What's With The Hate?

[Tankman101]

I edited it to correct a few punctuation mistakes, but other than that I didn't change anything. Stop trying to quote words I never said.

Whatever you want to tell me.

[technicalfool]

OF COURSE you have to make words up out of nowhere and pretend like I "edited my words out".

You know I can see your edit history, right? It helps when resolving arguments like this.

It's also really not worth getting worked up over professional axe grinders. Haters gonna hate, yo. That goes for both of you, and everyone else.

[DoToH]

I would really like people to stop labeling criticism (and well deserved, at that) and expression of frustration and disappointment as "hate". kthxby

^^ This.

If asking for bugfixes and performance improvements is "hate", then I'm a "hater".

Read here here for more "hate" reasons. Some of them were there when I bougth the game (0.18) and are still there (post 1.0-release-no more early access).

[mythbusters844]

You know I can see your edit history, right? It helps when resolving arguments like this.

Ehehehehehehehe...

^^ This.

If asking for bugfixes and performance improvements is "hate", then I'm a "hater".

Read here here for more "hate" reasons. Some of them were there when I bougth the game (0.18) and are still there (post 1.0-release-no more early access).

Completely agreed.

Edited June 30, 2015 by mythbusters844

[Bill Phil]

There's mentioning problems and asking for them to be fixed. Then there's people who complain as if they deserve better. That's not quite fine, but it would be nicer if people didn't complain like that on the forums.

[technicalfool]

^^ This.

If asking for bugfixes and performance improvements is "hate", then I'm a "hater".

Read here here for more "hate" reasons. Some of them were there when I bougth the game (0.18) and are still there (post 1.0-release-no more early access).

Do be aware that I'm not talking about bug complaints. I'm talking about the HULLO-shooping and snekpost troll's den that Mythbusters844 claims he never mentioned.

Not that there's anything wrong with snekposts. Snekguy is welcome to show Scully off in the Space Lounge. I suppose I wouldn't see the harm in a Plop-thread (Dont think we need to see any of the live-feeding videos though). The HULLO-shoops on the other hand... hell no.

Edited June 29, 2015 by technicalfool
And that's why we can't have nice things.

[Sandworm]

I would really like people to stop labeling criticism (and well deserved, at that) and expression of frustration and disappointment as "hate". kthxby

Hate is irrational. It therefore cannot be argued with, resulting in heated debates that go nowhere. Criticism is rational. Its debate is useful to all, particularly "responsive" developers as Squad describes themselves. But as hate is irrational, so is love. The fanboys can no more be debated than the haters. Those who treat Squad's every utterance as scripture, their every action as above reproach, they aren't any different than the trolls. Neither contribute anything useful. But only one is ever put down.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Sandworm

[kiwi1960]

If I might respond to the original post:

This attitude by game developers is what I hate. Just because AAA game developers have the resources to pour into huge marketing campaigns for their ....ty, unfinished products, doesn't mean that is the way the market should be run from now on.

Apparently, in spite of asking us to pay for it, and announcing it's official release, SQUAD had no intention of delivering a finished product to their customers.

Imagine buying a new car, and having it fall to pieces while you're driving it home. You might be inclined to go back to the dealership and complain, but when you do they say, "It's not our fault, the factory never finished building it."

That sums up my thought process, when 1.0 was released people expected a finished product, but what they received was a game not welded together properly.

The worst part of it is, instead of admitting they made a mistake, and simply asking us to hold off while they finish the game, SQUAD seems to think they can just 'patch away' their problems.

And to anyone who thinks I'm just waffling, all you have to do is look at the file structure for the game. There are unused and abandoned folders still sitting in the main game directory, that have never been removed. For some reason, they're still a part of the current game installation.

A developer that doesn't even clean up even their basic file structure before announcing a release, is a developer who has no intention of releasing a finished product.

- - - Updated - - -

There is a difference between unfinished, and broken.

Kerbal Space Program is unfinished. It continues to be developed, because it was never finished in the first place.

Starship Troopers is broken. It was abandoned by the developer, because they couldn't make it work at all.

