Oak7603

I had written a response to this with the parts of the document that clearly state that this isn't going anywhere, but at this point it's also clear that the few of you that seem to think this has any merit will carry on regardless. Have fun with this silliness but it isn't going to give you the closure you are all looking for and it isn't going to achieve anything that you all think it will other than giving you a momentary distraction from the anger you feel.

This is all fantasy and it has nothing to do with being a member of the bar, like that has any standing on anything anyway - I could be in the criminal justice system and have no idea about corporate, or consumer law, or health and safety law and so on. As a lay person, I see it that in this type of situation you have to be able to show that you have lost out, that you were effectively tricked into handing over your money and none of you can. Not one of you can say that you were misled - you can complain all day long that you believed the hype and the future promises, that you were impressed by the optimism of the team, and felt assured by the AAA title backing the game but that's on you. That isn't the reality of the situation. The reality is that they were legally open and honest about it being early access everywhere you bought it, the advertising all said early access and what that means, and they can show they warned you, every time you purchased it, every time you played it, with the EULA that you agreed to. You may not like this feeling. Maybe you're one of those that think that if you skip past the agreement that you will be able to argue that you didn't really read it. That's not how it works and this is why there is no consumer protection element to this. They tried to protect you. They gave you ample warnings. You accepted the risk. None of you can say that you didn't. I also don't believe that any judgement will imply that companies should continue working on a product that they have deemed not to be viable just because some customers felt aggrieved. It happens all the time. What if all the VHS owners could have forced companies to keep producing tapes, or mini-discs, or playstation 1 games, or car models from years ago, or old TV models - the examples are endless. I think that this is a complete waste of time is because at the end of the day you knowingly paid for a game that was early access and it hasn't made it to a final version which you knew might happen BUT you can still keep playing the game so you haven't lost out. They haven't taken it away from you. They haven't taken it off you. You can play it all day for as long as you want for ever. It just won't get developed any more. You have your product that you paid for, it just isn't what you hoped it to be. You wasnt misled. You havent lost out. So what is a court going to do?

Even the OP liked this comment. Maybe common sense is prevailing....

Your analogy isn't right. KSP2 wasn't the new ford truck that got shelved. It was the concept car that Ford said, "we're planning on making a new car and it will be great, BUT we're not sure it will make it to production so if you want to put a deposit down you can but if it fails to make it to production you won't get your money back". You said that's ok, I belive you that it will be great. And then when it failed you lost your money. Ford wouldn't be giving that money back now would they?

Of course and I don;t deny that but I don't feel bad. I just backed a bad horse. I'll survive.

It's all about entitlement. There is clearly the feeling of being entitled to get the 1.0 game because someone said so, completely ignoring the fact that it was early access and you, and me, all thought the gamble was worth it. What do investors do when they back a business idea and it fails even when those looking for investment said it would work. What do gamblers do when they back a horse and it doesn't win even though the trainers and promoters said it would? What do all the other EA game studios do when the games are canned? If they could face legal action they wouldn't do it. It's not true at all! They said it was early access. They don't need to say, truly early access, they don't need to pinky promise it, or put a cherry on top. It was early access. Thats all there was to it. Just because they bigged themselves up has nothing to do with it.

I bought KSP2 just because it was KSP2 and it looked like it would be good. I knew nothing about the developers, or the company. I don't follow that sort of stuff. If a game looks good and I have the money I'll give it a go. I didn't understand how multiplayer would have worked, but I wasn't planning on playing it multiplayer so that didn't matter to me either.

Why do you? Because some post somewhere said that they had the funding? So what. Do you think companies arent allows to change direction, change staff, change priorities, deal with economic changes, chose to cut costs, close departments, all because they said they were going to do something? They are not obligated to provide you with anything with Ksp2. They haven't lied about the product you bought. It was clearly early access. It was labelled as such. It is mentioned all the time. You accepted the risks that it entails when you handed over your money. You are not entitled to anything. This post is the funniest thing ever. I'll do a deal with you, if you manage to get people's money back, then you can have mine. If you don't however, you can pay me the money I paid for the game.

