Kerbart

By who? It's not like the wreckage is patrolled by the International Waters Sea Police.

The good ole' we never said that, we surely suggested it but we don't think it's OUR fault that YOU interpreted our carefully crafted words in such a way as any normal person would. The only thing that was mentioned was: We're lowering the frequency of updates to be able to spread the load between bug fixing and feature updates Next update will be in June, and we're working on Science Look! Shiny Science parts! But never once was somewhere said that this update would actually include Science. I wouldn't bet on it. At one point in time, "June" was mentioned. Nate then had to specify that this was not intended as "June 30" which is how the, by now quite salty, community unanimously interpreted it. My own take was the Friday before June 30 (as you know, the previous "cut and run" releases were on Friday COB and hoping the s###-storm dies down by the time Monday comes around), which is June 23, but surprisingly they picked June 20 as the release date instead.

This has been discussed over and over. While we won't know for sure until someone inside IG spills the beans (unlikely) this looks like what happened: The game went through design hell regarding decisions on how it should look like (not the physical appearance but game mechanics) Later than wanted, some ambitious Grand Design was envisioned and work towards it was started Sugar daddy T2 got tired of missed deadlines and postponed release dates (while paying bills for rent, electricity and wages each month) and set a hard publication date. Intercept looked at their lofty design, realized there's no way we'll be able to publish this on time and scrambled to design and build a version they could publish Intercept doesn't hold us for idiots, they were confronted with an impossible deadline and did the best they could. They're the schoolkids working on an ambitious end-of-year science project who were told "actually it needs to be ready next week." Take Two isn't the evil bean counter imperium either, they were confronted with a dev team who pursued perfection and kept delaying publication. When confronted with running expenses you can't blame them for saying "we're going to set a hard date now" forcing some kind of product to be released. Clearly mistakes were made. We're not happy with the game, and neither are the devs. "But they say they're proud of the game and like it." Ok, ask yourself the question: do you want KSP2 to stay in its current state? Because the second the gaming press is publishing articles with headlines as INTERCEPT GAMES ADMIT KSP2 RELEASE IS TOTAL FAILURE I can assure you that Take Two will pull the plug and we're stuck with what we have now. So, we're stuck with IG working hard to make things better, being forced to be upbeat and chipper in their communication, because they have no real choice to do anything else. Last week's Mea Culpa and a strong emphasis on bug fixing in the communication is the best we're going to get, and the fact they gave in to that indicates how serious the community is taken — and not considered a bunch of idiots as you state.

More specifically, they said something along the lines of "and we don't mean June 30" so that points to June 23.

Upnate? Is that a typo or a very clever portmanteau? Don't lie!

A post like this gives more confidence in the game than a ten minute video about the new engine. Thank you!

BuT ThEy ArE EvIl BeAnCoUnTErS WhO WaNt To KiLl ThE GaMe WiTh MiCrOTrAnSaCtIoNs You're spot on and this is something that seems consistently overlooked. The problem is a lack of transparency, although one can hardly blame aprivate company for hanging the dirty laundry outside either. Clearly the design process ran into some major obstacles and had to revert a couple of times. Unlike some, I find it hard to imagine there's no good reason for that, I'm sure no one wanted things to go the way they went. But instead of telling us, we were painted a rosy picture on how cool it was going to be and that is where the train went off the rails. When KSP1 was released it had hardly any functionality. It took years to get to a "basic" game. Of course, it was for free (or close to it, later on), and pretty much peerless which provides a rather large tolerance. KSP2 has in that respect a few major issues that are individually not that big of a deal, but combined result in a large grumble factor: A really, really long develop time A very immature product that, despite having been developed for years is clearly rushed, incomplete and bug riddled A steep intro price A long series of updates and sneak peeks suggesting a product in a far more advanced state than actually published ("but they never SAID that..." no, and that's why I wrote suggested and to be so naive to think it was never the intention by IG to hype expectations the way they did) The good news is that hopefully by the end of the month ("When we said June we didn't mean June 30" — so it's June 29?) we'll get some answers to that. It'll be a good indicator, but at this point I'm going to interpret the promise of an "overhauled science system" as "new instruments replacing the old ones but you will still have to biome-hop and grind the living daylights out of everything" Whatever colonies will bring us, I'll be pleasantly surprised if it includes all those fancy buildings we've seen previews of. And disappointed, but not shocked if it didn't.

Based on what is promised and what we got, Science will be exactly the same, with shinier parts. It will still involve grinding away biome after biome to rack up points, and that miraculous ground sample will still unlock that pinnacle of innovation, the ladder. I had high hopes that things would be radically different, but the initial rlease and the first two patches have taught me to lower my expectations to ground level.

