it’s at least possible such a system could be implemented in KSP2. The player base seems pretty united against wobbly rockets above a minute wobble. But there are some trepidations at that taking away from the engineering and visual feedback. This seems to solve those problems to me.

I feel like my comments may sometimes seem contradictory but there’s two things I’m communicating. 1 what I hope for and 2 what I think will happen. On 1 I hope grand things. Amazing beautiful things and a KSP2 that has made everyone happy. On 2 I believe this statement 100%. I just really hope I’m wrong. The sub reddit was the most helpful and positive place on reddit for a long time. And it’s getting back there, by only discussing KSP1. The rare ksp2 post is used just to mock the game and vent frustration. The community at large is quickly losing interest and patience and I fear it may be too little too late.

@AngryBaer 1. On that I only mean the broadest strokes. Colonies, resources, interstellar (and multiplayer tho tbh that one I’m not as excited for.) The steps and exact vision will be different and no I am not expecting feature parity with CGI trailers with hundreds of ships. Absolutely some take this point too far like you say. 2. This is a good point. I couldn’t imagine yelling at a waiter regardless of the quality of service. And this is why I try and and make sure the object of my frustration is clearly communicated. I’m angrily criticizing whatever suit decided to charge $50 for this and launch in the state it’s in. To me they were either wholly incompetent, or willfully deceitful launching those trailers knowing what’s going on behind the scenes. Either way those type of publishing decisions is what I want the gaming community at large to stop putting up with. People who complained about the developers going on vacation were rude. As far as “where is re-entry comments” my view is quite simple. They know they messed up there yet they don’t acknowledge it. I mess up constantly. I apologize to my wife, my coworkers even my son who’s too young to talk. An acknowledgment and an apology shows mutual respect. My irritation with this situation is 90% the lack of acknowledgment or an apology. It seems more similar to people who gaslight and manipulate out of taking responsibility and lines up more with the “ksp2 is an intentional scam” narrative than I believe is true or would like. A post about thermal systems was the perfect time for a “we are sorry we missed our goal on the timing of this feature but here is how we are working hard to make it awesome.” That line would make me not bring it up anymore. Not getting that line to me is disrespectful, but I agree with the point and will do my best to keep my voicing of this frustration limited and pointed at the right people. It’s just easy to get more frustrated the longer the problem is ignored. I agree that the investment was large enough they will try to recoup that by funding development for a long time. My fear is that it’s already been a long time and the pace of progress has not given reason for confidence. On communication style, absolutely there has been improvement. They are still not as open as most EA titles I have played during development. Most are able to say “sorry” for not hitting a stated development milestone on time or, if they know they are still building a system in the game from the ground up, do not promise it to come out “a short while after launch.” But I don’t want to be a negative Nancy, I agree progress is being made just sharing why I feel there is still some criticism here.

@Periple Agree on basically all points. I foresee the canceling of KSP2 as most likely now, but it’s not at all what I want. I have been overtly critical of the publishing decisions behind this game, but have multiple times taken the time to make sure it was known I was not directing it at the developers or any individual (for instance, being negative on Nertea’s post but I made sure to say it wasn’t about Nertea and that his post and work were appreciated) The physiological quirk of hoping for a bad thing then being disappointed when the bad thing doesn’t happen is something I try to actively steer away from. I’ll wear my dunce hat and transport my colony to Laythe very happily if that is the future that can be reached. And absolutely the community managers are a necessary middle man and appreciated. I just fear the more people act like everything is fine the more likely a critical-mass reaching number of gripes comes (as either they were unknown or how much they affected the players was unknown [see ongoing debate on wobble]) that push enough people away from this game that it is never finished. So I wish to share the gripes so that they are known and hopefully corrected.

Hey my OP was the direct source, no interpretation. After someone asked I shared my view. You are welcome to a different one. I would be interested in someone explaining how they think that interview shows that HarvesteR has a positive view of KSP2. I can see indifference, but am interested in the reasoning behind it being evidence that he has a positive view.

@Periple I appreciate that! I’m not trying to pick fights but have genuine conversations that can help move KSP2 forward (even if I’m doubtful.) I’m glad most on this forum can have constructive conversation without bickering and sarcasm. edit: also no I have not contacted IG. May be worth a shot.

