KSP 2 Would Have Microtransactions

[NotTheRealRMS]

On 11/17/2017 at 11:28 AM, John FX said:

I also think that a new game, with more `accessible` gameplay, possibly an autopilot, driven by a large marketing campaign based on the reputation of the first game would lead to a fair amount of profit before people realised it was just a dumbed down version of the first game with less modding capabilities and more cartoony graphics and simpler gameplay. At least career would be sorted.

There are millions of reasons for KSP 2, all of them are some form of currency.

I'm so utterly desensitized at this point that I can't really care about the future of KSP, but I hope for a realistic spaceflight simulator with the blessings of the real Richard M. Stallman for being 100% free software happening one day, likely never unfortunately.

I've seen this happen when Interplay first tried to dumb down their Fallout franchise with Fallout:Brotherhood of Steel, then failed and sold it to Bethesda which made it into Oblivion with Guns(Fallout 3), when the "masterpiece" action "RPG" Gothic 4: ArcaniA was made by wholly different developers after a mediocre Gothic 3 yet still a genuine RPG and the excellent Gothic 1 and 2 predecessors, when the very developers of those created a cool action RPG called Risen only to continue with poor sequels for it, when the horrible Thi4f came as a sequel to the great Thief 1 and 2 from Looking Glass and 3 from Ion Storm which was not so great but still good, when cynical companies starting deceiving fools through Kickstarters to pay for "authentic spiritual successors" of old games that don't hold a candle to the originals so they can get funds without having to share any profits to those doing the funding, when Bioshock happened as yet another inferior "spiritual successor" to System Shock 1 and 2, then ironically its sequels were accused of being "dumbed down" by some fans of the first Bioshock, just to name a few. I'm very glad there were no attempts to "remake" Arcanum: of Steamworks and Magick Obscura in a new form, accessible for "wider audiences", consoles and/or tablets and at least the legacy of the great Troika(RIP), unlike the legacy of the gone Black Isle Studios from which it originated, was left to rest in peace.

Edited November 18, 2017 by NotTheRealRMS

[Spricigo]

9 hours ago, Mako said:

Following that line of thought through does leave me wondering why Take-Two bought KSP.

Because they foresee more profits than anything else by the same investment.

Maybe because that was not such a big investment for T2's. In fact is possible that the issues to explore a sequel reduced the price enough to KSP become a 'low hanging fruit'. 

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

4 hours ago, NotTheRealRMS said:

I'm so utterly desensitized at this point that I can't really care about the future of KSP, but I hope for a realistic spaceflight simulator with the blessings of the real Richard M. Stallman for being 100% free software happening one day, likely never unfortunately.

I've seen this happen when Interplay first tried to dumb down their Fallout franchise with Fallout:Brotherhood of Steel, then failed and sold it to Bethesda which made it into Oblivion with Guns(Fallout 3), when the "masterpiece" action "RPG" Gothic 4: ArcaniA was made by wholly different developers after a mediocre Gothic 3 yet still a genuine RPG and the excellent Gothic 1 and 2 predecessors, when the very developers of those created a cool action RPG called Risen only to continue with poor sequels for it, when the horrible Thi4f came as a sequel to the great Thief 1 and 2 from Looking Glass and 3 from Ion Storm which was not so great but still good, when cynical companies starting deceiving fools through Kickstarters to pay for "authentic spiritual successors" of old games that don't hold a candle to the originals so they can get funds without having to share any profits to those doing the funding, when Bioshock happened as yet another inferior "spiritual successor" to System Shock 1 and 2, then ironically its sequels were accused of being "dumbed down" by some fans of the first Bioshock, just to name a few. I'm very glad there were no attempts to "remake" Arcanum: of Steamworks and Magick Obscura in a new form, accessible for "wider audiences", consoles and/or tablets and at least the legacy of the great Troika(RIP), unlike the legacy of the gone Black Isle Studios from which it originated, was left to rest in peace.

I'm still holding out hope for the future of the game. I'll give Take Two a chance and see what they do with it. They bought the Civ franchise and made the best game of the series in Civ IV (IMO). Then they utterly destroyed the game forever with Civ V; leaving me never to return. I figure it could go either way. I'll just hope for the best.

