25,000 copies sold (Steam)

[The Aziz]

58 minutes ago, MarcAbaddon said:

KSP 2 is not an indie game. 

Despite having big publisher name behind it, it very much is. So is, for example, Rocket League. And Minecraft. Both currently funded by Epic and Microsoft respectively.

[tstein]

14 hours ago, blazemonger said:

Also, keep in mind that many will buy direct, I actually refunded on Steam and bought direct instead as I wanted as much of my purchase benefit the studio..
For a niche game like KSP on a "rocky" start of EA like many claim they have, showing 11.5K concurrent on Steam is really not bad at all.

While that is very valid on an indie game,  it is not that much when a publisher is involved as take 2 is nto a struggling artist.

12 minutes ago, RayneCloud said:

There's no cash to take Ferio. This just feels like trolling at this point. You're treating real human beings in an incredibly hunhelp manner. Shuttering this project would put nearly 50 devs out of jobs. 

That is no real excuse.  I never ever will  look at bad product and say nice things because  the people that made it may lose their jobs. I  can also lose my job if I make a bad project.. know what I do about it? I do a GOOD JOB!

[MarcAbaddon]

17 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Despite having big publisher name behind it, it very much is. So is, for example, Rocket League. And Minecraft. Both currently funded by Epic and Microsoft respectively.

I am sorry but now this is getting silly. There's something between AAA and indie games you know. A ~50 people dev team directly working for a major publisher (whether by contract or as a direct subsidiary), is not an indie game. Please give me a definition of indie game where KSP 2 reasonably falls into.

KSP was definitely an indie game. Minecraft started as an indie game and was one for the longest game. It got bought out by Microsoft a long time after release. Rocket League also was an indie game, but Epic only bought them ~4 years after release. 

Edited February 27, 2023 by MarcAbaddon

[magnemoe]

18 hours ago, LoSBoL said:

Interesting link, owner estimation on there is a lot higher then the 25k of concurrent players

 

 

Number of people who buy a game is always much higher than concurrent players. 
More so on an single player game where its no rush to play. 

[MarcAbaddon]

1 minute ago, magnemoe said:

Number of people who buy a game is always much higher than concurrent players. 
More so on an single player game where its no rush to play. 

I think most people try a game out when they buy it. No doubt the number of bought copies are higher than the number of concurrent players (also due to different time zones), but I am not sure the ratio is that huge. And it'll be partially offset by refunds which seem to be higher than average.

[blazemonger]

1 hour ago, tstein said:

While that is very valid on an indie game,  it is not that much when a publisher is involved as take 2 is nto a struggling artist.

Of course it is valid as, big publisher or not, KSP2 _is_ a niche game and always will be. Nothing wrong with that at all, just a simple fact of life as far as I am concerned.

 

[MarcAbaddon]

Of course, space exploration is a bit of a niche game. Sure, it's not Call of Duty. But KSP 1 sold around 5 million copies overall. Those are good sales numbers for professional games by known studios. There are plenty acclaimed AAA titles who only sold about twice as much. Here it is in context of other games who sold the same amount of copies:

https://www.vgchartz.com/games/games.php?page=16&order=Sales&ownership=Both&direction=DESC&showpublisher=1&showreleasedate=1&showlastupdate=1&showvgchartzscore=1&showcriticscore=1&showuserscore=1&showshipped=1

An improved KSP II would have the potential to sell even more.

Besides, the dev team always presented it as a very professional effort and not an indie effort. Do you think indie (or even minor release) get the sort of announcement trailer they put together for KSP 2?

I really don't get people trying to claim that KSP 2 either was or even was marketed as an indie game or something close. 

[magnemoe]

1 minute ago, MarcAbaddon said:

I think most people try a game out when they buy it. No doubt the number of bought copies are higher than the number of concurrent players (also due to different time zones), but I am not sure the ratio is that huge. And it'll be partially offset by refunds which seem to be higher than average.

You have time zones as you say, its also far more common than you thing to buy games but not play them for some time, yes I would not do but far from all, talked with one who had bought KSP but not tried it playing an online game. Its more understandable if you buy the game for somebody else as partner or kids. 
No reason to doubt the sale estimates. 