I don't know how all this works in America but I don't see anyway that this will achieve anything. It was an early access game that has failed. You knew it was early access. You knew what that meant, so you knew it might fail or stop being supported. You gambled. You lost. Imagine what this would do with the whole industry if this was even possible. How could any judge, or whatever you have in America that would look at this, find that a company has to complete and support all the projects it starts, especially when they have been clear that it was early access and might fail? This is ridiculous.

I wont give this game another penny

KSP2 was being fully developed until it wasn't... I guess that the forums and Discord are for the KSP franchise as a whole which still makes some money and so could remain open even if there is no longer any development in KSP2.

It failed due to over promising and under delivering by the studio. It's as simple as that. I think I read that KSP2 has been going for 7 years in total and although the real development only started in the last few years, if anyone can say the release schedule, updates, performance, or anything other than the promotional pieces the studio put out were anything near what they hoped and expected for KSP2, even as an early access, then I would argue that you are some sort of fanboi or similar type. Don't get me wrong, I get it. I paid full price for this too. I watched as it was sold cheaper not long after. I watched as the updates dribbled out. I tried to play it with the bugs - over 360 hours worth of playtime, so not a small amount - all while trying to stay positive, posting threads of the missions that I was doing, reporting the bugs, doing what I was asked to, but it wasn't enough. I conceded to the truth a long time ago because this failed a long time ago.

It was clearly a cash grab as all EA titles are - come and buy our product that is "GOING" to be cool and be one of the first to support it yadda yadda. They 'grab' the early 'cash' and put it in to the development fund. Whether it made a profit or not is a different question completely and doesnt have any bearing on whether it was a cash grab or not, that would only indicate if it was a succesful cash grab. I have no idea if KSP2 was a succesful cash grab but I would say not or we wouldn't be discussing the tings we all are today.

Well I'm out. There's no point suggesting anything as it won't be listened to. This is only EA in that it was released before being ready. The rest of the typical EA process is being ignored. There's no point submitting the same bug reports because they'll only work on what they deem necessary and not on others. Even if the community are asking for things repeatedly. There's no point having any opinion other than positive or they'll just delete it. Especially as they've heard it all before. There's no point trying to challenge these decisions as they'll just delete that too because censorship is better than change. There's no point me even posting this as they'll probably delete it too. I've waited a long time for a full price game that has not delivered and shows little sign of being what I expected anyway. My initial excitement and optimism has gone. Excellent work development team and moderators. Game uninstalled.

My apologies, by wobbly rockets, I meant the rockets that start wobbling on the launch pad and then explode and then a relaunch fixes it. @herbal space program in the post above is proof taht this is still happening. As for @The Aziz needing to sigh, I never meant for that guy to fix it but your stalwart defense of KSP2 does not go unnoticed. To be fair to that guy though, it's great that his team has time to play around and spend time on a pointless, miniscule addition. Maybe if more of the game was ready, like the colony parts or new parts or terrain or lighting on the supposed new planets etc, They would have some more worthwhile tasks to oversee. The point I was clearly making was that as a whole, the studio should be working towards fixing the small things that have a big impact, not this waste of time.

But for me I have no idea why they are bothering to even spend the time modelling it. I get it's topical but a post showcasing eclipses as they are and a challenge would be enough. It seems crazy that they bother spending any time when there are so many bugs from the beginning that they can't work out - wheels! They can't even make wheels work. I'm not talking about making them work in different gravity, on different surfaces, with different loads or different inclines, I just mean simple driving away from the craft. What about the maneuver nodes that people are screaming out to be changed? What about wobbly rockets. What about fairings that don't work. The list goes on. There is something wrong with the way this game is going. Is it money, management, staff, processes, too complex to do, too big a project. I have no idea but is it surmountable? Hopefully, but I am growing more pessimistic, as are a lot of others, some vocal, more not so much, as time goes by.

We al know that the reason that Discord gets the majority of the updates and support is because it is transient in nature. Conversations are difficult to follow, posts get lost, its a symptom of the modern day lack of attention span and clickbait, but for businesses it is great. Drop a post and by the time people look at it in too much detail, it's gone. Dissent get's drowned out. It's a good echo chamber hearing what you want to hear. This forum however is a more permanent record of what gets posted, conversations are more on topic and can last days, weeks, or months. It's a good way to hold ideas to account and was probably what the intention was by having this one, however, when people on here started to question and voice their discontent with progress and content, things seem to have switched to the Discord. This forum is generally growing more negative over time but it's easier to go back to the echo chamber than tackle the issues raised here.

