Post-KSP2 Launch Rehabilitation Thread

[Dantheollie]

I started playing KSP in late 2017, but didn't join the forums until 2019... a very short time before the announcement of KSP2.

KSP2 has been this elusive, almost mythical thing for me. Many of us in this community have been waiting patiently for the past 4-ish years, with great anticipation, for the release of this game.

Now that is is here, even in its early access stage, I feel a great relief! KSP2 is no longer Vapourware... It is a tangible product that will grow and develop with the community it has fostered.

I am very excited for the future of KSP! I think this game is really going to push the Kerbals to the mainstream -- a thing which will bring new challenges to the community!

[Wheehaw Kerman]

I think the mantra should run “stay off the discord, report the bugs, provide the feedback, enjoy the process”.

As someone who doesn’t identify as a gamer (KSP is basically all I play) I gotta say that the utterly toxic whinging I’ve seen since the specs dropped has almost made me despair for humanity.  Is this typical?

[Kubas_inko]

5 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

I think the mantra should run “stay off the discord, report the bugs, provide the feedback, enjoy the process”.

As someone who doesn’t identify as a gamer (KSP is basically all I play) I gotta say that the utterly toxic whinging I’ve seen since the specs dropped has almost made me despair for humanity.  Is this typical?

I am sorry, but the performance is objectively bad. Unless you got the recommended hardware, there is nothing enjoyable about this process...

[Wheehaw Kerman]

38 minutes ago, Kubas_inko said:

I am sorry, but the performance is objectively bad. Unless you got the recommended hardware, there is nothing enjoyable about this process...

EA, inadequate hardware… what do people expect?

[Dantheollie]

1 hour ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

I think the mantra should run “stay off the discord, report the bugs, provide the feedback, enjoy the process”.

As someone who doesn’t identify as a gamer (KSP is basically all I play) I gotta say that the utterly toxic whinging I’ve seen since the specs dropped has almost made me despair for humanity.  Is this typical?

I think the video game industry has set a bad precedent, where it has become acceptable to release games in an unplayable state, yet price them as if they were near-release. I do not blame the KSP2 devs for this, maybe the higher ups at Private Division. KSP2 might be early access, but it would be nice if they released it without the excessive bugs and performance issues it has.
However, I agree with you absolutely. KSP2 isn't a bad game, it is just an unfinished game. Like any other thing, the more love and care is put into it, the better it will become. Some individuals do not care for that, which is why KSP2 should currently be for enthusiasts only (as others have said on the forums). We bought the game because we want to contribute to its development, in the hopes our playtesting will mold KSP2 into the game we all want it to be.

I would refrain from "Doomscrolling" too much on the negative opinions. When the negativity is vitriolic and in-your-face, it might be better to let things cool down, and have a more reasonable discussion later!

Everyone is free to have their own opinions on KSP2, and we should all strive to make our opinions independently of others, adhering to the truth!

[Kubas_inko]

3 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

EA, inadequate hardware… what do people expect?

Stop using EA as an excuse. Performance is the one thing everyone always wants. And devs want it too, as they want people to play(test) it. But they won't be getting that many players if only something like 25% of the possible player base meats minimum requirements (and the performance is abysmal with that).

Of course, worse performance is expected with EA, but this is the extremest of extremes.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

49 minutes ago, Kubas_inko said:

Stop using EA as an excuse. Performance is the one thing everyone always wants. And devs want it too, as they want people to play(test) it. But they won't be getting that many players if only something like 25% of the possible player base meats minimum requirements (and the performance is abysmal with that).

Of course, worse performance is expected with EA, but this is the extremest of extremes.

I’ll stop pointing out that the game is in EA when people stop having hilarious fits of overblown histrionics over every little bug.  It’s been far more playable than I expected on my 2017 gaming laptop, and is a far better EA experience than KSP1.  The EA fine.  1.0 will be fantastic.  Everybody needs to chill.

[Kubas_inko]

51 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

I’ll stop pointing out that the game is in EA when people stop having hilarious fits of overblown histrionics over every little bug.  It’s been far more playable than I expected on my 2017 gaming laptop, and is a far better EA experience than KSP1.  The EA fine.  1.0 will be fantastic.  Everybody needs to chill.

