Everything hinges on the first update. Fingers crossed! [discussion]

[Vanamonde]

Some comments removed. Please don't make the discussions personal; we don't actually know what each others' motives are. 

Also, please avoid letter-substitution expletives, since it's still clear what is being said. 

[Bej Kerman]

6 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Then why don't we have procedural by length tanks and trusses?

Because this...

6 hours ago, Periple said:

Can't do interstellar without that. Trying to reduce part counts by combining functions is a dead end, you'll get at best, like, 10% improvement, when you actually need an order of magnitude improvement. 

If by the time KSP2 gets to interstellar it's not possible to fly a 1000-part ship on minimum hardware, the game just won't work. Which is why I'm sure they'll figure it

...procedural parts were the solution from the modding community, but the modding community wasn't so ambitious to rewire KSP 1 into something more playable.

[TheArturro]

I've played a lot of KSP 2 in the last 3 days and to be fair, I might have to revise my opinion that everything hinges on the first update.

While I had encountered some bugs (strange parts appearing next to craft, craft sinking into Mun surface after loading a save, staging with space bar stopped working) I had an absolute blast. I even managed to do a YT video of my Mun mission.

 

Also, now that we have gotten some info on the upcoming update I'm getting more confident that the game will indeed not only be a worthy succesor to KSP2 1, but in time will outshine it in every aspect.

Edited March 5, 2023 by TheArturro
Meant KSP 1, not 2

[Datau03]

1 hour ago, TheArturro said:

I'm getting more confident that the game will indeed not only be a worthy succesor to KSP2, but in time will outshine it in every aspect.

Can basically say the exact same as you in your post for me (just not only 3 days). And just one lil thing: you propably meant to say KSP1 there

Edited March 5, 2023 by Datau03

[TheArturro]

3 minutes ago, Datau03 said:

Can basically say the exact same as you in your post for me (just not only 3 days). And just one lil thing: you propably meant to say KSP1 there

Apologies, I'm still before my 1st coffee this morning .

[Wheehaw Kerman]

Now that things have settled down and the venomous reptiles have been relocated to their natural habitats, I’m going to suggest that everything depends on the first three roadmap steps, assuming that things get reasonably debugged and optimized by the time Colonies drop.

Science in a semi-debugged state in Q1 is going to give people a playable progression with things to do at destination that’s much prettier, has better and has more parts than KSP1, and is, let’s assume, about as stable.  I expect we’re going to suffer a minor infestation of reptiles regardless, but the mods seem to have upped their pest control game. Word on the street will be “It’s improving”.

Then, we get Colonies, again assuming on a reasonably timely basis - say right before Christmas.  More bugs slain, lots more to do, a whole brand new way to play.  And it’ll be very photogenic too.  More improvement, more players, buzz starts snowballing in a positive direction.  Newbies start buying the game.

And then Interstellar drops.  An entire new star system drops, with new honking big parts being assembled into honking big starships.  It’ll be extremely photogenic.  The Kraken will likely devour some interstellar ships, because he’ll have been banished from the Kerbol system and interstellar space and DebDeb will be the only locations not purged with holy fire.  The positive snowballing increases, sales go up, some of the less toxic reptiles quietly forget what they said about the EA being worse than ethics in video game journalism and start showing up and being meekly non-venomous.

Now imagine what the reaction is going to be to when Multiplayer’s release date is announced.  We’ll have had months of buzz about the game heading in the right direction, positive reviews, feedback, optimization, bug fixing, Kraken-purging.  People will go nuts.

And all this hinges on nothing more than careful progress by the devs following the roadmap steadily. 

[Moons]

1 hour ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Now that things have settled down and the venomous reptiles have been relocated to their natural habitats, I’m going to suggest that everything depends on the first three roadmap steps, assuming that things get reasonably debugged and optimized by the time Colonies drop.

Science in a semi-debugged state in Q1 is going to give people a playable progression with things to do at destination that’s much prettier, has better and has more parts than KSP1, and is, let’s assume, about as stable.  I expect we’re going to suffer a minor infestation of reptiles regardless, but the mods seem to have upped their pest control game. Word on the street will be “It’s improving”.

Then, we get Colonies, again assuming on a reasonably timely basis - say right before Christmas.  More bugs slain, lots more to do, a whole brand new way to play.  And it’ll be very photogenic too.  More improvement, more players, buzz starts snowballing in a positive direction.  Newbies start buying the game.