[John FX]

28 minutes ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

I'm still holding out hope for the future of the game. I'll give Take Two a chance and see what they do with it. They bought the Civ franchise and made the best game of the series in Civ IV (IMO). Then they utterly destroyed the game forever with Civ V; leaving me never to return. I figure it could go either way. I'll just hope for the best.

I too am hoping for the best. All this talk is just that. Talk

We all will have to wait and see what happens. We may get the best game of the series before they kill it off with a terrible game, we may already be playing that game. None of us know, not even TT.

[Mako]

7 hours ago, Spricigo said:

Because they foresee more profits than anything else by the same investment.

I get that, but my point is what profits?

As far as I'm aware, all the merchandising deals went away with the sale of the IP and no new ones have been formed yet. I could be wrong, but I've not noticed anything happening along those lines.

As far as I can tell, the only profits are long-tail sales of a game released two years ago. Of course there is a DLC coming soon, but the market for that is limited to PC players who bought the game after April 2013. The same goes for any future DLC for this title. Of course the re-release of the console versions will happen soon too, and then those versions will have potential to generate new sales again.

Unless the price of the IP was very low, i don't think those limited revenue streams provide the profits to justify the purchase.

So that leads me back the the question of what do they do with this IP since we agree that making a new game doesn't seem to be most lucrative investment? Since there is currently only one product, soon to be three if you count the re-release of the consoles, it would seem like they would need more products to realize any significant profits.

Maybe there's something I'm missing...

[Spricigo]

 

15 hours ago, Mako said:

Maybe there's something I'm missing...

Certainly there's something we're missing. And there's good chance we never find out. That's why we speculate so much.

[wumpus]

On 11/18/2017 at 1:10 PM, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

I'm still holding out hope for the future of the game. I'll give Take Two a chance and see what they do with it. They bought the Civ franchise and made the best game of the series in Civ IV (IMO). Then they utterly destroyed the game forever with Civ V; leaving me never to return. I figure it could go either way. I'll just hope for the best.

I've heard plenty of people like Civ V (presumably after all the bells and whistles added), but I can't give up Nimoy's voicework.

[ave369]

Microtransactions in a single player game are impossible. People will just pirate the paid content and redistribute it via torrents. Using piracy to steal whole games can be called reproachable, but using piracy to combat microtransactions is a completely justified form of cyber guerrilla warfare. Human beings have a right to rise up against tyranny, and microtransactions are a form of tyranny.

Edited December 23, 2017 by ave369

[KSK]

32 minutes ago, ave369 said:

Microtransactions in a single player game are impossible

Possibly.

32 minutes ago, ave369 said:

People will just pirate the paid content and redistribute it via torrents

Probably.

32 minutes ago, ave369 said:

Using piracy to steal whole games can be called reproachable

Definitely.

33 minutes ago, ave369 said:

but using piracy to combat microtransactions is a completely justified form of cyber guerrilla warfare. Human beings have a right to rise up against tyranny, and microtransactions are a form of tyranny.

Amazing. Nothing you said in that last line is correct. Or, if you prefer an old-fashioned saying, two wrongs don't make a right.

[ave369]

22 hours ago, KSK said:

Amazing. Nothing you said in that last line is correct. Or, if you prefer an old-fashioned saying, two wrongs don't make a right.

Nothing I said in that last line YOU THINK is correct. Don't deal in absolutes. If you are willing to suffer microtransactions, by all means do so. But don't blame those who aren't. 

Piracy is like violence. Everyone agrees that violence in general is bad. If you attack passers-by in the street, you will be jailed. But if you beat up a mugger who tries to mug you, you are executing your right of self-defence. However, according to your logic, "two wrongs do not make a right", you are not supposed too fight muggery with violence,  but rather dance a pretty dance for the mugger in hopes he'll leve you alone.

 

Thanks, but I prefer self-defense. It isn't wrong.

Edited December 24, 2017 by ave369

[KSK]

To be clear, you can obviously have whatever opinion you like about microtransactions but your comparison to tyranny was ridiculous. That's what was wrong with your last line.

