First impression from Scott Manley's gameplay video.

[Tweeker]

Full disclosure upfront,  I had already made up my mind to pass on KSP. 

.

I just finished watching Scott Manley's gameplay video and I have a few thoughts. First and foremost, that tutorial is hideous. It's so incredibly condescending. I don't need or want some tween sounding brat rocket-splaing to me.  Even if I didn't have 10 years of KSP under my belt, and this was my first foray into rocket building that tutorial would be a huge turn-off. What ever happened to adult people explaining  thing in adult ways?    Why not get someone like Scott Manley to do the tutorial? What were they thinking? Do they even know their audience? 

Secondly, I've mentioned this before but it bears repeating. Why are they charging full price for an unfinished game? Either finish it, or charge a price more appropriate to an early access game. 

 

[t_v]

Disclaimer, I will be waiting for some optimization/bugfix patches and roadmap items to arrive before I am confident enough in development to buy EA

For the tutorials, their audience includes young children, and while it might be annoying to sit through explanations posed in simple terms, it is at least better than the opposite problem of a chunk of the target audience not understanding the tutorials at all. And honestly, if I wanted to learn about a concept I was unfamiliar with, I would take a simple explanation first to make sure I understand the basic concept before going into potentially confusing details. 

As for price, the game will be finished at some point (by all probability). It would probably be better to buy it then to make sure you are getting a more complete, optimized, and bug-free game if you care about that. Here's a question: If the developers changed the price, would that change your decision? I ask that because people have very different criteria for whether they will purchase the EA, and people who, for example, are very confident that the game will continue development until completion and will be fun in the early access state, see this as a discount on their future expectations of the game, or just getting a fun game at a reasonable price. Hopefully they get what they think they paid for (which can simply be the current state of the game for some), at a price that was acceptable to them. 

[regex]

I mean, I'll take overly-enthusiastic and slightly condescending 'tween Kerbals over eXpLoShUnS!!1!!1!!!! Kerbals pretty much any day of the week.

But also, I'm not the intended audience of those tutorials.

[Rocket Farmer]

1 hour ago, Tweeker said:

Full disclosure upfront,  I had already made up my mind to pass on KSP. 

.

I just finished watching Scott Manley's gameplay video and I have a few thoughts. First and foremost, that tutorial is hideous. It's so incredibly condescending. I don't need or want some tween sounding brat rocket-splaing to me.  Even if I didn't have 10 years of KSP under my belt, and this was my first foray into rocket building that tutorial would be a huge turn-off. What ever happened to adult people explaining  thing in adult ways?    Why not get someone like Scott Manley to do the tutorial? What were they thinking? Do they even know their audience? 

Secondly, I've mentioned this before but it bears repeating. Why are they charging full price for an unfinished game? Either finish it, or charge a price more appropriate to an early access game. 

 

Let me get this straight.  As a fellow 10+ year Kerbal player I’ve logged somewhere around 1,500 hours.  I originally paid $30.  You probably have as many hours as I do so it’s cost you $0.02/hour for entertainment.

 

Yet Somehow you don’t think its sequel is worth $50 because it isn’t finished?  How exactly do you value things?

[SoulCandy]

At the end of the day, the game has always been about tiny, minion-like alien characters w/ huge goofy smiles blasting rockets into space. The tutorial follows that same thread. Honestly, it would've been weird to have some college-style lecture as a tutorial, no?

[RayneCloud]

2 hours ago, Tweeker said:

Full disclosure upfront,  I had already made up my mind to pass on KSP. 

.

I just finished watching Scott Manley's gameplay video and I have a few thoughts. First and foremost, that tutorial is hideous. It's so incredibly condescending. I don't need or want some tween sounding brat rocket-splaing to me.  Even if I didn't have 10 years of KSP under my belt, and this was my first foray into rocket building that tutorial would be a huge turn-off. What ever happened to adult people explaining  thing in adult ways?    Why not get someone like Scott Manley to do the tutorial? What were they thinking? Do they even know their audience? 