Nate has also been blowing a lot of smoke. The game that was delivered was a far cry from what was suggested to us pre-launch. What we learned was that IG was extremely skillful in saying one thing, raising expectations, and when those expectations were missed by a parsec or two amd you start combing through them with a legal brush, then yes, they never actually said that, but it sure as hell was no coincidence we thought that. That has, not surprisingly, backfired in a spectacular fashion. Yes, they are saying they work hard on the bugs. Most of us like to believe those bugs are being worked on. But we've gone through two patches where those bugs were not addressed. Heck, we didn't even get the impression IG was aware of those bugs. But look what we spent our time on: grid fins! We know that's not true but that is the tone being played in the dev update and it's a tune the community is tired hearing. No one here knows what goes on inside IG. Most of us probably assumed they were working hard. But after two patches the patch interval gets bumped to two whole months, without acknowledging that there are some major bugs that need fixing. Delaying the next patch "because we want to include features" says "we prioritize features over bug fixing". And yes, maybe that's not what we should be reading into it, but here's where IG's reputation of blowing smoke is now hurting them; the community has grown quite salty. Hopefully the communication will get better from now on, but they've backed themselves in a serious corner by delaying bug patches instead of accelerating them. That patch needs to deliver, especially regarding addressing major bugs. Because I have doubts community support for the game will recover if it doesn't.

Thank you! Preferably things get fixed with the next update, but knowing that certain bugs do have the attention of the devs is way better than "yay, grid fins!" One request — if certain fixes don't make it into the patch, mention those too. "We're working on bug X but's it's causing ships to explode sometimes and we haven't figured out why yet" may not look good but it gives way more confidence that things are getting fixed than "we're just pretending this is not an issue"

Months have gone by since some pretty severe unresolved bugs were reported. An update on "when the next patch will be rolled out" was promised "next week" and that was two weeks ago. Isn't it telling that the community pretty much automatically assumes that "June" means June 30? We've gotten very used to vague timelines being meant as "at the very end of..." — if we're lucky. Given that the patches tend to get rolled out on Friday COB so any wailing will hit closed office doors for an entire weekend, I'm going to assume it'll be around June 23. Because rolling it out early June will be like the Spanish Inquisition: nobody is going to expect that. And again, managing expectations, expectations that were set in a negative way. If it's not mentioned, it's not fixed. "We know what bugs have priority and we're working hard on it," and we're rewarded with a video showing that solar lens flare now works correctly in edge cases. Nate, take note: this was not interpreted as "with all bigger issues fixed, we're now down to fixing minor optical stuff." Because by now that's not the expectation we have. Instead, it's interpreted as "we could have spend time on REAL bugs but we opted to pour all our resources into this" I'm still in the "KSP2 will be great camp," but I'm not the only on that side of the fence who's been getting quite salty lately. If it doesn't worry you that staunch defenders of the product are getting cynical, it should. There's lots of talk showing new features and announcing another month before the next patch comes out (with by now very low expectations it will address playability issues). Interest in the game will continue to drop with every patch adding new features without addressing the pain points. There's no reason to believe the 1.0 launch will be less incomplete than what KSP 1.0 was, so even if we ever get to see that (2 years from now? Three?) it will take another 2 or 3 years before it's in a state where most of us expected it to be right now. I still hope we will see that moment, but by now it looks like I get to play KSP2 when I retire and not earlier.

The fixes are unimportant in the sense that some of the major bugs reported from day 1 have not been addressed yet. To be fair, not all fixes were unimportant (there's a tendency from the nay-sayers to use hyperbole) but it is correct that there are a handful of bugs that warrant a hot fix. Rolling them out with a feature patch that seems to be at least 4 weeks out at this point in time is, at the very least, disappointing. It also suggests that the dev-team doesn't see the severity of those bugs in the same way as the community does. That's a disconnect that, at the very least, is disconcerting. There's a lot of things I have understanding for. Yes, you team members who design parts likely know jack [###] about programming, so there's nothing they can do to fix the bugs. So why not let them continue what they do, which is adding new parts. And I totally understand that they want more time between feature updates, and that's fine too. But clearly, clearly, the community is dying to see bugs fixed. Why not roll out hot fixes once per week or at least twice per month? Right now, not only are the devs missing out on a chance to turn disbelievers into believers, they're also turning their supporters away. When I see streamers polling if they should stream KSP1 or KSP2 content, I'd be worried if I were them. Very worried, A story about yay grid fins in a month is not going to cut it.

Probably a difference in perspective. If your job s to ship a working game, anything that makes the game stop working is "game breaking." Freezing, CTD's, corrupted saves, and so on. "So, if you are over the top and just trolling the boards… we probably aren’t reading that. " As the term "game breaking" is used for anything including jagged AA, there's a good chance that, in a "the boy who cried wolf" kind of way, "game breaking" bugs tend to be ignored when they're not, well... you know... game breaking. I've never had any CTD, that doesn't mean they're not there, but the claim that the game is riddled with them might lead to taking reports not quite seriously.