And then Interstellar drops.  An entire new star system drops, with new honking big parts being assembled into honking big starships.  It’ll be extremely photogenic.  The Kraken will likely devour some interstellar ships, because he’ll have been banished from the Kerbol system and interstellar space and DebDeb will be the only locations not purged with holy fire.  The positive snowballing increases, sales go up, some of the less toxic reptiles quietly forget what they said about the EA being worse than ethics in video game journalism and start showing up and being meekly non-venomous.

Now imagine what the reaction is going to be to when Multiplayer’s release date is announced.  We’ll have had months of buzz about the game heading in the right direction, positive reviews, feedback, optimization, bug fixing, Kraken-purging.  People will go nuts.

And all this hinges on nothing more than careful progress by the devs following the roadmap steadily. 

I dont understand people like you - you call others "venomous reptiles" - probably people with a different opinion than yours - just to stir up more drama and toxicity? Sorry i really dislike it when people are so derogatory towards others  ...

I also dont understand how people can be so overly positive - the product sold now is the rather underwhelming "alpha" at a price of 50 Dollars - thats what you actually buy - everything else is something you have no right to according to how EA purchases work. Looking at the state of the game now and at the release i am not nearly as positive as you. I seriously wonder why the game was released like this at this price - since that was a deliberate decision and i am sure everyone involved knew the state of the game and how EA pricing usually works. I'm seriously worried that the future of the game could be tied to the success of the EA start. I'm really having a hard time to come up with a logical reason on why the game was released in this state - and if they really wanted to do that then why at this price. The reception would have been completeley different at 30 USD - i would also have instantly bought it and would have been okay with a buggy build with lots of features missing because the price would have reflected that.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons

[Vl3d]

7 minutes ago, Moons said:

I dont understand people like you - you call others "venomous reptiles" - probably people with a different opinion than yours - just to stir up more drama and toxicity? Sorry i really dislike it when people are so derogatory towards others  ...

I think he was literally saying that he works at the wildlife sanctuary and he finished a days work, so he can now relax.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

I’m going to suggest that everything depends on the first three roadmap steps, assuming that things get reasonably debugged and optimized by the time Colonies drop

I get that you are leaning forward into the positivity... 

But if they don't get the core features of the game performant and bug free soon, the reputation damage will be permanent. 

By my estimate they have to drop a very big, very sweeping update 'when they are ready' that changes the conversation completely - with the second being a major refinement that convinces us that the rest of the roadmap is attainable. 

In other words - if KSP2 isn't in a true EA state (not the present Public Alpha) by the time the second patch drops... No one will buy it in the numbers to support future development. 

There is a very real risk of KSP2 becoming an effectively permanent EA Sandbox / cautionary tale. 

Edited March 7, 2023 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[Wheehaw Kerman]

3 minutes ago, Moons said:

I dont understand people like you - you call others "venomous reptiles" - probably people with a different opinion than yours - just to stir up more drama and toxicity? Sorry i really dislike it when people are so derogatory towards others  ...

Well, if you haven’t been all toxic, hissy, and bitey, then you aren’t one of the people my remarks were directed at.  As you’ve surely noticed, not all of the negativity here was disappointment being expressed in good faith.  That sort of thing is fine and can be productive, and not even the clear communication we got around the state of the EA can help that - some people confuse their unrealistic hopes with realistic expectations and then vent when they’re predictably disappointed.  

Happily, a combination of good moderation and the sort of person in question lacking commitment and attention span has led to less of the bad faith toxic negativity for negativity’s sake that we saw over the first week.  I don’t understand why people enjoy being hostile, aggressive, whiny, entitled to that degree, nor repeating the same litany of unfounded hyperbolic complaints despite their audience’s clear lack of interest.  I blame the internet, personally.

Regardless, I am cautiously optimistic about the game, you are somewhat less so.  If you feel strongly about this, why don’t you set a reminder and touch base again in a year, and we’ll see who was closer to the mark?

1 minute ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I get that you are leaning forward into the positivity... 

But if they don't get the core features of the game performant and bug free soon, the reputation damage will be permanent. 

By my estimate they have to drop a very big, very sweeping update 'when they are ready' that changes the conversation completely - with the second being a major refinement that convinces us that the rest of the roadmap is attainable. 