 

[HowDoKerbal]

The numbers are surely higher than 25000. For an EA title this is good. 1.25m

Also I think people are really overestimating how many people will have refunded. Despite the overwhelmingly negative tone of this forum, it’s important to remember that it’s just that: this forum. Steam reviews are a joke metric as they are susceptible to bombing campaigns which is what happened with KSP2.

Too many people unreasonably expected this to be as fully polished and playable as KSP1 which has been out for a decade. The majority of people will be fine to have bought it and then sit on it as it gets more developed, which is what you are meant to do with an EA game.

Edited February 27, 2023 by HowDoKerbal
Punctuation

[tstein]

23 minutes ago, HowDoKerbal said:

The numbers are surely higher than 25000. For an EA title this is good. 1.25m

Also I think people are really overestimating how many people will have refunded. Despite the overwhelmingly negative tone of this forum, it’s important to remember that it’s just that: this forum. Steam reviews are a joke metric as they are susceptible to bombing campaigns which is what happened with KSP2.

Too many people unreasonably expected this to be as fully polished and playable as KSP1 which has been out for a decade. The majority of people will be fine to have bought it and then sit on it as it gets more developed, which is what you are meant to do with an EA game.

Naa peopel did nto expect it fully polished. not at all. But  EVERYTHING in the game except the sound is  a disaster right now. People usually expect at least a good portion of the game working.

[HansAcker]

12 hours ago, Mantarochen said:

But that puts it in line with all the steam reviews

Still a lot better reviews than My Other Space Game 2 years after a catastrophic release after running a closed beta.

https://steamdb.info/app/1336350/charts/

I'll give KSP 2 a year or two to get into a state where I want to play it. KSP 1 is going to be the most complete KSP for a long time to come.

[HowDoKerbal]

18 minutes ago, tstein said:

Naa peopel did nto expect it fully polished. not at all. But  EVERYTHING in the game except the sound is  a disaster right now. People usually expect at least a good portion of the game working.

That’s not my experience at all with 14 hours so far. There are bugs of course but it’s not an unplayable mess like people make it out to be. It’s pretty standard fare for early access.

[tstein]

11 minutes ago, HowDoKerbal said:

That’s not my experience at all with 14 hours so far. There are bugs of course but it’s not an unplayable mess like people make it out to be. It’s pretty standard fare for early access.

well you clearly are in the  exception them  just look  the streams for example. They cannot pass 10 minutes without a bug.   I played for some 7 hours and stopped because it is simply unplayable. Every  time I press launch is a different crippling bug, except when the bug is that the launch button does not work anymore (yes that does happen)

[Periple]

I've clocked about 23 hours. It is very buggy! I just did a Duna mission and had to struggle with orbits spontaneously changing, tanks spontaneously draining, sudden losses of control, the maneuver planner not showing things properly, the dV indicators not showing anything at all, engines not staging, maneuver nodes breaking when I switch between map and vessel view, and whole bunch more. Oh and after my soft landing when I loaded a save, a wing fell off my plane.

The things KSP2 does well though are SO much better than KSP1 that I couldn't go back. I'm just treating the bugs as extra design challenges, inherently unreliable Kerbal engineering, and the Kraken... and I'm having quite a lot of fun in the process. It'll be almost boring when everything works as intended!

(I do have to say that if my studio was asked to release something to EA in this state, I would say, can we have another two months, pretty please?)

[garwel]

It's interesting that KSP2 concurrent players have decreased and fallen below KSP1's three days after the release. How normal is that?

[Missingno200]

I wish you guys would stop relying on concurrent player counts as a meter for success, especially for singleplayer-only games. It's a horribly skewed and atrocious meter, as people will buy the game and then set it down once they feel they have completed it.

59 minutes ago, garwel said:

How normal is that?

It's a singleplayer-only, early access, controversial sequel experience. All three of those combined act as effectively a one-two-uppercut for any concurrent playercount. It'll most likely get way better as time goes on and they fix issues, with its peak no doubt being 1.0's launch week. The concurrent will likely STAY above KSP1's permanently once multiplayer is introduced, at least until MP is shutdown.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Missingno200
C-C-COMBO!

[Mantarochen]

1 hour ago, garwel said:

It's interesting that KSP2 concurrent players have decreased and fallen below KSP1's three days after the release. How normal is that?

Yeah, like I stated in my comparison between the two, it isn't. It's a mess. That's what it is. 

