Poll: KSP2 buying decisions

[shdwlrd]

59 minutes ago, Dman979 said:

According to Danny2462, they're not bugs, they're features.

But most of the time Danny2462 has to fight to get the bug to show itself. These types of bugs I can live with. Obvious ones the hurt game play, those are the ones I won't tolerate.

[steve_v]

1. When it a) has a native GNU/Linux port, and b) is a finished, polished product and I can verify this with a comprehensive, up-to-date free demo. At this point that's pretty well equivalent to a flat "no".

2. I don't care, so long as the product is appropriate for the price tag. Again verifiable with demo, shareware or trial.

3. No. Hell no. All of my no in fact. I bought KSP based on promises of a finished product down the line, and years of horrible performance, untested .0 releases, ridiculous regressions and half-finished features later, development ended in favor of a new franchise money-grab. I'm still waiting for that finished, polished game I anticipated. Lesson learned.
Perhaps KSP2 will be different, but this time around I will require proof before I even consider spending money on it. If my suspicions as to the development model are correct, that means If I do buy it it will be at a deeply discounted price long after final release.

Edited May 7, 2022 by steve_v

[Guest]

6 hours ago, steve_v said:

1. When it a) has a native GNU/Linux port

Official Linux support through proton is a valid option for you?

 

6 hours ago, steve_v said:

Again verifiable with demo, shareware or trial.

Do you consider the ability to refund the game within 2 hours to be a valid trial method?

 

Honestly speaking it doesn't seem like you play many games if those requirements are the dealbreaker for you.

Lately I've been seing people engineering the most impossible requirements like they don't want the game in the first place, if the answer to my questions is no for both I don't really see you playing KSP2, your requirements are just outside of what is common practice for games.

[steve_v]

4 hours ago, Master39 said:

Official Linux support through proton is a valid option for you?

Valve's proton, no. I do not and will not use steam, and valve makes using proton without steam obnoxiously annoying.
Vanilla WINE (+DXVK)... Maybe, under protest, and only if that means:
* Real official support, i.e. bug reports and/or support requests being taken seriously and actioned in a timely manner, and effective prerelease testing and QA being performed under wine.
* Native performance. Not "near native", and not "close to windows". KSP2 is almost certainly going to be CPU intensive, and running things under wine is not without overhead.
* Installation and configuration is not a PITA, e.g. no faffing about with winetricks or installation of multiple GB runtimes and other such trash.
* Compatibility testing against the wine versions packaged by all major GNU/Linux distros, or provision of a custom, self-contained build that has received the same. Said build shall not be enormous, see runtime garbage above... And no, snap/flatpack/whatever idiotic "universal" package format is FotM is not the answer.
* Support for, or at least clear acknowledgement of the WINE project. When a commercial entity directly profits from a FOSS project, I fully expect them to throw that project some bones in return.
** A properly amazing game, so amazing that I am willing to make an exception to my longstanding "no tux, no bux" rule. Very few games have so far cleared this bar, and not even KSP is on the list (at least not at its current price and in its current state).

 

4 hours ago, Master39 said:

Do you consider the ability to refund the game within 2 hours to be a valid trial method?

For a simple FPS or something, sure... So long as there is a mechanism to do so that isn't tied to steam.
With a game as complex as KSP2 is supposed to be, I'm really not convinced 2 hours is long enough - especially as that includes the time taken to download, install and configure the thing (and screw about with wine/proton in the above scenario).
If game studios are going to do the cheap and lazy offloading demo functionality to youtube reviewers and steam refunds thing, I'll usually just do the cheap and lazy walk-on-by one.
There's always just [REDACTED] the thing in lieu of an official trial of course, but we'll not speak of that here.

 

4 hours ago, Master39 said:

it doesn't seem like you play many games if those requirements are the dealbreaker for you.

Correct. I have limited time and limited patience. I currently have more games to play than I have free time, so so wasting the latter making me jump through additional hoops is a non starter.
I also have no desire to pay for the privilege of spending hours guessing which particular wine version or patches I need, how many 3GB .NET runtimes I have to install, and how to remove DRM and/or anticheat rootkits that gratuitously and intentionally break compatibility. Ergo, no native build no purchase.

