Scarecrow71

Yes! Should be 2023-2024, as it wasn't given life until it dropped in EA. But who will be responsible for fixing them? I mean, what's the point in reporting stuff if nobody is going to do anything to fix it? Legally they can't do that. One of the reasons why people are told they are being laid off but then walked out with a multiple-week severance package is to prevent them from taking IP from the company letting them go. No, but the doctor is holding the plug in his hand. Expectations that Nate created, by the way. Perfectly said. We aren't harshing on the bug hunters, forums mods/admins, or anyone else in the community. We're just upset with TT, there are no answers, and you guys (bug hunters) are just the unfortunate souls who happen to be "closest" (in the most liberal sense of the word) to the organization. That might not be correct. If they signed an NDA, they could very well be under it for anywhere from 1 second to the rest of their lives. Unless someone can confirm how long the NDA stretches for AND the content under which they cannot speak, we simply don't know. I don't think you have to worry about them updating KSP1. They all but stopped at 1.12.5, and they even stopped updates for the console version, just as they were ramping up for KSP2. And if the last earnings call taught us anything, it's that their cash cow GTA has their full and undivided attention now. I would, however, like to see the source code behind either 1 or 2, truth be told. I am in no way a game developer, but that doesn't mean I can't learn a thing or two from peeking at the code. I know - won't ever happen. But it's nice to dream the dream. Ditto. To anyone who was/is employed at IG and who is impacted by this mess, you have my deepest sympathies. May your rockets all fly straight and true, and may whatever body you land on have nothing but exciting things to show you.

My guess is that, because I called you out first, they are waiting on you to answer the question before they do. And considering they could use the argument "Well, we've got mods that fix this stuff, so it can be assumed you can add that code to the underlying code", you are really up against it here. Again, I assert that you have no reason other than you simply don't believe it can be done. If that's the case, just admit it and let's all move on.

I will agree that anyone who said that the game can be fixed should provide evidence to support their side of the argument. However, you made the claim that it cannot be fixed. Which means you are then bound by your own statement there that you should provide evidence to support your claim if given access to the source code. That street runs both directions, Bej.

As I've stated before, I've never made the claim that it can be. I even quoted myself where I responded to you indicating that I'm not saying it can or can't be. YOU made the claim that it cannot be fixed. The burden of proof for that claim is on you. It doesn't rest with anyone else. If you make a claim, you need to back it up. At this point, I'm just going to live with the assumption that you are being intentionally obtuse and trolling the thread. Which is fine; I will simply believe that you are incapable of reading comprehension, are not interested in having a legitimate discussion where you answer to your own statements, and that you are simply here to cause trouble because you want others to feel as bad as you do. I will, to your detriment, continue to ask you to answer the question of providing proof, and I'll state again that I haven't made the claim that it can be fixed (even though you've proven multiple times that you either don't read my posts OR that you are intentionally ignoring what I've written because you cannot admit when you are wrong).

And you are still ducking the question. What proof do you have that the game cannot be fixed? At this point, I simply believe you just believe it can't, have no proof it can't, and don't want to admit either of those. If you would just admit that you have no proof, we could let this go and get on with things. But the longer you hold onto the claim without answering the question, the worse the look for you gets.

Again, the point here - that you initially made, by the way - isn't whether or not the game works, but whether or not it can be fixed. You have asserted that the game cannot be fixed so that it works, not that it simply doesn't work. Here, let me show you the actual post you made that started this whole thing: So there you have it. You stated that KSP cannot be fixed, but are now trying to say the game doesn't work. Which is it? Do you assert that the game cannot be fixed, or would you like to admit you have gone off on a tangent and are now talking about the game doesn't have a working build?