3 hours ago, HowDoKerbal said:

The numbers are surely higher than 25000. For an EA title this is good. 1.25m

Also I think people are really overestimating how many people will have refunded. Despite the overwhelmingly negative tone of this forum, it’s important to remember that it’s just that: this forum. Steam reviews are a joke metric as they are susceptible to bombing campaigns which is what happened with KSP2.

Too many people unreasonably expected this to be as fully polished and playable as KSP1 which has been out for a decade. The majority of people will be fine to have bought it and then sit on it as it gets more developed, which is what you are meant to do with an EA game.

Quote

@Missingno200 It's a singleplayer-only, early access, controversial sequel experience. All three of those combined act as effectively a one-two-uppercut for any concurrent playercount. It'll most likely get way better as time goes on and they fix issues, with its peak no doubt being 1.0's launch week. The concurrent will likely STAY above KSP1's permanently once multiplayer is introduced, at least until MP is shutdown.

 

Remember "the forest" ? An Indie Game developed by literally 10 people, launched in 2014.

 

Just as a little comparison to shut down the "it's EA so that is a good number" post.

 

Name                                  Copies sold                                                  Review on Steam

KSP1	~4.5 M  copies sold	"Overhwelmingly Positive"
The forest	~5M  copies sold	"Overhwelmingly Positive"
KSP2	~40.000 copies sold in 24 hours (launch 24.02,23)	"mixed" (inflated review score)
Sons of the forest	~2.000.000 copies sold in 24 hours (launch 23.02.23)	"very positive"

Both are:

• EA games
• Aren't finished 
• Have bugs
• Have missing features
• Both were delayed multiple times
• Have games before it in the franchise with ruffly the same number of sales and review score

 

The KSP2 figure doesn't even include the mass refunds that probably happened, judging the steam reviews.

KSP1 having more concurrent players then KSP2 isn't bad, it's alarming. 

Just as a fun example, here are "the forest" and "sons of the forest":

https://steamdb.info/charts/?compare=242760,1326470

 

KSP2 sits at $50, Sons of the forest at $28.5

and people actually still defend the EA price of $50 KSP2 is shipping at somehow....

 

That for the "it's EA so that is a good number" statement. I think you can figure out yourself what these numbers mean.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Mantarochen

[MarcAbaddon]

Early concurrent player count after release is a decent metric for short-term fan engagement. It's less usable for long-term success, so will have to wait and see. 

But if you think KSP 2 got review bombed, you are way off. KSP 2 got bad reviews mainly from fans of KSP 1 who were disappointed. Organized bombing campaigns bring outside groups in, mainly due to some culture war controversy. E.g. The Last of Us 2 was definitely review bombed.

Games getting bad reviews by their own fan base because people are upset about bugs and core gameplay mechanism isn't review bombing. Another typical indicator for review bombing is a discrepancy between positive critical review (i.e. by game magazines) and the reviewers - not the case here either. 

You may certainly and in good faith claim that the reviews are too harsh, but that's not the same as getting review bombed.

Edited February 27, 2023 by MarcAbaddon

[Meecrob]

4 hours ago, HowDoKerbal said:

Too many people unreasonably expected this to be as fully polished and playable as KSP1 which has been out for a decade.

I disagree. According to the roadmap, we were supposed to get an experience that approximates the features available in KSP1 v0.21. We did not get that. This is not my anecdotal experience either; I am clearly not the only one who thinks this way based on Steam sales figures.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Meecrob

[Jimbodiah]

From what I saw in the youtube videos showing the time line, about 90% of the functionality from KSP1 is still in the distant future. KSP2 has no business being released and an early-access game in this state, let alone at AAA prices.  All the features they have been loading the hype-train with are not even in the game yet, after what, almost 2 years of delay? What have they been doing in all that time?

This early-access is going to bite them in the behind. Just imagine being totally new to KSP, spending $50 expecting a AAA game that is almost done and then getting a buggy game with so many missing features that it will have even Noman's Sky laughing and pointing its finger. 

I swear the price will have most people getting peepeed just out of principle. $20 and I think everyone would get it and not moan about the state of it. Asking full ticket price for something that seems to have finished compiling without errors for the first time ever and expecting people to pay for the honor of testing your vaporware? MBAs are poison.