While we're here, I might as well add a few more (though these have already been discussed WRT KSP2 IIRC):
No DRM or invasive anticheat.
No pay-to-win, real-money gambling mechanics, microtransactions, lootboxes, in-game advertising, or NFT insanity.
No forced account signup or online checks in single-player game modes, and no phone-homes or analytics (or the same being strictly opt-in).
An offline installer or distribution archive for direct browser download, not tied to any particular game store or launcher frontend.

 

4 hours ago, Master39 said:

I've been seing people engineering the most impossible requirements like they don't want the game in the first place, if the answer to my questions is no for both I don't really see you playing KSP2, your requirements are just outside of what is common practice for games.

I expect that's because what constitutes "common practice for games" these days is usually customers-as-beta-testers, execrable abuse of power, and extorting the playerbase at every possible turn. The mainstream "AAA" games industry is a revolting cesspit of corporate greed, and I expect many here really, really don't want KSP to go that way.

Incidentally, my requirements are pretty well covered by the "Linux games" section on GOG... Indicating they are, at least outside the "AAA games" DRM and microtransaction garbage fire, not particularly unreasonable.

Edited May 7, 2022 by steve_v
Mention snap, just in case someone is crazy enough to think that's a good idea.

[whatsEJstandfor]

Boy howdy there's a lot of negativity in that post

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, steve_v said:

I expect that's because what constitutes "common practice for games" these days is usually customers-as-beta-testers, execrable abuse of power, and extorting the playerbase at every possible turn. The mainstream "AAA" games industry is a revolting cesspit of corporate greed, and I expect many here really, really don't want KSP to go that way.

Incidentally, my requirements are pretty well covered by the "Linux games" section on GOG... Indicating they are, at least outside the "AAA games" DRM and microtransaction garbage fire, not particularly unreasonable.

It's not a matter of AAA being greedy, your requirements would cut out most of single developer indie titles too.

"I won't use any mahor release platform but I want something that isn't a PITA to instal on Linux" will cut way more indie and small games than published titles from big studios.

But to each their own, I guess.

[mcwaffles2003]

2 hours ago, steve_v said:

I have limited time and limited patience.

Are you sure KSP is what you are looking for?

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

"I won't use any mahor release platform but I want something that isn't a PITA to instal on Linux"

I won't use any distribution platform (major or otherwise) that creates walled-gardens (i.e. steam workshop), regularly behaves as DRM, often requires an internet connection and/or login to play offline single-player games, downloads 30% of a different operating system as a runtime even for native titles, and interferes with my ability to keep local backups.

Most of the games I have purchased over the years came from GOG *looks pointedly at long list of indie titles*, and while GOG Galaxy exists (and is kinda terrible TBH, but whatever), I don't have to use it  because they also offer direct, DRM-free downloads in a self-contained easy to install format.
That's all totally fine by me, and when steam/epic/whatever does the same (and gives me a way to easily identify titles containing DRM and other such brokenness) I'll absolutely consider using it.
The rest were purchased direct from the developer, at their own store, and that group includes KSP. If it was steam exclusive I wouldn't have bought it in the first place and we wouldn't be having this lovely argument discussion.

I'm not suggesting that every game studio put up their own store store front and CDN of course, that would indeed be impossible for many indie developers... But there are alternatives, such as GOG or Humble, that don't try to lock people into their ecosystem or require a special client application. AFAICT most of them will even do the packaging/installer bit for you.
 

36 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Are you sure KSP is what you are looking for?

KSP is leisure and entertainment. Trying to get non-native games working in WINE, rip them from steam so I can back them up properly, or and disarm their anti-features is not.
Perhaps I should have said "limited patience for gratuitous screwing around when I could just go play something else instead".

 

The TLDR here is really: "I use GNU/Linux, and that's non-negotiable. I also intensely dislike DRM and rental-disguised-as-purchase. If you want my money, make things easy for me, or at least not unnecessarily difficult... Oh, and since you never really finished the first game, I'll not be doing the EA bit again."

Edited May 7, 2022 by steve_v

[mcwaffles2003]

3 hours ago, steve_v said:

I won't use any distribution platform (major or otherwise) that creates walled-gardens (i.e. steam workshop), regularly behaves as DRM, often requires an internet connection and/or login to play offline single-player games, downloads 30% of a different operating system as a runtime even for native titles, and interferes with my ability to keep local backups.

I own KSP through steam and do not require an internet connection to play it, I also have a million copies of the game folder I play the game from for different mod sets. The devs have said that staying DRM free is a core component of KSP for those that play offline. Also, mods won't be exclusive to the steam workshop, nor should they be.