Secondly, I've mentioned this before but it bears repeating. Why are they charging full price for an unfinished game? Either finish it, or charge a price more appropriate to an early access game. 

 

This is an incredibly childish post. This is a game that's trying to bring new players in to the franchise. 

[Tweeker]

1 hour ago, RayneCloud said:

This is an incredibly childish post. This is a game that's trying to bring new players in to the franchise. 

That's an incredibly childish response.  The franchise has never had any problem brining in new players, in fact it was popular enough to warrant a sequel. Maybe appealing to the existing user base would be a good  approach? 

[Superfluous J]

I'm going to address the subject line and not the subject of tutorials specifically. I can't speak on them as they're not aimed at me. My opinions on how tutorials are and should be are strong and could easily cause arguments I don't want to have in this thread.

Regarding Scott's video. I was pretty unimpressed with the game as presented, to be blunt about it. I'm still not sure when I'm going to buy the game, but this video at BEST didn't improve my desire to buy it day-one. If anything, it gave me enough reasons to wait until at least the first major update (Which according to the road-map is Science mode?)

[Tweeker]

1 hour ago, SoulCandy said:

At the end of the day, the game has always been about tiny, minion-like alien characters w/ huge goofy smiles blasting rockets into space. The tutorial follows that same thread. Honestly, it would've been weird to have some college-style lecture as a tutorial, no?

That's a false dichotomy, there is lot of room in between a tween spouting  "space is cool yo!"  and a college lecture. 

Case in point. 

 

[Tweeker]

2 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

I'm going to address the subject line and not the subject of tutorials specifically. I can't speak on them as they're not aimed at me. My opinions on how tutorials are and should be are strong and could easily cause arguments I don't want to have in this thread.

Regarding Scott's video. I was pretty unimpressed with the game as presented, to be blunt about it. I'm still not sure when I'm going to buy the game, but this video at BEST didn't improve my desire to buy it day-one. If anything, it gave me enough reasons to wait until at least the first major update (Which according to the road-map is Science mode?)

IIRC when I bought it was 0.20, and while I did enjoy the game I certainly wouldn't have paid $49.00 for it.  So you could argue that if I did the same with KSP2 that it would be money well spent. But as you said there is nothing in the the game right now that makes it worth a day one, or even year one purchase. 

[cfds]

2 hours ago, Rocket Farmer said:

Let me get this straight.  As a fellow 10+ year Kerbal player I’ve logged somewhere around 1,500 hours.  I originally paid $30.  You probably have as many hours as I do so it’s cost you $0.02/hour for entertainment.

 

Yet Somehow you don’t think its sequel is worth $50 because it isn’t finished?  How exactly do you value things?

KSP is a sandbox. The 1500 hours were YOUR effort, not Squad's. The price is for the effort that the company put into the game. The $10 that KSP costs most of the time on Steam is a fair appreciation of Squads effort.

Also keep in mind that you pay the $50 for the game that you see exactly now. The publisher could stop the development next week without any legal repercussions. You get no right to any completed game whatsoever.

[Yellowburn10]

I guess this is more of a subjective take, but re-watching the tutorial again didn't give off any condescending vibes for me. It certainly came across though that the point of this tutorial was to teach those who knew absolutely nothing about flying a rocket, and the voice in question sounded a bit too enthusiastic in my opinion, but I found nothing about it or said voice offensive. But still, if you don't like it that's your opinion. I'm sure it's not going to stop others on the internet from making their own, giving you and others tutorials that more so tickles your fancy.

With that being said, a point that you made here frankly just doesn't make sense. Case in point:

1 hour ago, Tweeker said:

The franchise has never had any problem brining in new players, in fact it was popular enough to warrant a sequel. Maybe appealing to the existing user base would be a good  approach? 

