Week One Adventures

[captainradish]

1 minute ago, BmB said:

I will say I'm fine with it being just sandbox mode with a limited selection of parts right now, it's the game breaking bugs that are the issue.

It's in a state that most developers would be embarrassed to show to a paying audience. This makes me suspicious there is more going on then we are led to believe and Take Two's track record is not stellar. I don't trust them as a publisher to look at more than the bottom line when it comes to this game. It's already probably over budget and certainly well behind where it originally was going to be.

[Wyleg]

6 minutes ago, captainradish said:

Early Access is supposed to be used when you have the entire skeleton of your game in place but want community input on the rest. That's what Workers and Resources Soviet Republic does, for example. It's supposed to be in an advanced Beta state. What we got was not that.

At the same time don't forget that first impressions are important. What we got was a very bad first impression of a game that was *technically* functional but certainly not very feature complete.

That is debatable. One can say that we somewhat have the buggy skeleton of the game on our hands.

Nothing really changes with the game released in Febuary in rough state or if it releases later in more polished state. But the benefit of having a game on our hands early is not a bad thing, I'm imagining player's feedback can only help to shape the further development into better state.

And today first impressions don't mean a thing. I can't decide what's shorter - the memory of a goldfish or the memory of the public. After half of a year when the game is polished positive feedback will eclipse negative and your average gamer will not remember the rough start at all. Polish that with some PR and shill on youtube and the problem is no more.

4 minutes ago, attosecond said:

From the link that @Wylegposted, words about EA directly from Steam:

"Early Access is a place for games that are in a playable alpha or beta state, are worth the current value of the playable build, and that you plan to continue to develop for release."

Is KSP2 worth $50 in its current state? Debatable. 

Is KSP2 in a playable alpha or beta state? Yes.

So no negatives on that, got it.

[captainradish]

2 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

That is debatable. One can say that we somewhat have the buggy skeleton of the game on our hands.

Nothing really changes with the game released in Febuary in rough state or if it releases later in more polished state. But the benefit of having a game on our hands early is not a bad thing, I'm imagining player's feedback can only help to shape the further development into better state.

And today first impressions don't mean a thing. I can't decide what's shorter - the memory of a goldfish or the memory of the public. After half of a year when the game is polished positive feedback will eclipse negative and your average gamer will not remember the rough start at all. Polish that with some PR and shill on youtube and the problem is no more.

And I sincerely hope you are right. I really want KSP2 to succeed. First impressions are important, though. It could sincerely mean a game that sputters and dies because the publisher wants to cut its losses and move on.

Edited March 10, 2023 by captainradish

[croviking]

19 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/earlyaccess

Great link!

I particularly love this part:
"Early Access is a tool to develop your game with the community by giving them access to your title before it is officially released. You should think hard about whether it is a fit for your game."

And in my opinion, I think it is the right fit and the right timing for this game, despite people being loud about wanting a finished product.

4 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

Nothing really changes with the game released in Febuary in rough state or if it releases later in more polished state. But the benefit of having a game on our hands early is not a bad thing, I'm imagining player's feedback can only help to shape the further development into better state.

Exactly!

Another benefit of Early access is that modders get to officially start digging deeply to do what they do best!

[captainradish]

I really really hope that you are exactly right. I have a feeling in a few years time we'll be comparing KSP2 to KSP1 unfavorably.

[BmB]

If the game was stable enough, there's loads of things you could give feedback on, like the new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials etc. But you can't, because none of it works.

11 minutes ago, croviking said:

Another benefit of Early access is that modders get to officially start digging deeply to do what they do best!

KSP2 has no modding support, which is worrying. The mods you see now are done using hacks originally developed for japanese porn games.

KSP1 had asset loading, plugins and data driven config files almost from the start.

[captainradish]

2 minutes ago, BmB said:

If the game was stable enough, there's loads of things you could give feedback on, like the new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials etc. But you can't, because none of it works.

KSP2 has no modding support, which is worrying. The mods you see now are done using hacks originally developed for japanese porn games.

KSP1 had asset loading, plugins and data driven config files almost from the start.

And don't forget Take Two have a rather famous dislike of mods.

Lets be honest here: the big reason KSP1 was so popular and has such long legs is the same reason Skyrim is still kicking: the modding support and community is tremendous. If there is no modding for KSP2 I have a feeling a big part of the community will disappear. I know I wouldn't bother with it.

Edited March 10, 2023 by captainradish

[The Aziz]

2 minutes ago, BmB said:

there's loads of things you could give feedback on, like the new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials etc. But you can't, because none of it works.