In other words - if KSP2 isn't in a true EA state (not the present Public Alpha) by the time the second patch drops... No one will buy it in the numbers to support future development. 

There is a very real risk of KSP2 being a semi - permanent EA Sandbox / cautionary tale. 

We’re actually not that far apart.  I think we’re both saying that obvious steady progress is necessary - I’m pointing out that a series of solid roadmap drops over time will change the current temporarily whiny negative narrative.

18 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

I think he was literally saying that he works at the wildlife sanctuary and he finished a days work, so he can now relax.

I think you have me confused with Ghostii and Dakota

[Moons]

17 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Well, if you haven’t been all toxic, hissy, and bitey, then you aren’t one of the people my remarks were directed at.  As you’ve surely noticed, not all of the negativity here was disappointment being expressed in good faith.  That sort of thing is fine and can be productive, and not even the clear communication we got around the state of the EA can help that - some people confuse their unrealistic hopes with realistic expectations and then vent when they’re predictably disappointed.  

Happily, a combination of good moderation and the sort of person in question lacking commitment and attention span has led to less of the bad faith toxic negativity for negativity’s sake that we saw over the first week.  I don’t understand why people enjoy being hostile, aggressive, whiny, entitled to that degree, nor repeating the same litany of unfounded hyperbolic complaints despite their audience’s clear lack of interest.  I blame the internet, personally.

Regardless, I am cautiously optimistic about the game, you are somewhat less so.  If you feel strongly about this, why don’t you set a reminder and touch base again in a year, and we’ll see who was closer to the mark?

Just because people have different opinions doesnt make them toxic. And it was to be expected that people react in a negative way if you sell a game in a state like this at the price of a AAA full release.

Also how does that make you any better - most people directed their critique at the product they bought - you directed your anger directly at the people that voiced their opinion - from my point of view that makes your post more toxic, hissy and bitey - as you would word it. And how is your posting not hostile,agressive, in bad faith etc.?

I wouldnt call you cautiously optimistic - your post pretty much seem to suggest a standard development process with almost no issues to me and ending in a success. I on the other hand think that it will already be hard work to even get rid of the negative image and press the game already has.

I know im overly negative - but im having a hard time understanding why the game was released like this when everybody knew the state of the game and how EA pricing works. It should have been pretty obvious that the release would be rather bad and that people would be very negative - so im concerend because the release was done anyways especially since the game is funded by a rather big Publisher so the use of EA (usually for funding etc.) doesnt make much sense to me. For example they  could have just released the game at 1.0 in the future and used things like open/public alpha etc. to get feedback - or pre-orders with beta/alpha access, or EA release at an EA price etc.

 

I dont think that you are in the right - when people are dissapointed and its about their hobby and a franchise they are a fan of for years their dissapointed obivously will become a bit emotional and exaggerated - i wouldnt assume that thats in bad faith - its just people beeing emotional about their hobbys and games they like. I also dont think that there is clear communication - we neither know the actual state of the game (is the EA build released just a part or everything except unused models etc?), we dont know what realistically is a timeframe for a release at all?, we dont know how much time and money is planned to be invested so we have no idea how a final product can even look - obviously they cant give definitive answers but some clues would be nice.

And in the end - isnt that what makes a hobby a hobby and a fan a fan? People were like that way before the internet - just take a look at sports fans, drama in the chess world, how people react to news on stars etc.

 

 

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

4 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

We’re actually not that far apart.  I think we’re both saying that obvious steady progress is necessary - I’m pointing out that a series of solid roadmap drops over time will change the current temporarily whiny negative narrative

Yeah. 

See - if we go back in time to Feb 23, that would be what we would hope for.  A solid EA release with a clear roadmap that acts like a slow burn of positive experience and reviews with an ever increasing player base. 

KSP has a very loyal fan base and the numbers to have made 2 a true success with a whole new generation of gamers ready to see what all the hype is about.  And there is the problem. 

The team ran a successful development and hype campaign over the past few years that faceplanted.  Publicly. 

High cost paid for Alpha is not a good look. They can recover - but it needs to be sooner than 'getting back on track with the roadmap' - because right now they are not even on the road. 

[AuddieD2015]

I'm only afraid to buy it because of the system requirements. My processor and RAM is fine. My video card is almost 50% below the card they list as minimum. I can afford a $50 game but a 5600 XT is about $500.  I won't be upgrading that much any time soon.