Also for clarity, I have the same objection to this general habit of many people on Internet forums, of instantly reaching for the metaphorical nuclear option in any discussion. 'I disapprove of X' becomes 'X is evil'. It's polarising, lacks nuance and shuts down meaningful debate.

In the context of this thread at least, micro transactions are a way of monetising one form of entertainment content. Even if one feels particularly strongly about them, equating  them to a tyranny is ludicrous, shows a limited perspective  and is frankly insulting to those living under actual persecution or oppression.

This is the 'tyrannny' of a child being told that no he can't have all the toys in the store. It isn't some great call to arms for a noble cause.

[DAL59]

This thread has been revived?  There has never been indication from any dev that this might happen.  You've all spent a month complaining against something which actually doesn't exist.  I don't want microtransactions though.

[Vanamonde]

Rather than steal a business' products to teach them a lesson, how about just not buying or playing the thing? Serves the same purpose of denying them income, and has the added benefit that you are not breaking the law. Microtransactions (which I also hate) are part of a game, after all, and no one is making you play the game. So I don't play games that have them. 

Because, yes, pirating games is a crime, and advocating crime is not allowed on this forum, so let's leave that part of the discussion for other places on the internet, please. 

[adsii1970]

On 12/23/2017 at 1:49 AM, ave369 said:

Microtransactions in a single player game are impossible.

Nope, there are games that do this all the time. Most of the games folks play in Facebook have microtransactions and are single-player games.

On 12/23/2017 at 1:49 AM, ave369 said:

People will just pirate the paid content and redistribute it via torrents.

Yes, and if caught, it is infringement of intellectual property and is a violation of international copyright laws. And if you violate them, you deserve the rewards for your actions.

On 12/23/2017 at 1:49 AM, ave369 said:

Using piracy to steal whole games can be called reproachable, but using piracy to combat microtransactions is a completely justified form of cyber guerrilla warfare.

No. It is not justified. Just because you do not feel like paying for something does not legalize theft. And that's what you are doing. You are stealing someone else's work. If you don't want to pay for the content within the microtransactions, learn how to program and then add your own content. And if you cannot do that, then create your own game. But do not try to justify committing a crime by calling it "justified."

On 12/23/2017 at 1:49 AM, ave369 said:

Human beings have a right to rise up against tyranny, and microtransactions are a form of tyranny.

Tyranny is NOT being overcharged for a good or service. Tyranny is defined as cruel and oppressive government or rule OR cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control. You are not required to complete microtransactions to play a game. It may be required to shorten time on levels, to add content to make the game easier, or to achieve higher levels, but no one is forcing you to purchase those things.

[KerBlitz Kerman]

Try and be polite at least.

Also, I am backing up some versions and some mods.

[DAL59]

1 hour ago, Vanamonde said:

Rather than steal a business' products to teach them a lesson, how about just not buying or playing the thing? Serves the same purpose of denying them income, and has the added benefit that you are not breaking the law. Microtransactions (which I also hate) are part of a game, after all, and no one is making you play the game. So I don't play games that have them. 

Because, yes, pirating games is a crime, and advocating crime is not allowed on this forum, so let's leave that part of the discussion for other places on the internet, please. 

Also, there is no evidence, hints, or much reason for the ksp devs, that is even happening at all.  Can a dev please come in and say they are not adding microtransactions and stop the negative hype?

[cfds]

19 hours ago, DAL59 said:

Can a dev please come in and say they are not adding microtransactions and stop the negative hype?

The devs have nothing to do with this, Take Two would have to make this announcement. And they would be rather stupid to make it...

[pandaman]

I wouldn't want to see in game micro transactions, or pop up prompts or adverts for it or DLC whilst I'm playing, but paying a small fee for limited scope 'official mods' like say 'Custom Kerbal Hairstyles' or whatever I suppose is no big deal, players can take it or leave it as they wish.  In the same way that the up coming DLC will be an optional additional purchase for those who it appeals to.

As for KSP 2, if it were to be developed, as suggested by others above, as a 're-boot' to essentially play the same as it currently does, but to take advantage of the lessons learned during the evolution of KSP 1 then I would certainly check it out and most likely buy it.