Why there's 15 pages of threads in suggestions subforum?

3 minutes ago, BmB said:

hacks originally developed for japanese porn games.

I see you have a lot of experience in that area.

[Wyleg]

3 minutes ago, BmB said:

If the game was stable enough, there's loads of things you could give feedback on, like the new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials etc. But you can't, because none of it works.

KSP2 has no modding support, which is worrying. The mods you see now are done using hacks originally developed for japanese porn games.

KSP1 had asset loading, plugins and data driven config files almost from the start.

Objection - things you named work in the game right now. You probably should stop posting false facts.

[croviking]

2 minutes ago, BmB said:

KSP2 has no modding support, which is worrying. The mods you see now are done using hacks originally developed for japanese porn games.

Modding support is on the roadmap, and today, whatever means are being used, people are learning, researching, gathering knowledge on things beneath the surface which will inevitably help them guide the developers on what they need to provide for modding, and what resources can be utilized to that end.

[captainradish]

4 minutes ago, croviking said:

Modding support is on the roadmap, and today, whatever means are being used, people are learning, researching, gathering knowledge on things beneath the surface which will inevitably help them guide the developers on what they need to provide for modding, and what resources can be utilized to that end.

Roadmaps are just all that much fluff until they actually appear in the game. I've seen enough of them that never materialize to not trust them at all.

[TickleMyMary]

22 minutes ago, croviking said:

Great link!

I particularly love this part:
"Early Access is a tool to develop your game with the community by giving them access to your title before it is officially released. You should think hard about whether it is a fit for your game."

I love this part even more and think it's applicable in this situation...

"6. Don't launch in Early Access without a playable game. If you have a tech demo, but not much gameplay yet, then it’s probably too early to launch in Early Access. If you are trying to test out a concept and haven't yet figured out what players are going to do in your game that makes it fun, then it's probably too early. You might want to start by giving out keys to select fans and getting input from a smaller and focused group before you release in Early Access. At a bare minimum, you will need a video trailer that shows gameplay. Even if you are asking for feedback that will impact gameplay, customers need something to start with in order to give informed feedback and suggestions."

I had the hype for this game because of what we were told before release in interviews... It was big talk that was unnecessary seeing as they knew the state the game was going to be released in.

I'm certainly in this for the long haul but it's valid that many are calling out a terrible release... It's barely playable at this stage.

[Lisias]

22 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

Objection - things you named work in the game right now. You probably should stop posting false facts.

Since I didn't see any update (yet) on Steam's News page for the game, neither found any new manifest on SteamDB, I'm assuming the patch was not issued yet, and so anything that wasn't working on Launch Day is still not working today.

So unless KSP2 has some kind of backdoor to inject fixes transparently (what, frankly, may render to PD a huge process on the civilised World, Europe in special), I don't see how you can make such affirmation.

Is your KSP2 today any different form the one that was launched last Feb 24? If yes, where did you got it? If no, how can you affirm that things are working now?

[croviking]

4 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Since I didn't see any update (yet) on Steam's News page for the game, neither found any new manifest on SteamDB, I'm assuming the patch was not issued yet, and so anything that wasn't working on Launch Day is still not working today.

So unless KSP2 has some kind of backdoor to inject fixes transparently (what, frankly, may render to PD a huge process on the civilised World, Europe in special), I don't see how you can make such affirmation.

Is your KSP2 today any different form the one that was launched last Feb 24? If yes, where did you got it? If no, how can you affirm that things are working now?

35 minutes ago, BmB said:

new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials etc. But you can't, because none of it works.

The things listed here worked from day 0.

Instead of spending hours digging what you think the reply was to, maybe spend a minute and check the previous message to see what the reply is actually to.

 

 

[Wyleg]

4 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Since I didn't see any update (yet) on Steam's News page for the game, neither found any new manifest on SteamDB, I'm assuming the patch was not issued yet, and so anything that wasn't working on Launch Day is still not working today.

So unless KSP2 has some kind of backdoor to inject fixes transparently (what, frankly, may render to PD a huge process on the civilised World, Europe in special), I don't see how you can make such affirmation.

Is your KSP2 today any different form the one that was launched last Feb 24? If yes, where did you got it? If no, how can you affirm that things are working now?

 New UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials work.

Last sentences were added by the author later and I haven't bothered to edit my message.

[razark]

Are you denying that "the new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials" exist?

[Delay]

43 minutes ago, TickleMyMary said:

 If you have a tech demo, but not much gameplay yet,

But they have plenty of gameplay. An entire KSP 0.17 release worth of gameplay!
With several improvements to UI, graphics and certain gameplay elements (Wings, for instance)!

