Jump to content

Kerbal Space Program 2 Early Access Available Now

Intercept Games

By Intercept Games
in Announcements

 Share

Recommended Posts

Azimech

Azimech

Posted
Posted

I've asked for a refund. The first time it wouldn't save my design ... okay, my C: drive was suddenly full. Freed up space. Next time I launched the game it ignored my settings and I couldn't change my settings. And not able to start the game beyond the menu anymore.

Guys, these are pre-alpha problems. 

I'll be back in 5 years. Maybe then you'll have a decent product.

Three years of waiting. Down the drain.

I'm too old to be an alpha-tester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sune Gam

Sune Gam

Posted
Posted

The wait for this second masterpiece of universal exploring have been loooooong.

My expectations has been bigger than my ego for the new dawn of interstellar flight.

Im sorry to say that this qualifyes to the lowest terms of mickey Mouse Club.

Same good stuff but wrapped in plastic starshine paper that might  attract a larger audience than Taco Bell.

I hope you get your money´s worth, i did´nt.

/M

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dinkledash

Dinkledash

Posted
Posted

OK I landed on the Mun. It seems way easier than KSP.  Seems smooth on a RX 6800 XT.  I'm uploading the landing video and I'll post it later.

5 minutes ago, Vexillar said:

I have something not too dissimilar: parts of a craft I didn't build keep falling past me as I launch.

 

Yeah something weird is going on with debris.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPGDv92CWDQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Multivac

Multivac

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am actually feeling like this whole launch is pretty unfair. It's not just the road-map that puts all the promised features an unknown length of time into the future (despite the game already costing what you'd expect a finished game to cost). It's not just the sky-high system requirements that make this "more accessible" space sim game anything but. It's a more basic thing behind the philosophy of this launch that, for some reason, I'm only realizing now, after having read and seen a bunch of early reviews.

We're being asked to pay for the privilege of being QA testers.

Traditionally, QA testers don't pay for the privilege of testing games. Instead, it's developers who pay QA testers, in exchange for the help the QA testers give them in finding problems with a new game so that the game can be fixed and improved... before it's released to the actual audience.

We've been explicitly, openly told that the point of this Early Access release is to help the developer fine-tune the game and make sure everything is "working right" before the new features in the road-map can be added.

... But that's the job of a QA tester.

Now I see review after review basically saying that this is a very buggy alpha-level release. It's not just that a bunch of nice features are missing, as we've been told they would be since the roadmap was announced. It's that, well, the game is at a stage where it probably shouldn't have been released yet at all.

It's not fair to ask me, or anyone else, to pay a hefty sum for the privilege of testing an alpha.

Not some token sum, either. KSP2 is being sold for the price of a big, shiny, finished game.

Now, if you're a small tiny publisher, like a group of a few people working on a passion project together, sure, maybe you can't afford a QA department, so you ask your fans to test the game for you, even if they're also the ones financially supporting you. For a small indie publisher, sure, that's fair enough. But even a small indie publisher will generally be kind enough to its fans to charge them some small, steeply discounted amount of money for an early version of the game that needs early testing. That's certainly how Squad did it.

KSP2 is not being developed by a small indie group. It's being released by a major corporation that should be able to afford a QA department. And even if it can't, even if for some reason the developer does need to rely on the audience to also be QA testers, the decent thing to do would be at least to price the game accordingly.

The fact that this developer wants to charge me $50 to play a game that has none of the promised features, that probably won't run well on my computer, and on top of that I'm asked to play the role of a QA tester for a game that turns out to be, basically, in an alpha state?

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I actually spent a lot of money on KSP1. I bought the game early, when it was still discounted. But then I bought it again years later when it came out on Steam because I wanted to support it and I was so excited about it. And on top of that, I actually bought two additional copies of the game as gifts for friends. And, of course, I own both DLCs, and have actually bought at least one of the DLCs at least once as a gift as well.

But none of that expenditure felt like it left a bad taste in my mouth. This does.

I feel that it's fundamentally messed up that the new devs are openly asking me to help them test their unfinished game, which offers none of the features that have been hyped up for years, and I have to pay a hefty price for the privilege.

I'm expecting someone will chime in with — "but they have a right to charge whatever they want, and clearly some people are willing to pay, so there!" And, sure, that's true! I don't disagree with the fact that they can, or with the fact that some people, maybe even quite a few people, will be happy to pay.