Do you see the difference? It's a huge difference. While I might complain about an unfinished game, I don't give two ....s about a broken game.

Lower your expectations, sir. The game WAS finished... it contained all they wanted it to contain, which was part of the goals included when the they started this project, and it was added to over time with the help of the community. For that reason, once all the goals had been met, the game was released. It still contains bugs, but what doesn't? And now, there is more goals to add to the game, and THAT is the on going side of things, had goals been added constantly, the game would NEVER have been released, btu the thing is, even with the new goals, the game is there, it functions. It plays as expected and is fit for purpose. If anyone finds a bug, it is reported here and till the next patch is released, people find work arounds and accept that the bug was no ones fault except maybe of the Gods....

...so shouting about it isn't helping anyone.

As for version .90 straight to 1.0.0 ...

People, really? Is there some .... written law or something that says you do this, that and the other then release it as .90.... then a bit more and 0.9.1 ????

The fact is, the guesstimate these versions, the fact is, between .9 and 1.0 .... they moved heaven and Kerbal, hauled ass, survived on coffee and no sleep.... and achieved all the goals they had.

The rockets point UP.... the engines work.... there is gravity... atmosphere where it needs to be.... and the Kerbals look cuter.....

Of course it was time to release 1.0 ... they work to their agenda... NO ONE ELSES!

Just as the Microsoft team had released win 3.31 ... win95... ME.... XP and all the others WHEN THEY SAID IT WAS TIME..... and as well all should know, there isn't a version of windows out there that doesn't suffer from bugs and security issues and ... release patches even now for those windows they still support.

So, my advice to you is not to cry too much, you're fighting a losing battle.

JUST as I have decided I am fighting a losing battle over my locked threads... etc etc...

Edited June 29, 2015 by technicalfool
Those word filters are there for a reason.

[LtWigglesworth]

Lower your expectations, sir. The game WAS finished... it contained all they wanted it to contain, which was part of the goals included when the they started this project, and it was added to over time with the help of the community. For that reason, once all the goals had been met, the game was released. It still contains bugs, but what doesn't? And now, there is more goals to add to the game, and THAT is the on going side of things, had goals been added constantly, the game would NEVER have been released, btu the thing is, even with the new goals, the game is there, it functions. It plays as expected and is fit for purpose. If anyone finds a bug, it is reported here and till the next patch is released, people find work arounds and accept that the bug was no ones fault except maybe of the Gods....

...so shouting about it isn't helping anyone.

As for version .90 straight to 1.0.0 ...

People, really? Is there some .... written law or something that says you do this, that and the other then release it as .90.... then a bit more and 0.9.1 ????

The fact is, the guesstimate these versions, the fact is, between .9 and 1.0 .... they moved heaven and Kerbal, hauled ass, survived on coffee and no sleep.... and achieved all the goals they had.

The rockets point UP.... the engines work.... there is gravity... atmosphere where it needs to be.... and the Kerbals look cuter.....

Of course it was time to release 1.0 ... they work to their agenda... NO ONE ELSES!

Just as the Microsoft team had released win 3.31 ... win95... ME.... XP and all the others WHEN THEY SAID IT WAS TIME..... and as well all should know, there isn't a version of windows out there that doesn't suffer from bugs and security issues and ... release patches even now for those windows they still support.

So, my advice to you is not to cry too much, you're fighting a losing battle.

JUST as I have decided I am fighting a losing battle over my locked threads... etc etc...

Well the idea about a software development cycle is that the Alpha phase is for testing ideas and features, the Beta phase is then for a "feature complete" game, which needs bugs shaking out, and release is when the game is both feature complete, and bugs have (largely) been removed.

KSP was not "feature complete" when 0.90 was released, and only really became "feature complete" with 1.0.2 or 1.0.3. In reality these should have been the last alpha updates/ first beta updates, not release updates. There could have then been a period spent solely to crushing bugs, without the added distraction of trying to add new features/port to U5, and then a release version would be ready. There is a reason that a significant proportion of people still think it should better be referred to as 0.28 rather than 1.0.4.

