RocketRockington

Noone has done any of that in this thread. Y'all are making things up. It's a thread about bad comms. How many straw men need to die for you to believe you've won this arguement?

Has there been a non-drought to interrupt any droughts? This makes it sound like there's been, at some point, a flood of development to interrupt the lack of it. Also, does one need to have faith here now? Is KSP2 now a religion?

This. I spent a lot of time playing KSP, but some people would like to gatekeep my ability to comment on the sequel because I don't subject myself to playing it constantly. Why would I? And why shouldn't I comment on an ongoing disaster destroying the franchise?

I'm with you on that. Though so far every time theyve said they're doing less of something to do something else - mostly things like delaying release to polish the game, then once launched, claiming that slower releases will let them focus features, the results have been the opposite. A sort of 'do less to do less' strategy.

Is it as weird as customers who acknowledge the food is terrible, are not even eating said food, but routinely come back to the restaurant each day to make hour-long speeches in front of the restaurant about how people should still be giving it a chance, that it's totally understandable that there's a good chance the customer will get food poisoning, that they should support the restaurant anyway so that some day, perhaps, just maybe the food is less nauseating and vaguely edible - and if anyone has issues with food poisoning, its their own fault for not reading the fine print? I think it's less weird than that, myself. Maybe the person returning to remind people "hey this food is actively going to make you sick' is only there because otherwise the people might be fooled by the people routinely delivering those soliloquies, and covering up for the terrible food inside.

I don't think anyone here literally is allowed to be impolite to the developers - because to extend the analogy - the bouncers kick you out of the restaurant or duct tape your mouth shut if you step over the line when speaking about the staff in an actual rude manner. Thus the argument here is not about politeness - you can still politely tell people they're doing a bad job - but that to be 'polite' here in some people's minds, the ones who want to police the discussion - you have to bend over backward to say 'Oh yes, I'm sure the cook & restaurant staff are all amazing people who in no way shape or form are doing less than their best - only OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES could possibly have caused my food to arrive covered in hair, late, cold, dramatically overpriced, and missing most of what I'd ordered from the high-gloss menu.

The replies you're getting, in a nutshell. But yes, it's pretty clear there's a lot of tribalism going on,.people who will never change their minds no matter what the state of ksp2 is. I've seen this attributed to the "haters who just want to see it fail" in several posts in the last couple of days...but it also applies to the people who are so dug in on making excuses or blaming the consumer that they are likely to blame to community if the project gets cancelled because the community was unwilling to loyally buy overhyped garbage and hold thier nose indefinitely in sufficient numbers.

You have to have completed, well thought out designs and significant progress on features that you have confidence in to follow that kind of strategy. Better to just speak in vague terms and consider marking all bugs with no fix as 'under investigation' when you're making glacial progress instead.

I actually agree with you here,.more comms without substance won't help anything... But it's 100% understandable after they said they'd be better about communicating honestly and clearly, per Dakota, that the users would expect that and it's a bad look to back track on it already. Whereas blaming the consumer over and over for their reasonable expectations and their predictable and reasonable reaction to the state of the game is just abhorrent to me, I can't understand why that's the position some people are still taking after it's become so clear how far off the expectations the company set for the game are from the product they provided.

Truth. Though this is primarily enforced by 2-3 people who post more than everyone else combined - which is enough to prompt a shut down any thread they don't like as argumentative.

And that's great but his answers were mostly vague. The only concrete thing there was that there's an 80m colony part. Oh and there will be a tech tree and science points! Big whoop. Seriously, real this word salad about science : Are you able to tell us 'something' about science and career modes, there's been an alarming lack of any real information regarding the two. Well! Science mode is cool. It is designed to be a progression-based mode that takes the aspects of KSP1’s Science mode that we like and build upon them to create a solid progression experience that has higher level of agency and approachability. You can expect the return of the experiment loop, with changes, and the inclusion of a very different mission paradigm from Career. One of the fiddlier aspects of the last few months has been taking our full set of concepts from KSP2 1.0 and figuring out how they break down into the early access structure. Complete nothingburger. Not that it's his job to communicate with us anyway - but pointing out his comms as meaningful just shows off that nothing that matters has been said recently. At this point, we should have a good picture of what science mode will be, if they were at all committed to transparency as they claimed - both how far off it is, what it will contain. That we dont either means science is even less done than many people expect, or that they just don't want to share details of something destined to be disappointing, and transparency is meaningless to them.

You believe that just because some assets are finished, or even significant work toward a feature is done, doesn't mean the design isn't changing particularly if the designers are talking in 'nice to haves' and 'maybes'? That's... optimistic. By now, if the feature was even alpha, the designers should have all tuning by and large in and being tweaked, and they would be playtesting the system. They would be able to give us communication like the Friday Factorio Facts, (eg: https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-375 - this is for a DLC that's still a year away) and not like they were housewives speculating on the weather 3 months from now. The way Nertea talks about it, it sounds more like its in pre-production, even though yes, some assets and even UI is done for it - it just means the artists have done speculative work - either because they had time, or because IG was trying to pretend it was further along than it actually is. That factorio blog is the standard of good clear communication on what's coming. What IG is currently doing is the absolute opposite, and @RayneCloud is right to call them on it

Given that your position, as I've seen it on this forum, is pretty reliably 'the devs have made the right choices' and yet the game has fewer players than devs at some times of day and is running a mostly negative review rate on steam, I find it hard to give your stance.much credence, but of course that's just my opinion.