[linuxgurugamer]

2 minutes ago, AuddieD2015 said:

I'm only afraid to buy it because of the system requirements. My processor and RAM is fine. My video card is almost 50% below the card they list as minimum. I can afford a $50 game but a 5600 XT is about $500.  I won't be upgrading that much any time soon.

What video  card do you have?

[Moons]

19 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

We’re actually not that far apart.  I think we’re both saying that obvious steady progress is necessary - I’m pointing out that a series of solid roadmap drops over time will change the current temporarily whiny negative narrative.

Yeah you even have the same chaotic reply style i use of constantly adapting and extending your posts so that any further replys turn out to make less and less sense

I think im just a bit less optimistic than you but in general i agree.

5 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Yeah. 

See - if we go back in time to Feb 23, that would be what we would hope for.  A solid EA release with a clear roadmap that acts like a slow burn of positive experience and reviews with an ever increasing player base. 

KSP has a very loyal fan base and the numbers to have made 2 a true success with a whole new generation of gamers ready to see what all the hype is about.  And there is the problem. 

The team ran a successful development and hype campaign over the past few years that faceplanted.  Publicly. 

High cost paid for Alpha is not a good look. They can recover - but it needs to be sooner than 'getting back on track with the roadmap' - because right now they are not even on the road. 

Yeah i also think that didnt make it better. The Trailers were awesome and the marketing good but it was just way too soon and they pretty much killed all the hype they created with this release - if they would have delayed the EA it would have probably worked out for them perfectly.

Im a big fan of that trailer:

 

But whoever created it created way to much hype way to soon.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons

[AuddieD2015]

4 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

What video  card do you have?

RX 5500. 4GB VRAM. It plays KSP1 just fine though so I can still crash rockets.

 

[Moons]

16 minutes ago, AuddieD2015 said:

I'm only afraid to buy it because of the system requirements. My processor and RAM is fine. My video card is almost 50% below the card they list as minimum. I can afford a $50 game but a 5600 XT is about $500.  I won't be upgrading that much any time soon.

Honestly you should buy it now. If you dont have KSP1 buy that - its awesome with mods and DLC.

 

You can still buy this game later on when its released and get new Hardware way cheaper at that point. The game probably wont run playable at all or playable in a good way in EA and upgrading now probably is way worse than upgrading when its released or near release.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons

[Wheehaw Kerman]

17 minutes ago, Moons said:

Just because people have different opinions doesnt make them toxic. And it was to be expected that people react in a negative way if you sell a game in a state like this at the price of a AAA full release.

[snip]

Again, some disappointment was only to be expected.  And people expressing that is actually useful.  

Endlessly rehashing the same basic unfounded and exaggerated complaints everywhere, in bad faith, only louder and with extra vitriol, is only going to make the forums unliveable.  The sort of person that does that basically abandons any entitlement they might have to any degree of civility in excess of forum rules, and the mods have rightly been jerking their leashes hard.  This place is getting more tolerable as a result.

And I think that the narrative can be easily reversed with a series of successful updates.  Things can only get better, and if they do, consistently, the negative anti-narrative will lose traction and fade.

As for the fifty bucks is a lot of money the game should have been perfect and complete never mind the EA warning and it should run at 500 fps on a potato stuff, it’s all been said and replied to elsewhere.  

12 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Yeah. 

See - if we go back in time to Feb 23, that would be what we would hope for.  A solid EA release with a clear roadmap that acts like a slow burn of positive experience and reviews with an ever increasing player base. 

KSP has a very loyal fan base and the numbers to have made 2 a true success with a whole new generation of gamers ready to see what all the hype is about.  And there is the problem. 

The team ran a successful development and hype campaign over the past few years that faceplanted.  Publicly. 

High cost paid for Alpha is not a good look. They can recover - but it needs to be sooner than 'getting back on track with the roadmap' - because right now they are not even on the road. 

I don’t suppose you’ve watched S1 of For All Mankind, have you?

Edited March 7, 2023 by Wheehaw Kerman

[Moons]

4 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Again, some disappointment was only to be expected.  And people expressing that is actually useful.  

Endlessly rehashing the same basic unfounded and exaggerated complaints everywhere, in bad faith, only louder and with extra vitriol, is only going to make the forums unliveable.  The sort of person that does that basically abandons any entitlement they might have to any degree of civility in excess of forum rules, and the mods have rightly been jerking their leashes hard.  This place is getting more tolerable as a result.

