Release KSP2 Release Notes - Update v0.1.1.0

[runner78]

11 hours ago, Elfmaze said:

What goes into the decision to stay with unity over unreal? 

11 hours ago, Elfmaze said:

I thought people used to say Unity was part of the limiting factor in the first game. Granted I know nothing about unity. But I assume it's been developing as fast as unreal on a parallel path.  Hopefully the new engine version doesn't have the same limitations.  

One has to take into account that Unity is quite advanced in development since the beginning of KSP1. Some limitations do not exist anymore, and some limitations also arise from the inexperience of the developers.
Unreal, however, is starting to get the problems unity used to have with its easy accessibility: many games with the same look. I just recently saw a video of an Unreal developer ranting about Unreal. More and more bad Unreal games are coming out. While it's easy to make "good-looking games" with unreal 5, that doesn't mean that this only applies to the trailers and that the game is then just bad or boring. he also ranting that unreal is becoming more and more complex and complicated with every update. I tried Unreal 5 times, apart from the huge installation size, between 40 and 110 GB depending on the components, I felt more comfortable with Unity.

[uglyduckling81]

On 3/17/2023 at 11:43 AM, Kerbart said:

Are you volunteering to finance said two years of development?

"Would be nice" and "who bankrolls that" tend to go hand in hand.

?

Take Two bankroll it. They are a mega Publisher that owns the KSP IP and the dev team making KSP2.

Who else would fund it?

This weird greedy cash grab early access thing has no place with a major publisher. It's pretty much the entire point of having a publisher.

On 3/17/2023 at 10:57 AM, gussi111 said:

Did you forget that this is EA?

Nearly half of these seem to have been there before the patch came.

EA isn't some cover all for a excrementsty half baked tech demo parading as a game.

[Kerbart]

3 minutes ago, uglyduckling81 said:

Take Two bankroll it. They are a mega Publisher that owns the KSP IP and the dev team making KSP2.
Who else would fund it?

That's a good question, and the answer, likely, is: no one. Let that sink in for a second.

3 minutes ago, uglyduckling81 said:

This weird greedy cash grab early access thing has no place with a major publisher. It's pretty much the entire point of having a publisher.
EA isn't some cover all for a excrementsty half baked tech demo parading as a game.

Paying salaries, renting a building for three years. When you're leaking money like diarrhea something has to happen, this is not a COD title that is supposed to rake in tens of millions in the first week.  We'll never know what went on exactly but by the looks of it, the original plan was that the game would have been released by now, and the financing of it was likely modeled on that date.

Pumping money from profitable parts to loss giving projects is a great way to bankrupt any company which is why it's generally not done. The rational solution is to just shut the project down and take the losses. Between that and offering IG the chance to keep the project going while partly financing the adventure with EA revenue, I'll take the EA. It's also a way to speed up delivery. Shareholders may be swayed to keep the project under wraps for another two years while the developers decide to backtrack certain decisions to make the result even better. I suspect this happened with the project a couple of times, and there's good things and bad things about that. Now they're forced to commit themselves, and that has plusses (we get to see a game) and minuses (as we're very aware) to that, too. But a year from now it's very likely that EA is far better than waiting another two years for a full release, painful as the next six months may be (after that we should be in a good spot and it will get only better from there on).

[Jeq]

On 3/16/2023 at 7:08 PM, DeltaDizzy said:

So the "mag boots" werent a feature? huh...

I think they should make it back, or at least give kerbals ability to grab pbjects and climb them at low gravity. Not sure of it would be important but it could be fun at some scenarios. 

[gussi111]

On 3/20/2023 at 2:21 PM, uglyduckling81 said:

EA isn't some cover all for a excrementsty half baked tech demo parading as a game.

Once again it's EA, not a finished game, also far from a tech demo.

Edited March 21, 2023 by gussi111

[TomKerbal]

5 hours ago, Jeq said:

I think they should make it back, or at least give kerbals ability to grab pbjects and climb them at low gravity. Not sure of it would be important but it could be fun at some scenarios. 

So they really removed one of the best new features, the magnetic boots ???? Never!!!

[t_v]

4 hours ago, TomKerbal said:

So they really removed one of the best new features, the magnetic boots ???? Never!!!

The magnetic boots are still there, there was a bug where kerbals would stick to everything (rocks, trees, buildings), and now they just stick to craft

[dragonart777]

is there word on next update. ?  

[The Aziz]

"in few weeks"