VlonaldKerman

I'm not an expert of game engines but my intuition and what little I know of KSP 2's development process tell me that this is where the game was lacking. KSP 2 is less of a game design challenge, and more of a software engineering challenge. It's not like a new GTA or Fallout game, it involves actually doing things that haven't been done before, or haven't been applied in a certain way before. This is the big challenge. Make the thing technically sound, and the rest will fall into place, especially, though it's not great to rely on this fact, with the modding community this IP has.

Makes sense.

How difficult would it be to tie visual effects like clouds, rain, etc. to the weather simulation?

With the resounding success of KSP 2, which I can only conclude is full steam ahead given that there has been no communication to the contrary, and the roadmap is still on the Steam page for the game, what does the community want to see in KSP 3? For me, the most important thing will be a functional game with a fundamentally sound engine. But to each their own!

There’s no basis for a lawsuit.

Sorry you're dissapointed by KSP 2. I, too, splurged on a new PC for KSP 2. Right now by far the closest experience to what was promised for KSP 2 remains modded KSP 1.

Nobody is entitled to a refund. Why would they give you a refund? You bought the game at a discount, because of the chance that the game wouldn't get finished. If you are unhappy with the discount, you should not have bought the game.

Wait, which 5 points?

I disagree.

Before the game even came out, it was obvious to me that they were not releasing into EA to get community feedback. My first posts on this forum were partially about this. I concluded that since the game was so buggy they were not at the stage where community input was necessary. Thus it was forced out of EA. Thus they were struggling to meet internal deadlines for an undisclosed reason that had nothing to do with COVID. Thus, the game was in trouble. It does seem like the overall direction of development would have been much better if they had just consulted with people who worked on the code for KSP 1. They would have known that it would be impossible to deliver on the vision for KSP 2 without substantial reworking of the code base. But they were shunned, because T2 didn’t want the game to leak and ruin DLC sales for the first game. Pathetic. When all is said and done, T2 probably has lost tens of millions on this project. So this really isn’t the story of greed- more so a story of incompetence. Competent greedy people would have made better decisions. I feel like at its heart, KSP 2 is a software engineering project, not a traditional video game project. And T2 is not an engineering firm.

Gonna set aside some time and watch this Netflix style. This is exactly the sort of video we need right now. Thank you. It obviously took a lot of work.

It will run about as well as GTA 7.

By not officially shuttering the studio, they are preserving option value. It doesn’t necessarily mean they have any actual plans for it.

I suspect this will be fixed by the time multiplayer comes out.

Top ten moments when a guy didn’t know number ten:

It’s more like you fired all of your employees and sold the building your store is in, but you might let your little brother sell lemonade next summer under the name of your store.

5% is in regards to all T2 employees, not just PD staff. However, I still find his statements puzzling- how can a studio not be shuttered, if its offices are closed, and 70 people were fired, when there were only 70 people working in it? Technically he hasn't said anything wrong, since they are going to "support" KSP 2. But all this needs to be true is one more update coming out. I wouldn't pay attention to curated corporate speak. The numbers don't lie. 70/70 is a pretty big fraction. I dare say it is even close to 100%. Even if it's not 100%, but it's more like 90, any economist will tell you that the limit of X as X approaches 90 is 100, for large values of 90.

I suspect this issue will be fixed by the time the game goes into full release.

This guy called it 11 months ago (timestamp 11:34)- "KSP 2 will definitely be developed for another 12 months, but the game is basically dead."

The KSP “community” is one of the most passionate, engaged fanbases out there, and it was even more so before the KSP 2 phiasco. Its not often you get a video game fandom with so many relatively smart people who like solving problems and, even from a strictly business perspective, disregarding or damaging that is a bad move.

If they have known for a long time that the game is destined for failure, then I agree, they should not have kept it available for purchase. Luckily, even if they did, it seems like not many purchased it after the first month, so they probably swindled very few.

I don't believe we are born with the right to our investments paying off- and an EA title is an inherently speculative purchase. It's not my fault, nor your fault, nor T2's fault if someone doesn't understand that EA's are supposed to be discounted, in part, because there is a risk the game will never actually be finished. Moreover, introducing regulation could kill speculative projects, which some people want! You don't always know if there's a market for your game, and sometimes, launching an EA is a way of increasing market efficiency. It causes more games people want to be developed, at a cheaper average price for game studios, because they don't have to full commit! The problem here is that there is a discrepancy between what people think they value, and what they actually value. In fact, people are willing to pay for games they rationally know may never get completed. That doesn't stop them from being dissapointed if it doesn't pan out, but it would be wrong to say that people are regularly scammed by an EA game. I think minimal rules like this could be okay. But it would have to be used sparingly. And, to my knowledge, things like this already happen, like in the case of "A Day Before" which was an actual scam. However, the line between people being scammed, and wasting their money (which companies are allowed to profit from), is often thin. If they call KSP 2 finished tommorrow, then I agree, there should be refunds. I agree, I just think the devil is in the details. People regularly make bad purchasing decisions, and it's tempting to extend consumer protections too far. Should we refund everyone who's purchased Balance of Nature because it does nothing? No. In fact, I would argue, that by releasing an early access and getting you hyped, I have provided a service. If the game gets cancelled and this happens over and over, and you keep buying, it would seem that you actually value this service in its own right! I think this is actually what often happens. People enjoy hype trains. There's a business model in that, and the fact that people complain when the train ends doesn't make it illegal to sell it to them. What do people actually value about EA games? It's hard to say. Pricing, for instance, around games is ludicrous. Games are more engaging than movies, and cost a fraction of what movies do on a per-hour basis. Realistically, a lot of games could be $150. The point is, Steam in its current form has only existed for like 15 years, the video game market is changing rapidly, no one knows how to price anything. It's a bad idea to introduce regulations at this stage. We should wait 10 years and see if people still fall for the abandonware trap, at a minimum. I think we agree in general, but perhaps we have different setpoints for when to let time take its course, versus introduce new rules. With respect to KSP 2 specifically, I decided a long time ago that I would buy the game, even though I gave it a 50/50 chance at best of being completed. It was still worth it to me. Other people would not have considered this to be worth it, but they thought (in my view, irrationally) that everything was fine and the game was on-track. Now they're dissapointed, and many want to get bailed out of spending $50 over a year ago. I don't think there's any reason, at this stage, to do that. There was certainly no shortage of information to influence their purchasing decision, and there were many people expressing the view that turned out to be (approximately) correct in the end. This is a perfect example of a situation where no one has been scammed. That is, unless they somehow pretend that the game is finished now. THAT would be a false statement.

Am I the only one who thinks there should be no restrictions on EA games, that if EAs from big publishers suck, we shouldn’t buy them? No need to meddle with the market. I think people are willing to pay a relatively small sum (tens of dollars) for the possibility of a good game, and that is why they do. If that’s a problem, take it up with people! They do tend to ruin everything.

The fraction of people liking the game is surprising given the fact that the game has a 24-hour peak of less than 400 concurrent players. My favorite new thing about the game is the music. I also appreciated when they added hit boxes to the parking garage after community demand that was cool of them.

Unfortunately there is a small cost to them doing this, and little discernible benefit. I expect they probably don’t quite know yet- they are probably conducting a review of the code based to determine if the project is salvageable. Or perhaps they are simply preserving option value.