tstein

Because they are using automatic build and deploy. That is rather normal in non mission critical software (i.e non healthcare, non military etc...)

The difference is that in Comunism no deeds go unpunished.. good or bad (remember equal suffering for all )

Paying for it is the only part that clients are supposed to do.

Not 100% true. Commonly you are right, specially for smaller software products, but some projects have pre allocated funding for more than one year in large companies. They just pass for a review at end of each FY and if nothing out of ordinary happens they continue. Usually when a company says the funding is secure it means the company long term forecast already predicts these costs allocated for X years.

No it is not silly. Your example is in reverse in fact. I have worked with REAL complex simulations and KSP 2 is not even a POC of a complex simulation. Even on the category of GAMES KSP 2 is not a very complex simulator (most air sims are far far more complex physics wise)

Except that some people are facing crashes of their whoel machines exactly because of the excess resource usage. The stupid resource usage is as critical as any other source of crashes...

I advise you to READ the steam requirements... and try to cope with reality. Just because you like something your wishful thinking does not change reality, just make your opinion worthless because it is obvious that you are enamored with something and you would find it ok if the game poisoned you and caused cancer. My life is not ruined, I do not CARE for the game. If KSP vanishes that will NOT hurt my life in any significant form , but I do care for the HYPOCRISY of humans , and people that pretend this is ok are just hypocrites that feed the bad things in this world. Software industry is each day WORSE exactly because people have this behavior of embracing poison.

No this is not personal opinion. Check the requirements STEAM make on EA. That is not my opinion, that is the industry LEADING platform opinion, the very platform that basically invented EA retailing . I have read Nate post, and it smells like PR deflection. Notice as he does not even acknowledge the fact that the game has mediocre graphics and physics and yet it is one of the 4 HIGHER requirements on STEAM. The fact is, the team was delusional about the player base. They have a clumsy barebone physics system, a very NAIVE graphics implementation (because naive is the only form where you get a game with 2010 graphics that uses resources as a 2025 game, yet they had time to create a dynamic face emotional reaction system for the kerbals. It is a fact, they are NOT PROFESSIONALS, or they are trying to look like they are not.

I see them as a failed experiment of the elder ones in 40k that ultimately created the orks. They share a lot of the features (no need for food, color, stupidity, tehcnology that should not work except that it does because R&D beleives in it)

Survival game and I will say it it is NOT less complex than KSP2. Contrary to what so many believe KSP2 is a VERY VERY simple simulator. We basically have a SIMPLE physics engine and renderer, basically no other mechanic, yet KSP2 fails to even make a GUI that works. I develop software for 30 years, including some SEVERAL times larger and more complex than ANY game ever made and there is not excuse for the presentation state of this game, it is simply unprofessional. While I know game industry is the least professional of all software industry ( maybe with the exception of web front end development) this is still behind the state of most EA games. Lat year I played UA: Dreadnoughts EA and the community was enraged by the state of the game.... and yet it was at least an order or magnitude better than KSP2 (and again it has way more complex features than KSP2). an EA game is supposed to have content missing and minor bugs, some mechanics needing polish, but the core must work. A save/load system that fails 1 every 3 attempt, a laucnh button that does nothign and get you stuck in VAB forever once ever 5 designs, a VAB that suddenly erase ALL parts when you add that last one part,a GUI that spam 340 times the same message... all these are NOT acceptable for an EA because they are NOT high complexity issues, they are result of bad priorization.

Totally agree, Discord is a horrible persistent form of communication. Discord is alike a plaza where everybody is shouting, for me this kind of communication channel is completely useless. I tried KSP discord and I cannot read ANY sentence before it slips out of the screen.

well you even have a reasonable minimum wage Brazil price is 50% and it still is 10% of minimum wage.

Sorry, not true. Check Sons of the FOrest. EA title, released same day as KSP 2 and well, barely any frequent or critical bugs at all.

Well seem I was right and GUI spend a lot of the performance in the game, that is a bane in Unity on most recent games for god's know what reason.

They are okish for me given the overall state of the game. KSP 2 is not amazing graphically, I would say even mediocre (although it has more requirements than any other game I have seen on steam), so the clouds do not dissonate much with me (specially because I do not play planes so They are a half second element in the game for me)

We don't speak of clouds here....

That is nto the problem for me, the problem is simply that simple thigns do not work. Example: I tried several times to put thing in orbit with fairing byt the fairings simply disapear while the ships is ascending and then the content inside the firing start to levitate forward away from the accelerating rocket. I tried doing Side fuel tanks that feed central tank so I can eject mass during ascent... but fuel flows sometiems BACKWARDS... I tried landign in the moon, and when I touch down the kerbal inside the ship continue its inertia trough the ship and trough the floor of the planet... That is not a case of not being KSP1, it is a case of being mostly an LSD simulation.

Asparagus still worked and gave you some advantage in KSP1. THey just made a simpler way to achieve the same effect. In KSP 2 it is not reliable due to the fuel flow issues.

That is a very bad practice that has been erased in most of software industry but for some reason game develop did not evolve. That way of doing things result in higher costs and less reliable software almost always.

I am not sure it is needed any more communication unless there is something to communicate. TO make a post or annoucement when there is no proper content or plan would not help. I am very critic of this game quality, but I know it is not words that will fix it. When they have a schedules plan for patches that is when a more detailed communication could be helpful. What I hope is that this experience can be absorbed by PD/intercept and they learn to prioritize things, that the basics are more important than the sprinkles on top.

If it was government funded it would cost 400 billion, would be delayed for 11 years and would have an operational ratio of under 30%.. oo wait, that is the F-35... but close enough.

In fact no. make joints too rigid with the very skewed masses ratios in the ships and you can wake the kraken really violently unless you make a system with dynamic neutralization of joints. That said I agree that it seems intentional, as if the producers of KSP2 liked the stupid part of KSP1 more than the usual players did.

yes

A lot of people can cause it . I will say that ANY SINGLE middle manager, if shielded by a bad director can send such a project into hell easily. No need to be publisher fault (although it can be)

By a checklist it is an alpha indeed, a bit crude on the appearance (considering the stupid interface bugs), but indeed an alpha. My problem is with the word "possible" being very extreme here. I need to try several times to get a ship to moon without a bug rendering the mission unusable. It is surfing the edge of the "complete playtrough possible" concept. depends on who you consider the devs.. the programmers or you counting the managers as well. NEver ever underestimate the capacity of a manager to reduce anyone's productivity by 50%