[Bej Kerman]

17 hours ago, steve_v said:

3. No. Hell no. All of my no in fact. I bought KSP based on promises of a finished product down the line, and years of horrible performance, untested .0 releases, ridiculous regressions and half-finished features later, development ended in favor of a new franchise money-grab. I'm still waiting for that finished, polished game I anticipated.

It's annoying, but can't you appreciate that KSP started as a tiny project made by a teenager who wasn't even aiming for orbital mechanics in the first few pre-release versions, and how many people it helped spark an interest in aerospace?

[Lisias]

On 5/7/2022 at 6:08 PM, Bej Kerman said:

It's annoying, but can't you appreciate that KSP started as a tiny project made by a teenager who wasn't even aiming for orbital mechanics in the first few pre-release versions, and how many people it helped spark an interest in aerospace?

He did! He purchased the thing at first place.  He was one of the very first early adopters. I think he had appreciated it exactly at that times in which it was a tiny project made by a teenager. What's not exactly what KSP is now, after 10 years - and yet, it's not a finished product neither.

I will save you from the long and tedious sequence of absolute and unbelievable mishaps KSP is littered with (ping me in PVT if you are interested).

Anyway, his argument is "I will not do it again", and not "I advocate that no one do it". And I totally see his point, there's life happening out there, he prefers to live it instead of eternally handling KSP, DRM and a lot more of the crapness that litters the game industry nowadays.

— — MY TURN — — 

1: After I see reviews from people I trust and I like what they say. Or having a downloadable demo for my own evaluation of the mechanics and the behaviour of the game (now that I know where and what to look).

2: Inflation and current exchange makes 60USD** about 25 to 30% of the minimum wage where I live. Not cheap, I expect a lot less KSP players on Brazil unless some aggressive discount prices are applied. And I miss playing a game with people that talks the same language as me.

3: Not on this life.

— — POST EDIT — — 

For the sake of comparison, 60USD is almost twice the price MS is asking for Windows 11 Professional around here (and you can pay in 3 installments without interest). Source (google translator)

Edited June 4, 2022 by Lisias
geez… Tyops gallore!

[steve_v]

8 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

I own KSP through steam and do not require an internet connection to play it, I also have a million copies of the game folder I play the game from for different mod sets. The devs have said that staying DRM free is a core component of KSP for those that play offline.

I was talking not about KSP specifically, but steam in general. Frankly, a game launcher even supporting DRM functionality is enough for me to not want to use it, and this is only one of many reasons I don't use steam.
 

8 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

mods won't be exclusive to the steam workshop, nor should they be.

Sure. Except that for most moddable games released on steam, the majority of mods end up on steam workshop and only on steam workshop... Which is intentionally difficult to access without the steam client.
It would be utterly trivial for Valve to provide a direct download button on workshop pages, but they don't. I wonder why?

KSP is different in this regard because it's not steam exclusive, and the modding community is awesome. IMO it's unwise to rely on that remaining the case for KSP2, particularly if it were to rely on proton for cross-platform support as in the suggestion that started all this. Thin end of the wedge and all that.

 

7 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's annoying, but can't you appreciate that KSP started as a tiny project made by a teenager who wasn't even aiming for orbital mechanics in the first few pre-release versions, and how many people it helped spark an interest in aerospace?

Sure, that's why I bought KSP in alpha. Early access isn't a charity though, the idea is that you do actually get a finished thing at the end of the process. KSP is nowhere near finished IMO, and yet here we are calling it a day and moving on to a franchise backed by a multinational corporation.

[mcwaffles2003]

42 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Sure. Except that for most moddable games released on steam, the majority of mods end up on steam workshop and only on steam workshop... Which is intentionally difficult to access without the steam client.
It would be utterly trivial for Valve to provide a direct download button on workshop pages, but they don't. I wonder why?

KSP is different in this regard because it's not steam exclusive, and the modding community is awesome. IMO it's unwise to rely on that remaining the case for KSP2, particularly if it were to rely on proton for cross-platform support as in the suggestion that started all this. Thin end of the wedge and all that.

Well KSP 1 is already on steam, and has been for a while,  yet the mod scene isn't on it's workshop... Also the subscribe button just downloads mods to a specific folder because its easier and more accessible for the broader public to do so that way, you can still just find the folder and its contents... This is all besides the point seeing as KSP doesn't have mods on steam anyways. I'm fairly sure the whole steam workshop convo has come up already and Nate said they won't be focusing on the workshop for mod releases. No reason they would mess with a core pillar of the series in such a dramatic fashion.