But you are missing one big thing. KSP 1 was more of a passion project. KSP 2 is made by a big team and funded by a giant publisher. So $50 EA is not an excuse for what we got right now. The EA we have now is just a joke. The steam reviews are speaking for themselves...

And dude. I have 1080ti (more than minimum, 2017, so no idea what you are packing that runs it so well, but it must be 10 series or lower) and can't get it to stable 60FPS on launchpad (1080p min) and dipping below 30 when looking at Kerbin (and launching the 48 part rocket). That is, objectively, not good. This is bad from someone so big.

For someone who does not know KSP, this is just a perfect example of the standards we are now accepting. Games that work on the release are praised and $50 EA that run are accepted.
It is important to realize, that KSP 2 is now made by an AAA publisher, so we kinda can't have the same standards we had for the previous game...

Edited February 24, 2023 by Kubas_inko

[Wheehaw Kerman]

14 hours ago, Kubas_inko said:

But you are missing one big thing. KSP 1 was more of a passion project. KSP 2 is made by a big team and funded by a giant publisher. So $50 EA is not an excuse for what we got right now. The EA we have now is just a joke. The steam reviews are speaking for themselves...

And dude. I have 1080ti (more than minimum, 2017, so no idea what you are packing that runs it so well, but it must be 10 series or lower) and can't get it to stable 60FPS on launchpad (1080p min) and dipping below 30 when looking at Kerbin (and launching the 48 part rocket). That is, objectively, not good. This is bad from someone so big.

For someone who does not know KSP, this is just a perfect example of the standards we are now accepting. Games that work on the release are praised and $50 EA that run are accepted.
It is important to realize, that KSP 2 is now made by an AAA publisher, so we kinda can't have the same standards we had for the previous game...

“If you have a crappy PC, don’t buy the game!” -Scott Manley.

I’m running a 2017(?) [email protected] ghz, 1050ti with 6MB, game installed off C.  All KSP 2 graphics settings are low.  It does 30-60 fps in KSP1, so expecting the same from an EA version of KSP2 would be unrealistic.

I’m perfectly aware of the history of the game; I’ve been following it closely since it was announced.  So I understand the situation as well as most non-Intercept employees.  If you read the roadmap and spec slides and the reports coming out of the ESA event, the state of EA should not have come as a surprise.  The choice of how to deal with this reality should not be as hard as it seems for some people.  In my case, reality is that the game is quite playable on a machine I bought in 2017.  I have 5,300 hours since 2013 in KSP1: the reality is that KSP2 is far more feature complete than KSP1 was in EA, and much better looking.  So I’ll enjoy it on my crappy old laptop until its replacement arrives (on Tuesday - “if you have a crappy PC and still want to play the game, your options are either sucking it up, upgrading or buying a new PC” - me).

Here’s the thing: EA is not an excuse - it is reality.  We have the EA version of the game that we got, and it not only aligns with what we were told we were getting in terms of the EA, it exceeds realistic expectations based on that information.  And, as you point out, TT is a big studio with deep pockets, and plans for the franchise.  I’m optimistic for the future.  And in the worstcase, so what if the game fails?

In no particular order, the Steam forums are the sort of place that they are, and $50 is really not a lot of money.  KSP is not an expensive hobby -probably somewhere around $1/hr for me even if I factor in the entire  cost of both laptops I’ve played it on and the second license I got for my nephew.  

Edited February 25, 2023 by Wheehaw Kerman

[zeekzeek22]

Really excited for KSP2 to develop. I played a bit, I am *DYINGLY EXCITED* for whatever the story behind the anomalies are. Might reboot KSP1 to refresh myself on what my optimized rockets looked like...after over a year off KSP1, my attempt at a Dres rocket was way too huge. My Mun rocket was enormous and I kept thinking "I swear to god I got enough dV out of a WAY smaller rocket"...bigger fuel tanks don't always solve the problem.

I can't wait to open KSP2 in ~May and watch it run WAY smoother with lots of bugs gone, so I can actually do an LKO refueling and go find the anomalies for myself. In the meantime, I got Valheim to finish!