@MechBFP #2 is (to me) “I’m not involved in any way, but here (#3) is how I have solved the exact same problems in a very different way. Or showing how he disagrees with the decision to keep wobble because in his game he specifically took it out. Yes he is praising his game to advertise it by pointing out specifically what his game can do much better than the previous topic of conversation KSP2. But hey I politely asked for you to not be sarcastic and you had to end on an eye roll so I don’t think this discussion will be beneficial anymore. But I wanted to answer your last question with my honest view.

@Periple I say this wanting genuine discussion and coming from a place where I am respecting your views, even where they differ from mine. As a player with a negative view of the game currently I want to say a few things. If I can fly a 500+ part ship to my interstellar colony and set up a resource route and then fly by my friend in multiplayer I will change my review to positive. My self identity isn’t tied to “KSP2 is bad” anymore than I think yours is to the opposite. And if steam had refunded me I’d be out of these forums happy to forget about it until it either died or became good and I rebought it. As I’m still invested $50 I and others are vocal because we want it to be good. Trust me I would rather have the KSP2 as advertised than be “right” about KSP2 being a failure and losing funding before 1.0. I will happily say “I was wrong” if it means I get what was advertised. For one, I didn’t waste $50. And for another, the advertised KSP2 game sounds like a lot of fun that I would like to play. I keep sharing the negative feedback to do 2 primary things. 1. Try and steer development to the advertised features of KSP2. To get interstellar massive ships wobble has to go. So I will point out the badness of wobble hoping to help nudge by feedback development onto that path. 2. To keep others from spending money on the game in the state it is in. I like KSP a lot. Not so much that I will downplay the problems to others. My “not recommended” review will stay in steam until it is a game I would honestly recommend. Most of the positive review on steam are “it’s not good yet but…” I find those type of reviews dishonest. People on the fence of buying this game should see a variety of realistic views expressed by people who have time in the game. I wish to share mine. And a last comment, I don’t consider those with positive views of KSP2 in its current state to be shills or to be dishonest in their opinion, however little it makes sense to me. I would appreciate it if those of us with a negative view weren’t referred to as haters. Critics is fine. I love KSP I don’t hate it. And this is the only online community where the positive view outnumbers the negative one. On steam, YouTube, Twitter, reddit everywhere I read comments (in my counting) most are critical of this game at the moment. I do not believe that pretending we are dishonest in our opinion or that our opinion is a minute minority is productive. Rather, I think listening to the complaints can inform the developers what areas are of most concern and would have the most “bang for their buck” in turning effort into positive sentiment. And hopefully eventually a good game.

@MechBFP If the lines between the following dots aren’t apparent to you we must agree to disagree. 1. He doesn’t really praise the game at all, except for that it looks pretty. 2. He reaffirms that no one has reached out to him about KSP2. 3. After that, he spends a good minute or so discussing how Kitbash “has full solid physics now.” Explaining how it makes for smoother gameplay and easier computation while still being able to simulate internal stresses that can break vehicles. He then specifically mentions that he has wanted to implement this since the KSP days but now has the chance and how it will allow 1,000 part vessels from two different players to interact in multiplayer. I see that as a commentary on KSP2. You are not forced to see it the same way as me, and are allowed to disagree with me if you see it differently. I just ask that you please do so without being being condescending or sarcastic.

@razark I see where you are coming from, but seeing how Kitbash has solved (to me from the video) the “wobble” problem as well as (to me) made a much smoother procedural wing creation UI I think his expertise is still relevant.

His criticism of the intentional decision to keep wobbly rockets could not have been more clear. Speaking of, as someone who understands the hesitation of some in the community for Juno like rigidness, Kitbash’s way of keeping a rigid body until internal physics break the craft into pieces would work perfect in KSP. You still have the engineering challenge and visual feedback of a poorly designed rocket but it would both be more realistic and less frustrating. And, as he noted, way easier on processing power with larger part number vessels with the ability to turn it off when not needed (not said by him as he was discussing with the context of Kitbash, but for instance in large interstellar vessels.)

@Superfluous J I will get claims that I’m lying if I give any text other than a word for word transcript. But the gist is he still hasn’t been contacted by the KSP2 devs and “doesn’t know any better than us” (paraphrased watch the 2 minute clip for exact wording) if it will become the game promised. More telling to me was what he didn’t say and the pauses before he answered the questions. Also Kitbash looks fun. edit: also the link is directly to the interview on KSP2, no need to scroll through video to find it.