It's pretty clear now that this is not and never was an EA in any way, other than they released it early. It was simply a cash grab for a small studio to get more money quicker thinking it would get them some needed funds early, however over a year later and they seem to still be struggling to produce the product they promised. In terms of how other EA's work, I haven't seen anything that even hints at any changes or suggestions by a player having changed the preset course of the game. The game is going to be built how they want it and thats the end of it. We are no more than bug testers. There are so many threads on here with good suggestions, none of which will get in the game, proven by the repeated bugs that can't get fixed. Like you say, this waste of a post has 'complex maths' to show how a solar eclipse should work and yet they can't get wheels to work or rovers to drive more than a 1000m or whatever it is before they spin round or jump up. It's a joke at this point.

I use Discord but this is the forum. If you don't want people to use a platform then don't offer it as a platform. If you have so many platforms that you want people to use but can't manage them equally, then get better/more staff. The communication is poor. The updates and hotfixes are lacking and infrequent. The development is slow. The game is still unplayable for some and not engaging for most. Things need to improve.

That's not the point, the point is that the information contained in it could have been given to the KSP2 community, to those that paid for a full price EA, on the OFFICIAL FORUM, where they have asked for feedback. Instead, it was given to a rando, as you put it, on a release schedule at the choice ofthe rando. Once it was released, of course, the KSP team could have, and should have, said, look at our interview everyone, here is some new information. They didn't. Nate clearly felt that it was beneficial to do it this way, that's his choice, but players clearly disagree.

And this is what I said would happen over a month ago in my thread: I still think that player numbers will continue to yo yo with each DLC update but less and less each time. I havent played since before I posted and there has been no movement, or sign of movement since. The only communication was a 40 minute interview, not released to the forum where the paying EA players are, but in a way that was just an advertising opportunity. I had enjoyed KSP2 up to when I stopped playing but I have lost a lot of interest. I will probably play when the next bit is released but I also wouldnt be surprised if I didnt. At the rate this game is being developed we won't even have a full release by 2026. Imagine the amount of competition released between now and then... The one thing I have learned from this is I will never pay full price for an EA ever again.

Agreed but that is with the assumption that with colonies comes resources, or at least that there is a complete colony/resource system from the get go. I would also question if colonies will give long lasting gameplay considering it's not really new and we don't actually know how colonies will work. Agreed again as long as there is the interest by the time this happens. Of course there will be long term players but will there be enough? The difference as I see it is that KSP1 seemed much more geared towards restarting and trying new, whether that was because of the contract system, the money system, the three play modes, or the overall difficulty where as KSP2 just seems easier and far more linear.

I am beginning to feel like the pacing of the releases, either the next stage as per the road maps, and updates or even hotfixes, is going to be problematic for the game as things move forward and may even end up being a big negative. The release of For Science! was followed by a rush of posts, video reviews, and other activity that has already seemed to have dropped off after just short of 2 months. Players seemed to have gobbled up the new content and I wonder if they are now just waiting for the next little bit to be released or for their bugs to be fixed. Is this because KSP2 no longer feels like a sandbox, and the mission system actually causes play to stop when the final missions have been completed? Or is it because for us in early access we have been playing with KSP2 now for nearly a year and there is only so much anyone can do over that time before it is repetitive, especially with the limited toys to play with and the mission based system in place. In my opinion, KSP2 seems a lot 'easier' than KSP1 and for someone who barely left Kerbin and certainly never visited the Jool moons, in KSP2 I have been to all planets and most moons. Yes I could farm every biome but that seems like a chore rather than a game. Looking even longer term, when the official final release is here, those with EA may simply play the little bit of new content, maybe have a full run through again, and then stop playing. Will this have a negative impact on player numbers and if the final release doesn't do well because of this, will that have a knock on effect with KSP2 long long term? Hopefully things start to get released quicker and quicker as bugs are ironed out and the amount of work left gets less which will stop the above happening. What do you all think?

Yeah 430+ m/s into the Tylo surface will do it. It took me forever to do that mission.

What do you mean by I wanted to preface this by saying this is for gaming systems only not mobile devices that are constricted by hardware and run other games slow too? KSP2 doesn't run on any mobile devices does it?