I'm just saying that in my opinion this approach is messed up, and unfair, and fundamentally disrespectful towards the games' fans, and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And I'm a loyal KSP1 fan of many years and a customer who has already spent plenty of money on the "franchise" saying this.

What's been released so far, by all accounts, should cost maybe $15, not $50, especially if you want the players' help testing it as well. Or better yet, hire a QA department, and actually pay them, and only release the game to an audience at all once the QA is done. That's what I think and I think I have, at least, a right to express it.

Edited by Multivac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phoenyx

Phoenyx

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Multivac said:

I am actually feeling like this whole launch is pretty unfair. It's not just the road-map that puts all the promised features an unknown length of time into the future (despite the game already costing what you'd expect a finished game to cost). It's not just the sky-high system requirements that make this "more accessible" space sim game anything but. It's a more basic thing behind the philosophy of this launch that, for some reason, I'm only realizing now, after having read and seen a bunch of early reviews.

We're being asked to pay for the privilege of being QA testers.

Traditionally, QA testers don't pay for the privilege of testing games. Instead, it's developers who pay QA testers, in exchange for the help the QA testers give them in finding problems with a new game so that the game can be fixed and improved... before it's released to the actual audience.

We've been explicitly, openly told that the point of this Early Access release is to help the developer fine-tune the game and make sure everything is "working right" before the new features in the road-map can be added.

... But that's the job of a QA tester.

Now I see review after review basically saying that this is a very buggy alpha-level release. It's not just that a bunch of nice features are missing, as we've been told they would be since the roadmap was announced. It's that, well, the game is at a stage where it probably shouldn't have been released yet at all.

It's not fair to ask me, or anyone else, to pay a hefty sum for the privilege of testing an alpha.

Not some token sum, either. KSP2 is being sold for the price of a big, shiny, finished game.

Now, if you're a small tiny publisher, like a group of a few people working on a passion project together, sure, maybe you can't afford a QA department, so you ask your fans to test the game for you, even if they're also the ones financially supporting you. For a small indie publisher, sure, that's fair enough. But even a small indie publisher will generally be kind enough to its fans to charge them some small, steeply discounted amount of money for an early version of the game that needs early testing. That's certainly how Squad did it.

KSP2 is not being developed by a small indie group. It's being released by a major corporation that should be able to afford a QA department. And even if it can't, even if for some reason the developer does need to rely on the audience to also be QA testers, the decent thing to do would be at least to price the game accordingly.

The fact that this developer wants to charge me $50 to play a game that has none of the promised features, that probably won't run well on my computer, and on top of that I'm asked to play the role of a QA tester for a game that turns out to be, basically, in an alpha state?

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I actually spent a lot of money on KSP1. I bought the game early, when it was still discounted. But then I bought it again years later when it came out on Steam because I wanted to support it and I was so excited about it. And on top of that, I actually bought two additional copies of the game as gifts for friends. And, of course, I own both DLCs, and have actually bought at least one of the DLCs at least once as a gift as well.

But none of that expenditure felt like it left a bad taste in my mouth. This does.

I feel that it's fundamentally messed up that the new devs are openly asking me to help them test their unfinished game, which offers none of the features that have been hyped up for years, and I have to pay a hefty price for the privilege.

I'm expecting someone will chime in with — "but they have a right to charge whatever they want, and clearly some people are willing to pay, so there!" And, sure, that's true! I don't disagree with the fact that they can, or with the fact that some people, maybe even quite a few people, will be happy to pay.

I'm just saying that in my opinion this approach is messed up, and unfair, and fundamentally disrespectful towards the games' fans, and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And I'm a loyal KSP1 fan of many years and a customer who has already spent plenty of money on the "franchise" saying this.

What's been released so far, by all accounts, should cost maybe $15, not $50, especially if you want the players' help testing it as well. Or better yet, hire a QA department, and actually pay them, and only release the game to an audience at all once the QA is done. That's what I think and I think I have, at least, a right to express it.

Totally agree. By the way, KSP1 graphics mods are better than KSP2 Vanilla, and were talking about modifications that are ~10 years old!
With Squad, in addition to a lower value than the "alpha testers" in crowdfunding, you also won the DLCs later released.

Now this is the full value, without any innovation to the previous one (other than cosmetics), on the contrary, unfinished and with several bugs. Im honestly disheartened.

Edited by Phoenyx
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...