Couple of things wrong with what you said here. First, you are the one that keeps shifting the goal posts and burden of proof. I've asked you pointedly and directly what proof you have to show that the game cannot be fixed, and you have yet to answer the question. In this latest example, you try to dodge the question by stating that neither I nor Lisias have proof that it can be fixed...and then state that Lisias has provided some explanation that you believe is hear-say. Secondly, I'd like to challenge you to go find where I stated that the game can be fixed. In fact, I'll even point out something I said in this thread as a direct response to you: So you either read what I wrote here and completely ignored it, or you glossed over my post and failed to see it. Either way, you are wrong when you say that I am saying it is fixable, primarily because I never said that. Go ahead and look through my posts in this thread; I've got all day. This assumes I'm not reading your posts, but rather just spamming the thread. Neither of which is true, because I am in fact reading your posts, and I'm responding to them directly. Copy/Paste only works when you aren't interested in actually talking. The big issue here is that you haven't even defined what you mean by "not fixable". I could make the assumption that you are talking about modding the game and not the actual code...but that doesn't seem right. Mods may make it appear that the game is fixed, but no, the underlying code is the problem as that still has issues for anyone who hasn't used the same mods someone else has. So let's assume, then, that you are talking about the underlying game code itself and attack this conversation from there. Are you a programmer? Have you had the chance to actually look at the underlying code and analyze it to the point where you can say with 100% certainty that it cannot be altered so as to make the game "fixed"? Have you had in-depth conversations with the actual developers on this topic, and if so, can you share those insights with us? My final guess here is that you don't even know what you mean when you talk about the game being "fixed", nor do you have an idea of what state the game would need to be in to be considered as "fixed". I think you simply have had bad experiences with bugs and just assume the game isn't fixable. Not that you've tried, of course; why else would you continue to not answer the question, other than to protect your own narrow viewpoint?

I am more concerned about documentation to indicate what they changed than I am the actual changes.

As far as supporting TT goes...I don't buy a whole lot of games to begin with, so I'm not worried about throwing my money at or away from any one entity. They don't get much of my money anyhow. I have GTA SA for my PS2, and that was the last GTA game I bought. Never played 4, or 5. Won't be playing whatever version get released next year. And going through the list of games by Rockstar...I don't play any of them apart from SA. I do play Civilization, which is owned now by Take Two. But again, the last one i ought was Civ IV, which was a long time ago. All told, I don't care. I'm not going to actively boycott Take Two, primarily because I don't buy a lot of games to begin with.

I'd love to hit that high benchmark of 15. Unfortunately, the ships I build tend to be in the 100s of parts, which, as has been shown and proven, wrecks performance in KSP2.

It is relevant. You continue to say that the game isn't fixable, and you continue to refuse to provide any proof or evidence to support your side of the discussion. As I said earlier, I'm trying to literally get you to engage in a discussion about this, and you continue to ignore the question and/or duck it. Being fixed is different from being able to be fixed. You claim that the game cannot be fixed, yet this answer above only shows that you think no version of the game is fixed. As Fizzlebop pointed out, that's a great attempt at moving the goal-posts to try and either support your argument OR confuse everyone around you into not realizing what you are doing. I'll ask again. And again, and again, and again. At least until you answer the question directly. Where is your proof that the game cannot be fixed? I do not disagree that both KSP1 and KSP2 have problems. Both of them have bugs and incomplete features. I cannot dispute that. But if you are going to claim that neither one can be fixed, then you really should back that claim up with some actual facts, lest the community continue to think that you... Couldn't have said it better myself.

And you again ducked the question I put forth to you. Can you prove that the game is unfixable? What evidence do you have that the game cannot be fixed? You have spent a lot of time stating it can't be fixed, so let's hear your proof.

For your side of the argument, the burden of evidence is absolutely on you. You come out here and continue to spout off about how it can't be fixed. You post negative comment after negative comment, contributing next to nothing to the actual discussion. I'm literally asking you to pitch in here; I literally asked you to present you side with arguments and proof, and you refuse to do so. Why? Are you simply not interested in having an intelligent conversation about this? I've asked before, and I'll ask again: why are you even here? You dislike both games, you have nothing positive to say, and you won't engage in actual discussion. Why wouldn't you be part of a community with a topic or game that you actually like?

Well, we are all still waiting on you to provide your proof that it isn't. To be clear: I'm not saying it is, and I'm not saying it isn't. I can code, but not to the depth that would be required for this game. So, you first. Where is your proof?

Well, my point is that Bej continues to say it isn't fixable, but continues to not provide any information, sources, or proof that it isn't. So I am asking them explicitly to identify why they think it isn't fixable, with any applicable proof they may have.