And I see they still herald the weak joints as an actual game feature.  smh.

I'll check the progress in about 2 years from now or if it goes on 60% sale.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Jimbodiah

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

I had a period on the second day where I felt like the game was in an exceptionally Beta state and not ready for EA as well.

First day, I was just glad to finally get my hands on it.  Second day is when I ran into way more bugs and issues than was comfortable and I became very grousy.

Third day?  I found a bunch of stuff that works, realized that many of the things the team has worked on are pretty darn good and felt in awe of much of the artwork.

Yeah - there's a lot for them to do.

But it's in what I'd call a hybrid Beta-EA state at the moment.  If they are really responsive and crush a lot of the true bugs in the first week, the QOL for players will improve immensely.

One of the things I appreciate about the forums is that a WHOLE LOT of the grousing has gone away; mostly the 'I can't play it because my system can't handle it' comments have disappeared.

The bug reports are flying fast and furious - but the bitterness has gone and those folks still playing are the kind of folks I like to be in Betas / EA titles with.  The good-natured, let's help the dev team identify problems and move-on kind of people that make this kind of experience fun.  

[USAGuerrilla]

I bought 2 copies

[78stonewobble]

15 hours ago, HowDoKerbal said:

The numbers are surely higher than 25000. For an EA title this is good. 1.25m

Also I think people are really overestimating how many people will have refunded. Despite the overwhelmingly negative tone of this forum, it’s important to remember that it’s just that: this forum. Steam reviews are a joke metric as they are susceptible to bombing campaigns which is what happened with KSP2.

Too many people unreasonably expected this to be as fully polished and playable as KSP1 which has been out for a decade. The majority of people will be fine to have bought it and then sit on it as it gets more developed, which is what you are meant to do with an EA game.

You are absolutely right. 

Early access means bugs, low performance, a lack of features and not least, no guarantees. 

If a person wants a maximum limit to bugs and their severity, buying early access is the wrong decision. 
If a person wants a minimum of performance in all situations, buying early access is the wrong decision. 
If a person wants a minimum of features, buying early access is the wrong decision. 

Early access also has absolutely nothing to do with whether a game/software is from a single enthusiast, amateurs, indie company, a small company, medium company, large company, huge conglomerate of large companies with subsidiaries around the world... It only refers to the development stage of bugs, low performance, lack of features and no guarantees. 

Complaints and reviews based on the buyer not understanding what early access is and therefore having unrealistic expectations of it are simply not valid. 

That is why I didn't buy KSP2 early access and waited 2-2½ years into KSP's early access, before the development stage reached a level, where I wanted to buy in. 

If I had bought it earlier and was unhappy, that would first and foremost have been me making a bad purchasing decision and that would have been my responsibility, not the devs of KSP1. 

For comparison. Here is the earliest (early access) release of KSP1:

"v0.7.3

Released June 24^th, 2011

• Initial Release^[2]

Notable Features

• Downloaded over 5000 times^[3]
• No SAS, although SAS module is implemented and generates torque
• The only engine, the LV-T30 can only be fed by one FL-T500 attached on its top
• The AV-R8 Winglet is just a fin and can't be used to control the vehicle
• It is nearly impossible to achieve orbit
• Kerbin is the only celestial object, does not rotate, and is a mirror reflection of the example planet from libnoise
• The sun is a directional light source at infinite distance
• The render distance is only 1500 km, and Kerbin will "sink" into the sky background, vanishing entirely as that altitude is achieved
• The original Intercontinental Kraken had not been fixed (Moving far from the KSC will result in shaking and even Rapid Unplanned Disassembly due to floating-point precision loss.)"
  
  That level of development is not for me, but that doesn't mean others shouldn't be allowed to choose to be in such early access, even at that early moment. 
  
  We should not let the people complaining due to their own unrealistic expectations and idiosyncratic definition of early access prevent others that make the correct decisions, whether to buy or not buy into early access from doing so. 
  
   

[Alex76]

I liked the game.

[Ferio]

15 hours ago, HowDoKerbal said:

 

Too many people unreasonably expected this to be as fully polished and playable as KSP1 which has been out for a decade. 

It's been 5 years in development. I think it's very reasonable  to expect a better experience. Not like KSP1 but at least much better than the current state.