Also because when concrete details are given, people find out how dissappointing the result is - like the new heat design - and not only do the high-flying dreams they had when things were vague get subverted, but they know that they're getting KSP1 except worse systems

Given some of Nertea's answers, it does seem like science mode is still being designed and has a lot of open questions, though they're in the sort of time-wasting mode where they're behind so they're implementing as they design - and then having to waste time changing the feature as they redesign it. Once you get into that mode where you're trying to catch up to where you claim to be you can end up being even more inefficienct than you were when you got yourself into that hole. I expect that KSP2 has been in that state since at least 2019.

They've reduced communications frequency to improve the communication quality. By reducing frequency to 0, quality will be infinite. Or they don't want to communicate with bots and only people on the discord are non-bots. Or the whole communications and transparency thing was not a promise and not even real, just us impatient gamers hallucinating things, imagining they said they'd communicate. Who cares anyway, the game will be perfect in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026...or whenever, and any time spent catering to the fans, caring about current player count or fan happiness is wasted, the 100million people who will play KSP2 in 2030 wont care about the salty fans who cared about the franchise in 2023.

Switching engines to avoid a $.20 for KSP2 now would be like a patient in cardiac arrest try switch ambulances because they're charging a $1 gurney fee. They've got bigger things to worry about. KSP2 is one of the products that this Unity fee would impact least, especially with the addenda that it now only applies to one install per device. First because unlike most unity games, it's got a high price, it's not f2p. Second because it's unlikely to get to one million installs per year at its current rate. Finally because how many people have multiple PCs with the horsepower to run it? So the # of devices per user should be close to 1.

You're right. This choice was made to make reaching orbit take less real time, as the shorter atmosphere plus lower dV means less total burn time, while keeping TWRs reasonable.

Yeah that's why I'm suggesting a different gravity constant, the gravity constant for the universe is a physical constant... but that's just for our universe. And changing it would certainly change a lot of cosmological-scale factors, but I don't think it would change too much about human/kerbal scale things, like it would if you changed other physical constants.

Unrealistically small to have the gravity and atmosphere they have, at least. Or the gravity constant of the Kerbal universe is just different than ours? I'm not sure if anyone calculated a new gravity constant assuming Kerbin is Earth-dense, but that might be a reasonable possibility.

I wouldn't call CBT a feature, as it's just supposed to fix performance Also based on the prior patches, I'm expecting 1.5 to take longer than 1.4, because each patch has taken longer each time. And for the number of bugs to be fixed to be 1/2 or less of the bug fixed per week of 1.4, since that's been true of each patch as well. I also expect then to release heat vfx without the rest of the heat system, and call that a big news feature, as they've been teasing it for months now and shown little progress on anything else.

Nah the major rift is because the picture the hype and marketing painted was so dramatically different from the result, and some people are fine with the discrepancy - even seeming to revel in it, becoming very holier than thou about how patient or bug-tolerant or game-development knowledgeable they are, as if it's normal to claim to be polishing a complete product and then delivering a pre alpha buggy tech demo - and some people just don't like being taken advantage of or being lied to, and won't let Go of the fact that that happened, won't accept expectation-lowering. This is not the KSP2 that was hyped by the developers, not even close. And yes, that includes expecting the game to be playable - but these are not made up expectations based on imagination. This is based on 3 years of the dev team pushing trailers and giving interviews about a complete game that was supposed to be better than KSP1. I don't care if you are ok with it or not, but some people seem to have entirely forgotten or forgiven, and set their expectations based on the idea that now the tram is going to be honest and transparent. The rest of us expect bad faith because bad faith has been shown.

The premise of the argument was whether communications to the community are good. You're claiming communications are good only if you examine each weasel-worded sentence and only construe from it the exact logical definition. If you have to blame the community for not 'understanding' the meaning of statements that pretty clearly convey one intent but semantically mean something else - then you're basically saying that yes, the communications are bad, whether its deliberately bad to fool people into thinking they are getting a discount by purchasing early, or just bad because they said something that they didn't intend, then didn't correct the community at any point when they could have until after the sale was already announced.

Yes, I don't think progression play is even possible in KSP2 even if it was implemented, given how.many issues people have with save corruption. I saw people still recommending starting a new 'campaign' for each mission. Plus there are issues like this

I think your memory is incorrect about this. You should boot up KSP 1.0 and check it out. KSP 1.0 had about a 97% rating on Steam in April of 2015 of 11,433 total. I think if it was anywhere near as bad as KSP2 is now - even with people being more forgiving since its not a sequel - you wouldn't see such high reviews. The difference is very stark.