[Lisias]

55 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

 New UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials work.

15 seconds on Google and I found this:

On this very Forum.

You see, if I would use your own criteria how I should address you from now?

Most users (granted, not all of "them" are really users) don't have a clue about what's happening and usually jump into conclusions- but this doesn't means they didn't found something wrong.

 

55 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

Last sentences were added by the author later and I haven't bothered to edit my message.

Frankly, sir, IMHO i think you should had bothered a bit more.

 

55 minutes ago, croviking said:

The things listed here worked from day 0

At least one of them, I just proved without doubt that nope, it didn't. 

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence. 

Carl Sagan is utterly missed nowadays, I think that KSP2 should create a Kerbal for him and use the character on tutorials about how to diagnose problems.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Lisias
My grammars are bad, but not THAT bad. The autocomplete must be trolling me.

[f!r3fOx_]

I think KSP 2 is a miscarriage. You have to ask yourself what has been developed in the last 4 years and what the result has been. This is a total fiasco. I bought it too and play it but I'm not having fun it's frustrating me. So I will mod my KSP 1 and play it again. Because that's fun to me and it's not a cracker like KSP 2. It's sad to see KSP 2 going down the drain.

You must have been aware of what happens when you hype a game in this state and then release it. They took the time to shoot lots of promotional videos to add to the game's addiction because they knew it was eagerly awaited. That's great. Really. So the expectations were correspondingly high. But then you get so disappointed?

The community certainly didn't expect to have all the features at launch. I didn't expect that either. I expected the foundation to work. But it doesn't do that in any way. There are problems everywhere. In the editor, when docking, when planning maneuvers, to name just a few. Aside from the performance. If the developers had actually played your game, they would have noticed the bugs. Especially since the original developers are said to have helped develop it. Apparently they didn't bother to compare the game with the first part.

There are some nice things going on in KSP right now. The graphic. The soundtrack. PA and AA on both screens. This helps. But I can also have that in KSP 1 with a MOD. There are a few pluses, but the negatives immensely outweigh them. It's really a shame about the work that has been done, but you can see it in the game "The Settlers 8" or "Company of Heros 3". Years of development for nothing.

I thought KSP2 would be different, but I was very wrong and was disappointed. And now the wait for an update that at least fixes some of the problems. Isn't it possible to release smaller updates so that we as a community can see that something is moving at all? Is it that hard?

KSP 2's strategy was completely wrong. The correct strategy would have been to release a working KSP 2 with all its beauty and sound that works. And the individual features could have been submitted as DLC. A lot of people would have paid for that. In the end, one would most likely have earned more than releasing an EA title with announced features that will be available when it comes out of EA. In fact, it is probably not yet possible to estimate the effort, how much time and money the promised features will cost. The question is rather whether one shouldn't rather let KSP 2 die in order not to burn even more money.

[Delay]

9 minutes ago, Lisias said:

At least one of them, I just proved without doubt that nope, it didn't.

Not to excuse any one failure, but given the apparent rarity of the event I don't think you can say that it doesn't "work", as in "completely non-functional".

A crash like this can be caused by any number of things.

5 minutes ago, f!r3fOx_ said:

This is a total fiasco. I bought it too and play it but I'm not having fun it's frustrating me. So I will mod my KSP 1 and play it again. Because that's fun to me and it's not a cracker like KSP 2. It's sad to see KSP 2 going down the drain.

This is the first version. The. First. Version.
The first. Of many.

Let's check how quickly the game will develop in the future before making such statements, yes?

[Bosun]

I feel like Early Access was a bit too early.  

The game did not appear to work, and it wasn't the community driving direction and final input - it was the community discovering core elements of non-functionality that made the gameplay impossible.  Basic gameplay is building a rocket and launching it - and in that regard there were several glaring and game-breaking issues that made gameplay impossible.  Not as a nuisance, but as a regalar occurrence.   If I was building a car, I take early access as being, as if I asked for community input on the color of the finish, the type of seats I go with, or the final shape and placement of the shifter knob for best ergonomic feel.   But in this example, we've handed users an early access car where the core engine under the hood isn't working, the wheels aren't always there, and sometimes it just turns off.  

That's not an early-access car - that's a car that hasn't been built to be drivable yet.  That is an Early-Investor stage.  At this stage, you're asking people to help fund the remainder of your development cycle until an Alpha release is ready - not asking them for final input and direction on an upcoming 1.0 release.  Early-Investor stages mean that those who sign on will get some incentives for being a part of the development team without being employees.  Things like exlusive titles or content, a significantly reduced price, free product merchandise, or other similar things. 

