Scarecrow71

This is pretty much the agreed-upon approach by everyone in the community after seeing SZ's video. Granted, we don't know what the current codebase looks like. But it's obvious that the developers didn't use the codebase from KSP1 as a starting point, and that is evident through the bugs that exist (either the same ones from KSP1 OR bugs that were solved by KSP1 that aren't resolved in KSP2). Starting over is, unfortunately, the most likely way to go. This is the tricky part. If a new company purchases the IP, they are under zero obligation to provide any sort of discount or freebie for anything they produce with KSP. Even if they called their new game KSP2, they have no obligation to give existing customers a discount. Whether or not it's the right thing to do has no bearing here because, as you've stated at the end of your post, any sort of profit is a long-term thing. And giving away the game at a discount to existing customers is eating into future profits. On top of this, you have to have some way of verifying if someone has a copy of KSP2 that they purchased and didn't refund. And at that, how do you differentiate the people who paid full price ($50, or however many pounds/rubles/rupees/whatever your home currency is) vs. those who got it when it was on sale? And if you got it on sale, what kind of a discount do you get? Surely not equal to the discount someone who paid full price, right? Everyone who has a copy of KSP2 (or, rather, most people who have a copy) are pretty irked at it appearing to be dead and probably not going to be finished. But I think you might be in the minority here about being irked if they came out with KSP3, provided that the new game is far more polished than the current one. Heck, I think if we got a decent sequel at some point we'd all probably just forget about KSP2 and be pretty darned happy. Without having a completed game to this point, talking about DLC is an exercise in futility. We have no way of knowing what is/can be/might be in the stock game, so trying to come up with DLC is pointless. I CAN tell you that mods would probably include a boatload of new star systems; KSP1 has mods that include interstellar, so making them a pay-for-play thing in KSP2 would just be wrong. Modders would probably add star systems after seeing the first stock one, and mods are free. If you are talking about DLC possibilities, we need to know what is in the stock game first. My first suggestion would be robotics (as that was confirmed as not being part of stock at any point), and that's something that everyone wants. I certainly hope not. That game series with the plumbers fighting sewer crabs was great...right up until they spun off a billion other games, movies, a potential TV show, web comics, etc. I would hate to see Kerbals get watered down like that. And yes, I might be alone in that thought. Merchandising, like with plushies, is ok. But going into Lego or other toys brings me back to my previous point about watering down the IP. Sith Lord Jar Jar Kerman

Bej was agreeing with you, stating it was on Mech to provide proof instead of defaulting to telling you to search Discord.

The layoffs aren't technically effective until the 28th of June. So the staff very well could still be in the office working until then.

Granted. You give down. I wish to be a Q Tip.

Um, those are the titles of people we know have already been let go.

That statement alone tells me he was the absolute wrong choice to lead this project. I'm all for realism with joints; some flex, breaking under intense strain, maybe a slight jarring here or a minor shift there if you are being too overzealous. But to just have a wet noodle flying through the atmosphere, and then try to sell it as both necessary and fun? He has no clue. Which a lot of us in the community have been saying since day 1. We were told continuously that they wanted our feedback, and that the bug reports were good, and that we were important to the end product. And then they clammed up and just pushed out whatever they thought was great, the community be damned. Bugs be damned. Heck, the game itself be damned, so long as the art and marketing departments were happy. I think this actually boils down to "How much of the code itself is salvageable, and how much has to be tossed and redone". And depending upon your personal preference for how much code you think it takes to make the game salvageable, it could go either way. I guess that, without knowing what the code itself looks like, and only looking at what the game is today...:shrug:? I have no words. Hard agree. Because I'm a software person myself (automation jockey mostly, but I dabble), I've actually downloaded and fired up Unreal. Followed a small tutorial, and I've got a planet rotating in space near a star! Hey, that's big news for me! Anyhow, from what I understand Unreal is far better equipped to handle some of the physics than Unity is. I just wonder how much of developers avoiding Unreal has to do with it being from Epic? That was probably the most eye-opening thing I learned from this video. I've seen my fair share of management imposing stupid rules on their teams in the name of business, but to be told you can't even talk to the former developers? Don't look at the previous code and learn from their mistakes? That alone should invoke firing of the entire board.