32 minutes ago, steve_v said:

I was talking not about KSP specifically, but steam in general. Frankly, a game launcher even supporting DRM functionality is enough for me to not want to use it, and this is only one of many reasons I don't use steam.

Weird to boycott a game launcher for allowing devs to have DRM functionality for the games they made even when that issue doesn't affect the product at hand, in my opinion,  but different strokes for different folks.

36 minutes ago, steve_v said:

KSP is nowhere near finished IMO, and yet here we are calling it a day and moving on to a franchise backed by a multinational corporation.

What in your opinion would let KSP be deemed as a "finished" product to you then? It's come a long way since it's release and well passed the original scope of the game. Not to mention, to do many of the things that are planned for KSP 2 would required KSP 1 be taken down and rewritten from near scratch anyways with many of it's deep rooted inherent inefficiencies and bugs. The games been going for over 10 years, isn't it time to look ahead?

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

the subscribe button just downloads mods to a specific folder because its easier and more accessible for the broader public to do so that way, you can still just find the folder and its contents...

If you have steam installed. If you do not have the client and a login (and for many games pass steams DRM checks), it's third-party downloaders and hassle all the way down.
 

1 hour ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

the whole steam workshop convo has come up already and Nate said they won't be focusing on the workshop for mod releases. No reason they would mess with a core pillar of the series in such a dramatic fashion.

Steam is only part of the conversation because Master brought up "Official Linux support through proton" and "I won't use any mahor release platform but I want something that isn't a PITA to instal on Linux"
It's only a few small steps from "you need steam/proton for GNU/Linux support" to "we're only using steam as a CDN" to "we're converting store purchases to steam keys". Then comes the argument that "steam workshop is more convenient and everyone is using steam anyway".
We've already tried the "beta access only for steam users" bit with KSP, and knowing what that feels like I'm not about to let them put the tip in again.

The only reason we didn't end up with the KSP modding scene running on a proprietary platform like curse or steam workshop is the existence of better community developed alternatives... That and the massive community pushback over the spacedock vs curse thing.
 

1 hour ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

What in your opinion would let KSP be deemed as a "finished" product to you then?

The outstanding bugs and regressions fixed (also the pervasive physics jank, e.g. wheels that work properly, landed vessels and bases not sliding around or randomly self-destructing), and at least a few of the features introduced years ago as barebones placeholders polished into a coherent experience.
Perhaps, ya know, a progression mechanic a little deeper than "go place, click button, get points"... Or maybe using the part upgrade system for anything at all. There are plenty of other examples of stuff haphazardly chucked into the game with promises of fleshing them out later, then forgotten for the next shiny thing.

Edited May 8, 2022 by steve_v
More quote for context

[Bej Kerman]

16 hours ago, Lisias said:

23 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's annoying, but can't you appreciate that KSP started as a tiny project made by a teenager who wasn't even aiming for orbital mechanics in the first few pre-release versions, and how many people it helped spark an interest in aerospace?

He did! He purchased the thing at first place.  He was one of the very first early adopters. I think it had appreciated it exactly at that times in which it was a tiny project made by a teenager. What's not exactly what KSP is now, after 10 years - and yet, it's not a finished product neither.

That's not the energy I get from them - they seem more disgruntled that KSP became much larger than what it aimed for in the first place, if anything.

[Bej Kerman]

15 hours ago, steve_v said:

23 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

It's annoying, but can't you appreciate that KSP started as a tiny project made by a teenager who wasn't even aiming for orbital mechanics in the first few pre-release versions, and how many people it helped spark an interest in aerospace?

Sure, that's why I bought KSP in alpha. Early access isn't a charity though, the idea is that you do actually get a finished thing at the end of the process. KSP is nowhere near finished IMO, and yet here we are calling it a day and moving on to a franchise backed by a multinational corporation.

You're acting like it's completely broken. It's good enough, but you can't fix a 10 year old codebase and you should appreciate that as well. KSP 2 is coming out thanks to the success of the first, so you're getting what you wanted soon enough anyway.

[Lisias]

7 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

You're acting like it's completely broken. It's good enough, but you can't fix a 10 year old codebase and you should appreciate that as well. KSP 2 is coming out thanks to the success of the first, so you're getting what you wanted soon enough anyway.