Thats not to say it isn't a great game, and that squad hasn't done something truly unique, but a lot of the anger is justified.

Edited June 29, 2015 by technicalfool
Edited quoted post

[worir4]

Maybe the mods should ban every one! Then there will be no hate!

[worir4]

Seriously though guys, just be nice to each other.

[Pthigrivi]

I actually stopped coming here because the tude got so negative. Im just returning after more than a month. Seems... maybe? better?

[Joonatan1998]

I think there are 4 main reasons for the "hate".

Reason one:

Usually:

-When a system remains the same for a long time people who don't like it give up on complaining, there are always some who don't stop but very few.

-When a change happens, the people who liked something previously start complaining a lot.

-After some time the complaining calms down.

But:

SQUAD did an major aerodynamics change 3 times in a row...

Every time the complaints were calming down, SQUAD got them started at full force again.

Reason 2:

-Some people don't like their crafts getting unusable.

-most people were fine with making new crafts for the release (some still complained).

-Many people expected that the release would be the last craft-ruining release.

-People start making a lot of new crafts. (and there are many new players)

-Squad makes 2 craft-breaking updates just after the release

Reason three:

-When SQUAD said next update will be release, people warned them not to.

-SQUAD: "trust us"

-after an (buggy and pretty unfinished) release, 2 craft breaking physics changes.

-Community: "We warned you"

Reason 4:

Any change that adds difficulty to any game gets a lot of "hate"

Edited June 29, 2015 by Joonatan1998

[mythbusters844]

Do be aware that I'm not talking about bug complaints. I'm talking about the HULLO-shooping and snekpost troll's den that Mythbusters844 claims he never mentioned.

Not that there's anything wrong with snekposts. Snekguy is welcome to show Scully off in the Space Lounge. I suppose I wouldn't see the harm in a Plop-thread (Dont think we need to see any of the live-feeding videos though). The HULLO-shoops on the other hand... hell no.

http://i.imgur.com/34nUr94.jpg

Hey, I was trying to have some fun...

Edited August 7, 2015 by mythbusters844
wew_lad.webm

[Pthigrivi]

Maybe its still too soon.

[Merinsan]

Since this thread seems to be devolving. I'd like to add my 2c before it's gone.

The primary reason for the "hate" in my opinion is simply that the game is as polished as an alpha release even though it's supposed to be full release.

I haven't tried 1.0.3 or 1.0.4 on my career save yet (due to travel for work), but I know I will be unhappy if the work I've done makes some missions that would have succeeded in 1.0.2 now fail in 1.0.4.

People focus on "save breaking" changes as the be-all end-all issue of updates after release, but it's not the only issue. Changes that affect gameplay such as aerodynamic changes, heating changes, etc can essentially break your progress in such a way that you need to either restart or spend a significant amount of time getting things back on track. This is not fun, and generates resentment. Based on what I have seen in the dev notes, it sounds like 1.1 may cause such issues. Based on the forums, these issues happened with 1.0.2, 1.0.3 (after 1.0).

So I will say, some level of frustration is warranted. Saying it is hate is somewhat disingenuous. It's criticism, frustration, or even anger. No one here hates Squad, though we may think the actions they have taken are foolish, we still love the game that they are making.

[Stargate525]

The primary reason for the "hate" in my opinion is simply that the game is as polished as an alpha release even though it's supposed to be full release.

This is pretty much my reason. That, and the idea that anyone who points out:

-Major gameplay changes in a game that's supposed to be finished.

-Making major announcements and then sodding off for the weekend.

-Making major announcements via PCGamer without any corroboration on their main sites.

-Doing no major bugfixing prior to a 1.0 release.

...Might be a tad bit unprofessional and worrying are shouted down as whiners, haters, and complainers who have no idea what we're talking about.

[Claw]

maybe you misunderstood... the monkey comment was saying that Squad are human, not monkeys.

Yes, I know. I was using your metaphor in my own post, as a reference toward moderators (as you used it for Squad).