And I think that the narrative can be easily reversed with a series of successful updates.  Things can only get better, and if they do, consistently, the negative anti-narrative will lose traction and fade

As for the fifty bucks is a lot of money the game should have been perfect and complete never mind the EA warning and it should run at 500 fps on a potato stuff, it’s all been said and replied to elsewhere.  

I would agree if the game was cheaper - but at 50 USD the updates must be perfect and full of new content. I think they just set up expectations no one can satisfy. (Price+Trailers+KSP1)

I do think its important to not voice opinions just once because that would mean that all the critique would dissapear just by time passing and not by improvements of the product. If a bad launch would only get negativity for a short ammount of time - wouldnt that mean that there is no reason to improve later on?

Lets hope the game is further in Development than we see and that the EA Build is just a reduced stable build with lots of features cut. I also hope for a discount or general reduction of price soon. Make it 30-35 USD- with tax - and i wont even thnk twice about buying the game.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons

[linuxgurugamer]

6 minutes ago, AuddieD2015 said:

RX 5500. 4GB VRAM. It plays KSP1 just fine though so I can still crash rockets.

 

Not sure how that compares to a GTX970, I tested KSP2 on a 970 and it was playable.  

[Wheehaw Kerman]

Just now, Moons said:

I would agree if the game was cheaper - but at 50 USD the updates must be perfect and full of new content. I think they just set up expectations no one can satisfy. (Price+Trailers+KSP1)

I think “solid enough for EA as part of a trend of continuous improvement” will do the trick.  

Expectations?  I think you mean “hopes”.  Those are on us to control.  Taking cinematics for gameplay is foolish.  The state of the EA shouldn’t have surprised anybody - we were give. Plenty of warning.

[AuddieD2015]

2 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Not sure how that compares to a GTX970, I tested KSP2 on a 970 and it was playable.  

According to UserBenchmark, mine is half again more power than the GTX 960. Maybe I will give it go this weekend.

You said 970. They say pretty much equal.

 

Edited March 7, 2023 by AuddieD2015

[Moons]

9 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

I think “solid enough for EA as part of a trend of continuous improvement” will do the trick.  

Expectations?  I think you mean “hopes”.  Those are on us to control.  Taking cinematics for gameplay is foolish.  The state of the EA shouldn’t have surprised anybody - we were give. Plenty of warning.

I dont think so - Expectations are set by Marketing and the Publisher - why should i control what i expect?

My expectations are set by a mix of marketing and mostly by the price. When i saw the price i was expecting a pretty stable EA release with lots of content already and a game nearly finished because thats what 50 USD suggests to me and what EA in general suggests. EA means setting a price for what you are selling in the time of purchase - if you set that price almost at full release price than thats what is to be expected since thats how EA works - you pay for the product given to you at the time of purchase with no rights to any further development patches etc.

 

For the same reasons games like Sons of the Forest - also EA - have way more positive feedback even with lots of bugs and lack of content - the game is beeing sold for 30 USD at the moment in EA.

7 minutes ago, AuddieD2015 said:

According to UserBenchmark, mine is half again more power than the GTX 960. Maybe I will give it go this weekend.

 

I doubt you will have much fun - you can probably try it but i doubt its fun with heavy FPS drops and everything on low when you could just play KSP1 with mods.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons

[AuddieD2015]

1 minute ago, Moons said:

I doubt you will have much fun - do you already own KSP1?

Yeah with both DLC. I love it. I can't fly anyway without blowing up, falling over, or running out of gas so KSP2 can't be much worse. If I can't fly in it either, I am already used to it.

 

[Moons]

3 minutes ago, AuddieD2015 said:

Yeah with both DLC. I love it. I can't fly anyway without blowing up, falling over, or running out of gas so KSP2 can't be much worse. If I can't fly in it either, I am already used to it.

 

I doubt you will have much fun with KSP2 with your system - you can probably try it but i doubt its fun with heavy FPS drops and everything on low when you could just play KSP1 with mods.

Watch out for the refund window. And i dont think i would upgrade for an EA game right now when you can simply buy better hardware cheaper when the game is actually way more developed. If you want a better PC for other games aswell thats a different story. But watch out - GPU and CPU need to make sense - for example buying a high end GPU for a low end CPU wont lead to good results because of bottlenecks.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Moons