While the first part may be true, despite it's popularity KSP is still somewhat of a niche game with a brick wall for a learning curve, and it doesn't help player retention to have to learn so much when the game gives you so little in comparison. Giving them even a little bit of interactive help goes a long way to have them enjoy the game longer.

For that second part, let me ask you this; What would be the point of catering to the existing player base, as in, the folks who already know how to play the game, for tutorials? I can guarantee you that the majority of returning players are only going to look at the tutorials just for the sake of them being new and shiny, and once they see them they'll say, "Ok, neat," (or in your case, "That's dumb,") and move on to the actual game. They'll have no bearing on how any of us will enjoy the rest of the game, so why should they appeal to us when we need them the least?

Edited February 21, 2023 by Yellowburn10

[intelliCom]

5 hours ago, Tweeker said:

What were they thinking? Do they even know their audience?

Do you know KSP 2's audience? Do you think every single person who buys KSP is just a serious spaceflight nerd who wants everything delivered in a serious way? For a game that has funny cartoon green people?

KSP became popular because it was fun to blow stuff up (See: Any of Markiplier's gameplay, any of JackSepticEye's gameplay, etc.).
It's survived this long because of the nerds, yes, but did you stop to consider the fact that maybe they didn't all start out as nerds?

2 hours ago, Tweeker said:

Maybe appealing to the existing user base would be a good  approach? 

KSP 2 existing and having interstellar flight in the future already appeals to the existing user base.

Also, I'm confused about why the tutorials are even an issue to begin with. Dub over the tutorials yourself if you think you can deliver them in a way that's 'less condescending' or 'bratty'.
It's meant to be a friendly voice, and I think it accomplishes that role just fine. Besides, if you don't like it, just don't watch them???

36 minutes ago, cfds said:

Also keep in mind that you pay the $50 for the game that you see exactly now. The publisher could stop the development next week without any legal repercussions. You get no right to any completed game whatsoever.

On top of this, many KSP content creators recently did early reviews, and they seem quite honest about things. There shouldn't be any nasty surprises (See: Cyberpunk 2077), and some have made the point that certain features from KSP1 are missing. The honesty alone makes $50 sound alright. It's not some gamble or anything, you're not being fed a product with false expectations.

Edited February 21, 2023 by intelliCom

[GoldForest]

6 hours ago, Tweeker said:

Full disclosure upfront,  I had already made up my mind to pass on KSP. 

.

I just finished watching Scott Manley's gameplay video and I have a few thoughts. First and foremost, that tutorial is hideous. It's so incredibly condescending. I don't need or want some tween sounding brat rocket-splaing to me.  Even if I didn't have 10 years of KSP under my belt, and this was my first foray into rocket building that tutorial would be a huge turn-off. What ever happened to adult people explaining  thing in adult ways?    Why not get someone like Scott Manley to do the tutorial? What were they thinking? Do they even know their audience? 

Secondly, I've mentioned this before but it bears repeating. Why are they charging full price for an unfinished game? Either finish it, or charge a price more appropriate to an early access game. 

 

I'm pretty sure the voice is autotuned and not some "Tween sounding brat" like you put it. The voice isn't condescending at all imo. As for adults explaining in adult ways, you do realize that tons of kids play KSP as well, right? Having a more kid friendly voice is best for the tutorials. Yes, they do know their audience, and they also know the audience they are targeting. That being both adults AND kids. If you don't like the tutorials, don't watch/listen to them. That simple. You're making a big deal out of something so little. 

Honestly, I agree with @intelliCom and I think it is worth the $50 bucks they are charging. If they were literally just making KSP 1 but better, no colonies, no interstellar, etc, I would still be happy paying the $50 bucks for EA, because the game will be $60 or $70 at launch. That's a $10 to $20 discount, and that's not even including tax, which would add another $5 to $20 bucks. Why would I be happy paying a premium for EA? Because KSP 2 is a better game than KSP 1, even with none of the promised features. It's no longer a shoe box held together by duct tape and rubber bands. It's an actual game instead of some hobby project that some amateur started. There are actual professionals behind KSP 2. That alone merits a premium price, imo. 

