The inevitable cause of disappointment among the playerbase in early access productions?

[hansen]

KSP is a great game and was rewarded with very pleasing reviews the last days. Although I have the impression, the release of 1.0 was rushed somehow and they should have released another beta before, I think the main reasons of disappointment some people express are an inevitable consequence of every early access game.

In the beginning there will be a lot of (visible) progress when core-gameplay-mechanics are added. And a lot of hope, because the final product is still in the sphere of imagination of its (future) consumers. Basically, this is similar to the hype when expectations are raised. This gets rather obvious with "hype trains" and such, pushing expectations to unreachable heights by the consumers themselves (supported by developers as well as a marketing tool).

The further the game is in development and the more time early access players already spent in the game, less and less innovations are being experienced by these players. So as 1.0 definitely honed the game mechanics successfully (blinding out aerodynamics) there are not enough new game elements and mechanics to please experienced ksp players. To be honest, I was looking forward to 1.0 a lot, but realized, that I have seen probably everything the game can offer (at least in stock, I played every version since 0.18, I think I have understood orbit mechanics and rocket physics which is great). But that is not a problem of the game, like every game it get olds after while. It is the inevitable pity of early access: to have already seen the whole potential of a game when it is released letting seem every small improvement a negligible addition. The worst consequence of this is, in my opinion, when people start blaming the developers for not working hard enough or not thinking deep enough about development decisisions, confusing felt disappointment with a problem of the game itself.

It think this is something one should keep in mind when taking a look at the rather negative atmosphere in the forum and on reddit the past days.

[Dizzle]

While what you're saying isn't without truth, I think 1.0 actually lived up to the hype. Aside from the bugs, I'm finding it to be an entirely new game, to the point where it feels like playing it for the first time.

[RocketBlam]

I knew this was going to happen. Its because players will give a lot of slack to a game that they know is in beta, and isn't finished. As soon as you slap a 1.0 on it, peoples expectations are much higher, and when they don't work, they are a lot more prone to complain. Myself included.

[MissStabby]

In early access everybody who hops onboard of the dev train gets to experience how a game can grow from a basic gameplay concept to a full fledged game.

With every stop in the line new features get added and the game becomes just a bit more awesome over a very long timespan.

Even though its easy to name new features, abilities areas for KSP to expand into (ocean ships, more parts, multiple solarsystems, interstellar travel, grabbing arms/pistons or automated systems, first person EVA and so on)

it is for the developer to decide when and where that dev train gets to pass the "finished" station.

Maybe other long time players would like to have that station away in the distance, maybe forever even.

Though looking at KSP from a distance, you get a game with "solid" physics and orbital mechanics, a great builder that allows to build all the rockets and planes you can imagine, you get to fly those like in a flight sim, you got a mission based mode where you have to complete assignments, gather science, ore and make a profit, you get to upgrade your equipment and buildings, similar to a tycoon management game. Also it allows players to actually step outside and plant flags on foreign moons and planets.

And any feature that is missing can be modded in since KSP has very good modding support.

I myself think KSP is 1.0 worthy at this moment, though i already thought it was 1.0 worthy after they introduced docking and space stations.

Also i think 1.0 is not the "end" of the stream of updates, atleast i hope so

[Kerbart]

As mentioned before. I think most players are very happy with the features offered in 1.0. What players are disappointed with is the bugs and lack of balance. It's not like they didn't release previous versions to the public to try out after all. From a player perspective there's no reason why 1.0 should be such bug mess to the extend that within the first week two bug fixes had to be released. 1.0.2 is the version that should have been 1.0; 1.0 should really have been 0.95. Apparently Squad had reasons to take this road, but I think that the community is very passionate about "their" game and disappointed that the 1.0 release (there's only ONE 1.0 release after all!) was such a mess.

[Vanamonde]

While the game was unfinished, every player had his/her own idealized hope for what the final game would be. As development continues, the actual game is inevitably going to turn out to be different from what many people hoped. Those people are going to be disappointed. Some are disappointed that it didn't go one way, and others are equally disappointed that it didn't go the opposite way. This is absolutely unavoidable, and I feel, the primary reason for dissatisfaction among players.

[zekes]

While what you're saying isn't without truth, I think 1.0 actually lived up to the hype. Aside from the bugs, I'm finding it to be an entirely new game, to the point where it feels like playing it for the first time.

I actually agree with this. I love it.

[rkman]

While what you're saying isn't without truth, I think 1.0 actually lived up to the hype. Aside from the bugs, I'm finding it to be an entirely new game, to the point where it feels like playing it for the first time.

I'm not so sure the 1.0 hype was that it would be like playing ksp for the first time. The hype was more along the lines of "it's finished" - and in that it disappoints.

Not inevitable, but i think another cause of disappointment is that many gamers have incorrect assumptions about how software development works: that software is build by just adding components until it is complete - not realizing that components routinely are changed after they have been added.

Without that there'd be a lot less complaining about how pre-1.0 rockets don't work very well in 1.x, and there would not be people expecting to be able to carry over their career save all the way from alpha to the finished product.

[Roflcopterkklol]

Honestly i wish they had of released 0.95 and delayed 1.0 for another 1-3 months.

[Temeter]

Honestly i wish they had of released 0.95 and delayed 1.0 for another 1-3 months.

It doesn't actually make any difference for a player, does it? Most of our issues and disputes won't even be noticed by new players. They just see a fantastic game like, and here i'm going on a assumption, we did when we first played unfinished betas, which didn't even hinder our enjoyment.

For players playing since early access and before those numbers are kinda pointless anyway. Who care if we're going to 1.0 now or get some beta-releases inbetween? Development is going to continue anwyway, and that beta/release-thing exists only in our head, it's an arbitrary spot in development.