Well… It mostly is, see the quantity of fixes on the most different mods needed to fix them.

And yes, you can fix 10 years old codebase. See the mentioned mods.

I do software for living. I have fixed or updated code older than KSP, as well I wrote some new ones that.. geez.. I'm not willing to put them on my Resume.   It happens, we do a living writing a mix of excellently written code with others that, frankly, I would like to forget I ever wrote it.

It's the end result that matters - you would be surprised about the crapness of some code that are pretty lucrative on this industry.  

You may have a point by arguing that it would not be lucrative to have KSP1 fixed - and perhaps you are right. But, by then, so it's @steve_v.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Lisias
typos! typos! tyops everywehre!!

[steve_v]

8 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

they seem more disgruntled that KSP became much larger than what it aimed for in the first place

Not at all, rather I'm disappointed and kinda annoyed that development ended with such a vast number of open bugs (not to mention the un-triaged mess that is the public bugtracker).
Despite saying "please stop adding new stuff and copies of existing mods, and just fix the bugs in the core systems" for years, the last few releases were... wait for it... adding more stuff that perfectly good mods already had covered, and introducing regressions in core systems.

The game getting bigger than originally planned is fine (assuming the resources exist to develop and maintain it), the game getting buggier in the process is not.

My EA ride has gone something like this:
Me: 1.0 already? That's got to be the shortest beta in history, what about all the bugs we found?
Squad: Launch party hype! Launch party hype!
Me: Uhh, performance still really sucks, and it's getting worse with each release...
Squad: New parts, hype hype!
Me: Well, performance is slightly better, but can we please get a fix for the wheels? They've been broken for like, 4 releases now.
Squad: Look, shiny DLC!
Me: What the hell happened this time? There's surface tile misalignment all over the place and my bases keep exploding.
Squad: We're adding new kinds of rocks!
Me: Wheels are more broken than ever guys, and now stuff is sliding around everywhere too. Also joysticks don't work at all, and haven't for 3 major releases. This is getting ridiculous.
Squad: Tron suit! Tron suit! Isn't it awesome?
Me: Uhh, hello? Wheels? Surface interaction in general? The rest of the bugs from 2+ years ago?
Squad: Get hyped for KSP2!

So yeah, I'm not so keen on this early access thing any more. I wonder why that might be?

 

8 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

You're acting like it's completely broken.

Well it's certainly more broken than it was ~4 years ago (1.3.1). More half-finished "features" too.

9 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

you can't fix a 10 year old codebase

Yes, yes you can. It happens all the time, but strangely enough, you do actually have to prioritise doing it.
Fixing a 10 year old codebase while simultaneously adding a constant stream of frivolous new features technical debt, now that's hard.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Yes, yes you can. It happens all the time, but strangely enough, you do actually have to prioritise doing it.
Fixing a 10 year old codebase while simultaneously adding a constant stream of frivolous new features technical debt, now that's hard.

Let me fix that statement:

You can't fix a decade old codebase when someone promised to do everything for free forever and most of the community even gets the DLCs for free and the market for expansions is limited because basically anything DLC worthy is a free mod already.

Shiny things bring new players, fixing old bugs doesn't.

That's the reality of "no monetization is needed, KSP was updated for 10 years!"

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

You can't fix a decade old codebase when someone promised to do everything for free forever and most of the community even gets the DLCs for free and the market for expansions is limited because basically anything DLC worthy is a free mod already.

Obviously I can only speak for myself, but I'm pretty sure (without digging through my 3k+ post history) I have said before that I'd probably be willing to buy what amounts to a DLC containing nothing but bug and physics jank fixes.
I also purchased both DLCs, despite neither of them containing anything of interest to me, just to fund development... After a couple of long ignored and pretty gamebreaking bugs in the GNU/Linux build were eventually fixed (only for later releases to introduce more of course ).

Squads lack of forethought isn't really my problem though.

 

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

"no monetization is needed, KSP was updated for 10 years!"

I never made that claim and I never would, because it's clearly ridiculous.

 

Ed. We should probably get back on topic now.

Edited May 9, 2022 by steve_v
typos

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Obviously I can only speak for myself, but I'm pretty sure (without digging through my 3k+ post history) I have said before that I'd probably be willing to buy what amounts to a DLC containing nothing but bug and physics jank fixes.
I also purchased both DLCs, despite neither of them containing anything of interest to me, just to fund development... After a couple of long ignored and pretty gamebreaking bugs in the GNU/Linux build were eventually fixed (only for later releases to introduce more of course ).