...I told them to be fair but hard, not to allow one to get away with something another wasn't allowed to...

...but more importantly, I told them not to be over enthusiastic it interpreting the rules, to allow some leeway.

And therein lies the balance.

Yep... I even tested the theory and stated in that thread that conspiracy theories were against the rules.... STILL NOTHING.

The best way to test your theory is to use the report button. We will see the reports. We will not necessarily see every post or thread on the forum.

I did post about Valentina being on the Mun and the Tech at KSP turned the radio off so they could enjoy the silence... and YET AGAIN... the thread was locked because it was ... sexist.... REALLY?

Without having any knowledge on the specifics of your thread, I can hypothesize that if it was posted at the height of sexist remarks being made on the forums, that's would increase the reason for it getting shut down. Again, I don't know the specific of your thread or the context.

Didn't Squad have a backlash for being sexist and not having females?

Yes they did, despite stating multiple times that they planned on releasing female kerbals (because they wasn't fast enough for some, and pointless to others). At the time of release, the forum was quite overflowing with comments, both appropriate and inappropriate. "Female kerbals" were also added to the "What Not To Suggest" thread. Not because we are heavy handed brigands, but because it was (yet again) another polarizing topic that seemed to encourage sexist remarks or personal attacks. Not to mention the fact that they were already a planned feature (so no need to suggest them again).

I will conclude by saying that the moderators are generally (or should be) reactionary by nature. We don't go out of our way to find things that break the rules, and we also rely on the community itself to help in maintaining the right culture. If there's an isolated thread that seems to be running rampant, it's likely because the people who are happy to banter about it are the only ones there (and hence, we don't notice). If someone posts a remotely sexist remark in a high traffic area at the height of female kerbal release, then it's more likely to get flagged, noticed, or otherwise closed down.

I will also conceded (as I did earlier) that I don't expect any of what I ramble about to change your mind. I do, however, feel saddened by the fact that you feel unable to post a new thread (because that's not what we want). I also appreciate you providing some specific feedback that can be addressed.

Thanks,

~Claw

Edited June 30, 2015 by Claw

[Vanamonde]

A whole bunch of posts that had nothing to do with the topic have been removed from this thread. Please try to keep your comments relevant, folks.

[Temeter]

This is pretty much my reason. That, and the idea that anyone who points out:

[...]

...Might be a tad bit unprofessional and worrying are shouted down as whiners, haters, and complainers who have no idea what we're talking about.

We do now what you're talking about, and it does look petty and contradictionary at times.

Taking you're examples:

-Major gameplay changes in a game that's supposed to be finished.

Which does not mean Squad is not continuing working on the game. Seriously, can you imagine the 'hate' if Squad just suddenly declares KSP to be finished and stops developing?

Secondly, I see the issue of having to adapt thing (although that kind of is part of the game), but what does it matter to you? We're both playing since a while and are used to iteration over iteration. Being 1.0 now and being 1.0 3 months later doesn't change anything for us.

The only people affected are newcomers, and they don't seem to bother. Contrary, going into a solid and still continually developed game is usually a nice thing.

Making major announcements and then sodding off for the weekend.

Which, to be honest, is more a criticism of a part of the community than squad. Could have been done better, but most issues are resulting out of anxiety and at times paranoia, which mostly mattered to a small minority of players - especially the one we're talking about right now. Could have just waited and gotten your answers anyway, Squad usually answers bigger complaints. There is no point in making drama.

-Making major announcements via PCGamer without any corroboration on their main sites.

That's again a valid complaint, while not much of a deal otherwise (actually seen these thing on Assetto Corsa too): Going for a big magazine to publish news is important to reach a bigger audience. We're just a minority here in the first place, which is better informed anyway. Otherwise we wouldn't know of PCGamer bringing the news 'exclusively' in the first place.

-Doing no major bugfixing prior to a 1.0 release.

Another valid complaint, I could see the issues comming too. And also again something that only matters to new players, not old ones.