Without wanting to be as audacious as telling the devs what to do (there are plenty on the forum who consider themselves much better at that), why not distinguish between patches (bug updates) and feature updates? So we'd get 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2,3 and then 1.3.0 with new/refreshed features, and so on. The bug fix releases can sill have a pretty fast cadence without putting too much strain on feature development. At the moment there are still plenty of bugs that will stop people from playing the game, or from enjoying it at the level where they should.

Do we really need to discuss this. Update gets released with communication not from Nate, what do you expect will happen on this forum, where evere tidbit of information (or lack of it) get dissected more thoroughly than the line-up on the Kremlin wall of October revolution parades? "RaDiO SiLeNcE FrOm NaTe! He Is FiReD!" Yes, running your developer team into the ground, not allowing them to improve their skills and creating an environment that everyone associates with burnout is definitely the way to go. Will Harley Davidson send you an itemized list of what went wrong when an ordered motorcycle is delivered a week later at the dealer than promised? Surely development didn't go to plan, I don't understand why so many seem to think that the devs are happy about that. But expecting that they're going to hang out the dirty laundry? That they're going to say before release “hey, the product is going to look like [explicitive] and not at all like what we want it,” who does that? It's just not realistic to expect, yes even demand that. Is there a reason to be disappointed in the game? Absolutely. But to be outraged over overhyped marketing and demand that everyone is now gong to work 24/7 for the next 6 months (not that it would help, btw) to alleviate naive expectations regarding "the picture on the box" suggests a disconnect from "the real world."

Rumor has it they want to get paid and have the audacity to want to sleep. Not just once in a while, but every. day. they. want. "night rest." No wonder the game took 3 years to get where it is, treating those developers like entitled kings and queens! If Nike can make $5 sneakers in sweat shops then why can't Take Two set up a similar production pipeline?

is there a reason for the totally obnoxious formatting of your posts?

Prediction: Science Parts stay the same: KSP2 Is Just VeRsIoN OnE wItH ShInY GrApHiCs! Science Parts are revamped: WhY DiD ThEy ChAnGe ScIeNcE PaRtS? G@me Br0k3n!! I'm with you though. Much needed change.

“the most absurd idea ever” Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that it's a bad idea for all the reasons you list. But most absurd idea ever? A brief look at the response to KSP2 would suggest that it's not that. Not by a long shot.

Followed the instructions, still not working. Did re-install of bepinex + spacewarp as well. Micro Engineer is working so I know that mods themselves are working and that I have the folders where they shoud be. Is it a Patch 2 issue? Log file doesn't show the mod loading: [LOG 13:28:01.244] Version Info: 0.1.2.0.22258 [LOG 13:28:01.244] Command Line Args:D:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program 2\KSP2_x64.exe -single-instance [LOG 13:28:02.077] [UI] Primary EventSystem Selected: 'GameManager'(instance id: 207546) [LOG 13:28:02.145] [UI] Localization sources updating [LOG 13:28:02.360] [UI] Localization sources updating [LOG 13:28:02.368] [System] Pre-initialization for plugin Space Warp completed in 0.0008s. [LOG 13:28:02.375] [System] Pre-initialization for plugin Flight Plan completed in 0.0000s. [LOG 13:28:02.470] [System] Pre-initialization for plugin MicroEngineer completed in 0.0000s. [

Imagine you'd hook it up to multiplayer, and call it something like Kerbal Air Traffic Simulator (KATSIM). I'm sure that's a novel multiplayer application no one ever thought of!

I wouldn't exactly say that KSP2 is running successfully.

The worrying part is any of the fixes are there to address the exact issue, like a recalcitrant teenager, trying to maliciously comply in the worst way possible. Take the garage, for instance. Yes, they fixed it. Did they fix the underlying bad colliders everywhere on the KSC problem? Nope, they fixed the garage. You'll still sink through the stairs at the launch platform, for instance. If a certain problem shows steps on how to reproduce a bug that happens on EVA, and it uses the Mun as an example, you can bet that while that bug will be fixed, the same issue will still exist on Minmus. I don't want to be one of the haters but the limited scope of bug fixing is very frustrating.

Let's be fair; it was never there for starters.

Or it'll be the end of May. Really, there's no way to tell when Patch 3 will drop I assume there's a "bug pipeline" that was being worked on even before EA was released. That can explain the fast turnaround on bug fixing, but that pipeline is rapidly being depleted at the moment In addition, easy bugs are quickly fixed; that leaves the harder ones that take more time There is no doubt that the priority is to "stop the bleeding" — players not enjoying or even not being able to play the game. Obviously fixes need to come out sooner than later but as more issues are being addressed, the need for rapid publishing diminishes The end goal is the roadmap and merely fixing bugs isn't going to get us there. Hence new features like flowers and building lighting, and we'll see more and more of that So if Patch 3 contains more feature updates, less life-or-death bug fixes (and the bugs take more time to fix) there's no need to hang on to a tight 3-week schedule. I'd conservatively estimate mid May at the soonest, maybe even end of May.