Squads lack of forethought isn't really my problem though.

You and me both, but two people don't make a market, such a paid update would only cause a crapstorm in the community.

I'm willing to spend even more for a fixed codebase and a reimagined gameplay, that's exactly what I see in the sequel (and that's why I don't like the idea of KSP2 being an EA too, better wait some more for a proper 1.0 at launch).

 

50 minutes ago, steve_v said:

I never made that claim and I never would, because it's clearly ridiculous.

Not talking about you specifically, that's the general sentiment, "every form of monetization is always evil", and you don't need to go far back in the pages to find one of the many threads from people asking if KSP2 is going to be free for KSP owners.

 

53 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Ed. We should probably get back on topic now.

Reasons to buy or not KSP2, seems pretty much in topic to me.

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

I'm willing to spend even more for a fixed codebase and a reimagined gameplay, that's exactly what I see in the sequel (and that's why I don't like the idea of KSP2 being an EA too, better wait some more for a proper 1.0 at launch).

This I can agree with... With the minor caveat that even if KSP2 is all that, I'm still not going to buy it unless it runs natively on my system. Doubly so knowing how easy it is to do cross-platform in unity these days.

That said, I have experienced the output of KSPs development cycle first hand, and given my fairly cynical outlook WRT big game industry players like Take Two I have zero faith that KSP2 will prioritise stable core systems and bugfixes over SNS either, or that they'll be reasonable with monetisation. Leopards, spots, etc.
So yeah, I'll consider buying it when I can verify that "1.0" means it's actually ready, rather than someone just pulling a number out of their behind to drum up interest.

 

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

the general sentiment, "every form of monetization is always evil"

Clearly all forms of monetisation aren't evil, but I can kind of understand this attitude considering the predatory behaviour that has become normalised in the game industry. The franchise being bought by Take Two (and the rather dubious happenings surrounding that acquisition) makes me pretty jumpy around the "m" word too.

 

1 hour ago, Master39 said:

you don't need to go far back in the pages to find one of the many threads from people asking if KSP2 is going to be free for KSP owners.

I've never understood that attitude TBH, I can kinda get people being liquidy if some players get free stuff and others don't (i.e. the DLC fiasco), but expecting people to work for free is pure fantasy.
Me, I'm quite willing to pay people to work on the game, so long as the monetisation isn't exploitative (hence the hard no to loot boxes and other dross).
I do however have some opinions on what parts they should work on, because IMO bugs and regressions, especially those that prevent paying customers from enjoying the game, should always take priority over new features.
 

Edited May 9, 2022 by steve_v
Typos, always with thge typos.

[Jacke]

Talk about fixing a 10 year old code base, Homecoming is fixing a 20+ year old code base (City of Heroes) entirely as a volunteer effort.  As well as adding new features at the same time.  It's going to take a while to get things done as there's only so much depth of skill and so many hours to put to the work, but it is progressing in a high quality way.

KSP could be fixed.  It's likely not in Squad's interest to do very much and I understand.  Some mod makers are doing what they can to fix things with special mods and I'm glad that's happening.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Jacke said:

Talk about fixing a 10 year old code base, Homecoming is fixing a 20+ year old code base (City of Heroes) entirely as a volunteer effort.  As well as adding new features at the same time.  It's going to take a while to get things done as there's only so much depth of skill and so many hours to put to the work, but it is progressing in a high quality way.

KSP could be fixed.  It's likely not in Squad's interest to do very much and I understand.  Some mod makers are doing what they can to fix things with special mods and I'm glad that's happening.

If you find the people to work for free you can fix anything, that goes without saying.

[Lisias]

On 5/9/2022 at 9:10 AM, Master39 said:

If you find the people to work for free you can fix anything, that goes without saying.

Work for free it's absolutely misleading.

I DO NOT work for free. I work for myself. It only happens that once the work is done, I don't mind other people using it too - since it's essentially cost free for me and not rarely users help me on finding bugs on the code that once fixed will benefit me too.

I do not blindly hunt bugs on the Internet to be fixed. I do what I can to fix KSP bugs because I WANNA PLAY THE GAME I BOUGHT, and if the only way of doing it is to fix myself the damned thing, so be it.

Edited May 12, 2022 by Lisias
Yep. Tyops!