You see my point? At least to me, most of these complaints seem to be arguable things of principle, maybe slight mistakes of small developer, question of personal expectations how the development is supposed to go, or outright criticism on behalve at others. Often these posts even sound as if the critic feels personally betrayed, making it even more of a subjective things that only uses these criticism to vent personal feelings. They at least don't hold that much on their own.

That's not to say there are valid things to cirticise in the dev cycle, the heat gauge thing should have been fixed before release or by a hotfix, not this late. The patcher needs a better implementation. But even discussions of these very real issues tends to be blown up like the whole future and development of KSP would be an utter mess.

Edited June 30, 2015 by Temeter

[Stargate525]

You see my point? At least to me, most of these complaints seem to be arguable things of principle, maybe slight mistakes of small developer, question of personal expectations how the development is supposed to go, or outright criticism on behalve at others. Often these posts even sound as if the critic feels personally betrayed, making it even more of a subjective things that only uses these criticism to vent personal feelings. They at least don't hold that much on their own.

That's not to say there are valid things to cirticise in the dev cycle, the heat gauge thing should have been fixed before release or by a hotfix, not this late. The patcher needs a better implementation. But even discussions of these very real issues tends to be blown up like the whole future and development of KSP would be an utter mess.

I do see your point, but I vehemently disagree with you that these issues cannot be projected forward to the continuation of KSP. These bugs have had no sign of being fixed, they continue to tinker with major aspects of the game, and are making rookie mistakes in development and community management with almost every update. Pointing out that this spells trouble seems eminently logical.

[LordFjord]

Let Squad do their thing. I don't think that we are in the position to give them development lessons as we only see a fraction of the whole picture. Things are sometimes not as easy as it seems from the outside.

Squad has given us one of the most wonderful games of all times. I for myself trust them to fix the issues and take the game into the (very subjective) "right" direction. At least I think they do, they did not disappoint me yet. I can't think of an update (since 0.22 when I started playing) where I would say that it was a step back.

So how about this:

The helpful and polite attitude of the community was always the number one reason for me to join this place.

Maybe we should just be more optimistic, spread some more love around, help the folks in the questions forums, teach them the quirks of the game and the science of spaceflight.

[rkman]

To that I want to add this link to HarvesteR's excellent post on reddit, detailing what "going 1.0" meant.

"There is an ongoing paradigm shift with software development and distribution these days, and it's fair to say we are caught right in the middle of it. The line between unfinished and finished software is getting increasingly more hazy." - Harvester

Might be interesting for the software industry to know that much of their target audience is not down with the direction of that paradigm shift.

The fact that developers can easily patch after release is no excuse to publish an unfinished product.

And no, "finished" does not mean bug free, but it does mean "does not contain longstanding bugs and does not require major balance overhauls".

I'm not even sure there really is paradigm shift, rather than a few big developers getting away with releasing buggy unfinished AA titles.

Though it looks like Maxis did not exactly get away with it re Simcity, now apparently having fallen out of favor and surpassed in popularity by Cities: Skylines.

[Wlan]

Maybe because many people did not see the features they want in the releases. Like their very impatient

[Harry Rhodan]

The fact that developers can easily patch after release is no excuse to publish an unfinished product.

And no, "finished" does not mean bug free, but it does mean "does not contain longstanding bugs and does not require major balance overhauls".

I'm not even sure there really is paradigm shift, rather than a few big developers getting away with releasing buggy unfinished AA titles.

Though it looks like Maxis did not exactly get away with it re Simcity, now apparently having fallen out of favor and surpassed in popularity by Cities: Skylines.

They are probably not talking about buggy AAA titles but more about smaller companies like Paradox Development Studios or Arcen games. Those companies develop DLC that will add a few new options to the game while at the same time a whole lot of new features will be released for free with the regular patches that the DLC helps to fund. On the one hand this means that every time a new major patch comes around the game will become a bit unbalanced until the next minor balance patch and people will have to adopt to new options and opportunities. That is obviously not something everyone would enjoy but it keeps the games fresh for everyone and retains mod compatibility for everyone without forcing everyone to buy the DLC.