Plus, with KSP 2 being professionally made, that means that we get a lot more in terms of modding. Better modding alone is to be worth $50. Because now modders don't have to implement work arounds or hacks. They can literally go ham on KSP 2 without holding back. 

Also, a theory as to why the price is so high is because Take Two wants their money, and they want it now. It is rumored that they are threatening to pull the plug on the project unless it launches and starts making money. Now, this is only a theory/rumor, so don't take it as fact. But if this were true, what would you want? KSP 2 to charge $30 bucks for EA and then have its plug pulled because Take Two didn't like the low price, or... would you rather pay a premium now, and receive a better product that will live on for years to come? Think about it. 

[dave1904]

The tutorial is designed for a very young audience. Its light hearted by intention. I actually think thats one of the very few good things. 

Its important to make it sound light hearted because it is a difficult game. You don't want to overwhelm anyone. Grown ups will always go to YouTube for deeper tutorials. 

[Tweeker]

 

1 hour ago, Yellowburn10 said:

I guess this is more of a subjective take, but re-watching the tutorial again didn't give off any condescending vibes for me. It certainly came across though that the point of this tutorial was to teach those who knew absolutely nothing about flying a rocket, and the voice in question sounded a bit too enthusiastic in my opinion, but I found nothing about it or said voice offensive. But still, if you don't like it that's your opinion. I'm sure it's not going to stop others on the internet from making their own, giving you and others tutorials that more so tickles your fancy.

With that being said, a point that you made here frankly just doesn't make sense. Case in point:

While the first part may be true, despite it's popularity KSP is still somewhat of a niche game with a brick wall for a learning curve, and it doesn't help player retention to have to learn so much when the game gives you so little in comparison. Giving them even a little bit of interactive help goes a long way to have them enjoy the game longer.

For that second part, let me ask you this; What would be the point of catering to the existing player base, as in, the folks who already know how to play the game, for tutorials? I can guarantee you that the majority of returning players are only going to look at the tutorials just for the sake of them being new and shiny, and once they see them they'll say, "Ok, neat," (or in your case, "That's dumb,") and move on to the actual game. They'll have no bearing on how any of us will enjoy the rest of the game, so why should they appeal to us when we need them the least?

KSP is hardly a niche title, It's sold nearly 4 million copies. And retention is hardly an issue,  the average amount of time played is 302 hours, with a median of 139.5 hours.    

As to your second question,  Why should the tutorials appeal to people over the age of 10? I think that question answers itself. If  I had no KSP experience and the tutorial was all I had to judge the game on then it'd be a hard pass.   Numerous games manage to have a tutorial without talking down. 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Tweeker

[Vl3d]

The tutorials are nice and the voice is fine. Let's move on.

[GoldForest]

10 minutes ago, Tweeker said:

 

KSP is hardly a niche title, It's sold nearly 4 million copies. And retention is hardly an issue,  the average amount of time played is 302 hours, with a median of 139.5 hours.    

As to your second question,  Why should the tutorials appeal to people over the age of 10? I think that question answers itself. If  I had no KSP experience and the tutorial was all I had to judge the game on then it'd be a hard pass.   Numerous games manage to have a tutorial without talking down. 

 

KSP is very much a niche game. It's a spaceflight simulator. How many spaceflight simulators exist in the world? The answer you can count on two hands. KSP 1, KSP 2, Orbiter, Space Engine, Simple rockets 1, Simple rockets 2, reentry, mercury go for flight, and maybe one or two others. So, in total, about 8 games. 8 games. That's a far cry from other genres. There are millions of FPS, millions of racing sims, millions of flight sims, millions of city builder games, cooking, factory management, tycoon management, so and on forth. Every genre is over saturated with games, except one genre. Spaceflight sims. KSP 1 and 2 are niche games. 