Once again, you are putting words in my mouth. I never said you were the sole source of negativity. I'm merely asking questions that you conveniently continue to disregard and refuse to answer. You also twist whatever is being said so that it suits whatever narrative you have, trying to make yourself look better while putting everyone around you down. Which you've now done at least twice in the last several responses to me to simple statements I've made. Let me be clear: There are other negative people here on the forum; you are not the only one. I'm just calling you out because, as I've stated before, you are on record as not liking either game, and all you seem to do is push out a negative point of view on every idea and topic that comes up. So you are either here looking only for a fight, or you are a liar about everything you say. Again, I'll ask: which is it?

It's not a source if it's said after you already had a source. So you're either intentionally looking for a fight, or you're a liar. Which is it?

They aren't a redeeming factor for HarvesteR. They are a redeeming factor for KSP1. Read that again: Redeeming factor for the game, not the developer. Source? I won't be shy and admit I'm not liked by everyone. I'm also a bit blunt and direct, primarily because I dislike ambiguity. But if you are going to make the claim that you've seen others speak negatively of me and my attitude, I'll ask for proof. Can't better myself if I'm not aware of what I'm accused of doing wrong.

And let's have you show me where I said we should lynch the developers for KSP2 having flaws. Or where I said HarvesteR should be praised for all those mods he didn't make. I'll wait for a bit while you go find those posts... ...can't find them? Right. Because I never said either of those things. If you are going to argue with me, at least argue the points I've made, not some half-baked fantasies that you may have read from other people. So, you are admitting to only wanting to cause issues then. Got it. What i want is to not have to see your endless string of attacks and negativity, regardless of the subforum I am in. And I shouldn't have to go to only one area to get decent conversation.

Prove it. You continuously say how terrible both games are, and you have no problem telling everyone everything that is wrong with them. So put your money where your mouth is. That is a lousy analogy. We aren't talking about a restaurant where customers have no platform to voice their opinion. Unlike this forum, X, Facebook, Discord, Instagram, et al, where we are all vocal and can express our like or dislike for everyone to see. Not to mention that everyone at some point has at least muttered to themselves "If they think they can do a better job...". And you have established that you don't care for either game, that you think nobody could do this right, the devs are horrible, the people here are horrible, we all put HarversteR on a pedestal...and on and on. So why exactly are you here? If you don't like the games, and you have nothing constructive to add, and all you do is criticize every post, every thought, every idea...why are you here? Is your only goal to just be negative and try to bring everyone around you down? Ok, so time to show what you know. If what ways do you believe KSP1 is interior to KSP2? I will wager you'll say some form of "art, music, UI". All the non-technical stuff that can be added to KSP1 through mods. Am I close? I, like you, know where my code skills end. And for me, it is way before being able to code a full space flight sim.

Except...he did. He and his small team came up with KSP1, coded it, created the artwork, rolled it out in early access. I'm not saying he's the best game programmer. But you have to give him props for what he actually did. Unless you think you can do better?

Once again for being the new page police.

Team lead gone. Multiplayer lead gone. Lead designer gone. It ain't dead yet....but it is on life support, and the doctor is starting to pull on the plug.

Might not last that long. Rocketwerkz has already reached out to him.

Suamico Pronounced "SWAH-mih-koh", it is a community/town in northeast Wisconsin.

Being pumped up is cheating, ja!

I'd say to just call him the Dead or Alive guy...but that would spin this discussion right round, like a record, baby, right round.

That really depends upon whom you are asking. Everybody has different experiences and expectations. To some people, it is just a game. To others, it was their livelihood and how they created income. For others still, it was an influence in who they became.

Well, KitHack hasn't been around all that long, so I'd be surprised it they solved a problem in months that KSP1 couldn't solve in more than a decade. But, you know, you just keep on bashing on something for not solving that problem instantly.

There's no way to know for sure without confirmation from the dev team themselves. The general theory is that they started from scratch, but somehow ended up with the same bugs BECAUSE they didn't use the original code as a starting point. At least, that's my theory.

Schroedinger's Thread. It is both linear and circular at the same time, and there is no way to validate it one way or the other. Or something like that. I'm sure someone will tell me I'm applying the principle wrong.

I am pretty sure @Kerbart mentioned KitHack is testing out physics that could be expanded upon and applied to spaceflight, not that KitHack is a spaceflight sim or that it's a stepping stone to interstellar. It's a stone to get to decent physics, and that's the context (IMO) that Kerbart was trying to get across.

For someone that is on record as saying they dislike both games, you sure do put a lot of effort into being here and responding to every comment you can. Are you sure you weren't impacted by announcements and trailers?

The WARN notice literally indicates closure.