Ok, so prove that it isn't. No, the argument "Well, Squad sold the game and nobody is developing it any longer" doesn't fly. We aren't talking about whether it was fixed or not, but rather whether it IS fixable or not. So, I'd like to hear your argument as to why it isn't fixable. Keep in mind that we know you don't have access to the code, nor are you (as far as I am aware, and I could be wrong here) a game developer. So, prove it. Prove that it isn't fixable.

No, that doesn't go counter to what I was asking. This is EXACTLY the kind of positive impact that KSP2 has had that I'd like to highlight. A lot of people went back to KSP1, and they wanted it to be like what KSP2 was supposed to be. It revitalized mods and the KSP1 section of the forums. Great call out!

Ever since the news dropped, things here in the forum have been rather depressing. Negative, questioning what is happening, attacks on other forum members. Things have taken a turn for the worse, and it makes me sad. We were hungry for KSP2, and in spite of its problems, we played it. Fired it up, dealt with bugs, went on missions. Some people are still playing it, and are still creating oddities. @ShadowZone released a video recently where he flung the four OG Kerbals into the farthest recesses of space. spacetime development might be dead, some people are still playing and getting enjoyment. With that said, I'd like to try something new here. I'd like to have a thread where people talk about things in the game that made them feel happy or good about it. Was it some mission you flew? Or perhaps a discoverable you, um, discovered? Something the game has that you didn't realize before that made you think " all righty then!"? I will start. I've got more than 1000 hours in KSP1, but I had never flown to Jool before. I've been to all the other planets, and landed on all of them. Notice I said landed; I still have not gotten back off Eve. But in KSP2, thanks to For Science!, I flew to and landed on Pol, Bop, and Tylo. I was able to return from both Pol and Bop, while leaving a rover on Tylo. Landing that rover on Tylo was the single biggest achievement in my KSP playing time. I'd like to ask that anyone who responds here to please only talk about things in KSP2 that you either never did in KSP1, or that made you feel good about the game. Nothing negative! We have a ton of those threads already; I do not want this thread to get locked because it dives into what is wrong or that TT is evil. Positivity only!

How so? And no, I don't want you to answer with "If you don't know then you don't know". Provide some context here. Contribute to the conversation. Why do you think they are the same? I'll give an example of how they aren't. You can have great code written, but if you fail to maintain it or take care of it, unintended things can happen. Especially when end users are involved; they tend to do things that you didn't necessarily plan for. That doesn't mean the code is broken. So again, how so? Why do you think they are the same?

Sounds like all you really want is to gripe and moan and insult people without fear of the mods banning you. How, exactly, are they enabling anything? They have ZERO to do with the development of the game, they aren't employed by Take Two/Private Division/Intercept Games, and are just as in the dark about what is happening as we are. Why, exactly? Evil-Corp is the one to blame, not the volunteers who are trying to keep this community alive in spite of that. Again, why, exactly? I agree completely that this section of the forums isn't in a good state, and it needs cleaning up. But why advocate for shutting it down when we don't know what is going to happen? Much like with Izny above, it just sounds like you want to whine and complain without fear of being warned or banned. This I can get behind. Someone should be taking the time and effort to back up the forums...but who is going to pay for it? And when should they do it? Like, right now, which would mean multiple back-ups until/unless the forums shut down? Or should they wait until we have a firm answer as to what is going to happen? Someone's gotta ask, so... ...why aren't you guys more vocal about it? I'm not asking why you aren't out here whining or complaining about it. But I get why some members are angry at the mods when you guys simply haven't been here since the announcement. Vanamonde is here daily, but this is the first time I've seen you on the forums since April. And what happened to Starhawk, and 18Watt, and the rest? Have you just simply moved on? Or do you no longer wish to be involved here?

[snip] Let me break this down for you, ok? HebaruSan was talking about people getting the latest batch of fixes. You decided to state that people needed to update them to Steam for other to get them due to remote work. Which, as I pointed out, is not entirely accurate because they could just use IG's internal network and access their own internal source control for that. Now, if you want to put words in my mouth about IG not doing branch management correctly, I'll ask you to at least point out where I even mentioned anything about them doing it correctly in my post. Can't find it? Right - because I never said it. [snip]

This just makes the argument for using internal network resources, not Steam.

I wonder if we'll finally get that awesome build the developers were constantly playing that Nate always said was bringing so much joy and fun to the studio.

Rejectaban