The tutorials aren't talking down to anyone, they're explaining concepts, very complex concepts, in a way that kids can understand. There's nothing wrong with that. If you don't like the in-game tutorials, go watch a youtuber's guide. It's that simple.

Edited February 21, 2023 by GoldForest

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Tweeker said:

Numerous games manage to have a tutorial without talking down. 

And even more people aren't hearing any of the talking down or the condescending tone you're claiming to hear. 

Are you sure it's not just because they're explaining obvious orbital mechanics in a way too enthusiastic voice? Because, spoiler, it's not only 10 years old kids that need that baseball bat video to understand orbits, but probably most of adults around you too.

[Turbo Ben]

I have to agree with the OP. I wouldn't say condescending, but as Scott said himself, not everyone will appreciate the "squeeky kid" voiceover. I'm not saying the tutorials should be like a dry university lecture, but there is surely somewhere in the middle that could appeal to all ages. I'll be skiping the tutorials which is a shame because there appears to be a lot of work put into them. Thankfully there will be "a very grown up Scotsman" providing tutorials on youtube. New players to KSP are not going to know about Scott though, so heres hoping some of them take the time to check youtube before refunding the game.

I also agree that the price of EA is too high. It looks buggy as hell and badly optimised, with only a promise that it will be fixed and all the missing features added. We don't even know the timescale for feature updates, it could be years before the game goes in to full release.

[Tweeker]

37 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

KSP is very much a niche game. It's a spaceflight simulator. How many spaceflight simulators exist in the world? The answer you can count on two hands. KSP 1, KSP 2, Orbiter, Space Engine, Simple rockets 1, Simple rockets 2, reentry, mercury go for flight, and maybe one or two others. So, in total, about 8 games. 8 games. That's a far cry from other genres. There are millions of FPS, millions of racing sims, millions of flight sims, millions of city builder games, cooking, factory management, tycoon management, so and on forth. Every genre is over saturated with games, except one genre. Spaceflight sims. KSP 1 and 2 are niche games. 

The tutorials aren't talking down to anyone, they're explaining concepts, very complex concepts, in a way that kids can understand. There's nothing wrong with that. If you don't like the in-game tutorials, go watch a youtuber's guide. It's that simple.

4 million copies sold is hardly niche. 

 

[GoldForest]

1 minute ago, Tweeker said:

4 million copies sold is hardly niche. 

 

4 million copies is niche in today's standards when games regularly sell 30 to 100 million copies. 

But the copies sold doesn't make it niche. It's genre does. Doesn't matter if it sells 3 billion copies. KSP is a niche game. 

3 minutes ago, Turbo Ben said:

. It looks buggy as hell and badly optimised, with only a promise that it will be fixed and all the missing features added. We don't even know the timescale for feature updates, it could be years before the game goes in to full release.

Early access. Very early access. 

[Tweeker]

32 minutes ago, Master39 said:

And even more people aren't hearing any of the talking down or the condescending tone you're claiming to hear. 

Are you sure it's not just because they're explaining obvious orbital mechanics in a way too enthusiastic voice? Because, spoiler, it's not only 10 years old kids that need that baseball bat video to understand orbits, but probably most of adults around you too.

At least one other person heard it, @ 6:08

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Tweeker

[Turbo Ben]

1 minute ago, GoldForest said:

Early access. Very early access. 

I would say too early. I suspect it's only being released now because T2 promised it's investors it would be released this financial year.

Most people don't even have the necessary hardware. The previews were done with a 7900X and a 4080, and it was still having performance issues.

It should be $30 in it's current state. Increase the price by $10 at every feature update.

[Tweeker]

 

22 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Doesn't matter if it sells 3 billion copies. KSP is a niche game. 

Early access. Very early access. 

 

LOL.