Though currently, rather than KSP 2,  I think the most likely scenario is one of several larger scale and higher value DLC 'packages' that expand the current game.  Things like - different solar system packs, or perhaps a stock multiplayer add-on.

[Just Jim]

On 11/16/2017 at 9:11 AM, DarkOwl57 said:

Why would they make a new game?

"KSP 2! Now with more plane-"

"Uh.. Jim?"
"Yoo?"

"There's a mod that adds more planets."

"Aww dangit. Okay then!"

"KSP 2! Now with more KSC Facilit-"

"Jim?"
"Darn it again?!"
"Sorry..."

"UGH! Fine. Backup backup plan.

"KSP 2! Now with better physics! It'll be the great- OH WHAT NOW?!"
"FAR."

"I GIVE UP! GET SOMEONE ELSE TO DO YOUR STINKING COMMERCIAL"

Hey, leave me out of it... I'm on your side... lol... 

[Diche Bach]

 

On 12/24/2017 at 6:49 PM, Vanamonde said:

Rather than steal a business' products to teach them a lesson, how about just not buying or playing the thing? Serves the same purpose of denying them income, and has the added benefit that you are not breaking the law. Microtransactions (which I also hate) are part of a game, after all, and no one is making you play the game. So I don't play games that have them. 

Because, yes, pirating games is a crime, and advocating crime is not allowed on this forum, so let's leave that part of the discussion for other places on the internet, please. 

I am universally opposed to crime, even as a form of protest. If one is engaging in "crime" as a form of protest, then really what one is seeking is a state of war, and sometimes wars are justified, but warlike crime (e.g., IRA bombings, or whatever) are NEVER justified.

With that said, there is one instance in which microtransactions or other forms of publisher/IP owner "interference" in consumer experience do verge toward "tyranny" (well at least as far as "rip off" is toward "tyranny" . . .): when a piece of software is sold in state X, and lacks interfering or costly features like DRM, microstransactions, etc., and which consumers purchased with the expectation that such features were absent, but which is "updated" at a later time to state "X + Y" and now INCLUDE such interfering features as DRM, microtransactions, etc..

Here of course I'm referring to Bethesda's "Creation Club," and in that instance, I refuse most adamantly to update my version of the .exe they sold me to a form that includes Creation Club.

KSP's steam library allows users to install various versions of the software depending on which one they prefer, and Fallout 4 (and probably Skyrim) do not and this is inexcusably manipulative, rude, and probably criminal.

People have been sharing copies of the "pre-CC" .exe and while it technically counts as "piracy," I must say, in this very special instance, I cannot blame them for helping others to circumvent Bethesda/Zenimax'es bad business practices, nor can I criticize the actions. I wont' say I SANCTION it, but I also do not condemn it to the same absolute degree I otherwise condemn piracy.

Edited January 14, 2018 by Diche Bach
clarification

[Matuchkin]

Is there some sort of summary to this?

KSP2 [would/wouldn't] exist.

KSP2 [will/won't] have micro transactions.

SQUAD [is/isn't] planning to put micro transactions in the present KSP.

[TheKSPBeginner]

Good idea for micro transactions:

Suit/hair colors and shapes

[SnailsAttack]

1 hour ago, TheKSPBeginner said:

Good idea for micro transactions:

Suit/hair colors and shapes

no

microtransactions are awful in every way shape and form

[TheKSPBeginner]

Why, if they're cheap, I think they're good

[Gargamel]

1 hour ago, TheKSPBeginner said:

Why, if they're cheap, I think they're good

Because if stupid little items like those you listed become the subject of microtransactions, then that is all the devs will focus on.  They will ignore gameplay mechanics for the sake of colored helmets.  The game will suffer, bugs will go unfixed for even longer than they already are, and we'll get content for a price that does not actually do anything to improve gameplay.   Doing so would require them to lock out mods, and that will kill the game.   One of the things that makes this game beautiful is the way @SQUAD has welcomed mods with open arms.  Without mods, this game would become boring very quickly for the vast majority of players.