This is an important framing mistake.  Framed as early access, this game was not ready.  Framed as Early-Investor, with the understanding of the game still being deep within development stages, and asking the community to help continue development towards an alpha/beta release, it is ready.   More to the point, the community would have come with more realistic, optimistic expectations.  Early Access titles are generally expected to be further along in the process, than this title seemed to be.  I think the community was collectively shocked at many of the core functions of physics (like not having any re-entry heat/physics) or landing and just falling through the ground, were not possible at what should have been a highly advanced stage of development.   Imagine, if you will, an early-access First Person Shooter where the guns had not been modelled to reload yet, and the bullets passed right through targets.  I don't think anyone would argue it was at early-access quite yet.  It was an advanced concept, and could be at an early-investor level, as a proof of concept, but it is not Early Access for community feedback pending a full release.  That is reserved for, essentially, a Beta-build.  

Finally - I would not have released it as Investor Stage on Steam.  I would have waited to post to steam, until there was a 1.0 release.  Advertise the game among your core on the forums and offer codes to access the download from your PD account.  This would also have cut down the PR negativity.  

All in all - I remain optimistic for the game, and the developers are working very hard, but I am once again facepalmed by the choices of the marketing teams and producer, as yet another game fails to properly advertise itself to the stage of it's development.  These types of mistakes happen - but at the frequency they happen now, its disheartening to look at these examples and know that people with years of experience and marketing expertise are still making very, very rookie mistakes.  

Framing is part of managing expectations and is a very basic, very fundamental part of a 'sell.'  Why 'Framing' is included in the Part Manager of the VAB is beyond me, because it isn't rocket science.   

Edited March 10, 2023 by Bosun

[Lisias]

1 minute ago, Delay said:

A crash like this can be caused by any number of things.

And THIS  is the problem! So many things being able to cause a crash, instead of a few ones that passed trough by mistake.

You see, you are not helping your case at all...

[Delay]

Just now, Lisias said:

You see, you are not helping your case at all...

Are you not going to acknowledge the first part of that response where I addressed the frequency of the event?

This was to suggest that the problem is more specific than "stuff broke". There are so many components, both in and outside the game, that can randomly cause crashes. A game (any game) that runs fine on one machine may completely refuse to work on another.

Because of this, I refused to assign a potential culprit and left things at that. I noted it more as a curious observation than a dramatic point of failure. You should, too.

[Scarecrow71]

1 hour ago, BmB said:

If the game was stable enough, there's loads of things you could give feedback on, like the new UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials etc. But you can't, because none of it works.

 

59 minutes ago, Wyleg said:

New UI, the new parts, the music, the tutorials work.

You are both correct here.  These things both work and have bugs.  There are things about them that work brilliantly, and there are things about them that don't work at all.  To say that they either don't work OR that they work - 100% of the time in either case - is wrong.

We all need to remember that one user's experience in the game is not necessarily going to be the same experience someone else has.  What you see and have happen may very well not be what the next person sees and has happen.  Heck, I've still yet to experience several of the major bugs that seem to be plaguing a decent portion of the community (an example is the KSC following people into space; another would be falling through planets/celestial bodies).  Your mileage WILL vary.  Not may, not might - WILL.  And we all have to remember - starting with myself at times - that we aren't all having the same experience or playing the game in the same way.  And if it's broken for you because of what you want to do, it may not be broken for someone else because they may NOT be doing what you want to do.

With that said, the game IS playable.  You can absolutely build ships, both manned and unmanned.  You can launch those ships into orbit.  You can get to and land on other bodies (Mun, Minmus, and Duna seem to be the really popular ones right now).  You can build and fly planes around the KSC.  So the game is definitely playable.  It isn't in the greatest shape, and there are things that need to be fixed.  Some of them need to be fixed pronto.  But the game does work, and you can play it.  If it isn't what you want it to be right now, there is nothing stopping you from simply not playing it until it does become what you want.

[Lisias]

2 hours ago, Delay said:

Are you not going to acknowledge the first part of that response where I addressed the frequency of the event?

No. There's no point on jumping subjects at your will to avoid addressing the ones we already have at hands.

Statistics can deeply hurt you in pretty uncomfortable places if you don't know how to use it. A problem that affects 1 in 200 users will render you 125 angry users when 25000 people buy your product.

Prolonging any kind of discussion while ignoring this is pointless. 

Edited March 10, 2023 by Lisias
Damn. Now is my math?