how long do you think it will be between roadmap updates?

[jastrone]

personally i think it will be about one or two months. i know this is a bit optimistic but i know some work has already been done in each update. we have for example already been shown many planets from other solar systems and colony parts so they arent completely unfinished

Edited April 3, 2023 by jastrone
mixed 1 and two

[Strawberry]

I dont think the game will be close to "fully" optimized before science, but I do think most of the bugs will be fixed before science. A lot of people have forgotten about ksp2 and I feel like science will be the thing that draws many peoples eyes back, so theyll want to make sure they get the second showing well off. Not many people are pushing for science to be released urgently so they have time on there hands right now.

[Dantheollie]

Man, if they took a whole year in-between roadmap updates, the community would riot  

I doubt they'd take more than 6 months per roadmap update, and I'd wager a little less on those certain updates that don't seem intense. Multiplayer could take a long time, but adding 1-2 star systems shouldn't

Edited April 4, 2023 by Dantheollie
Typo!

[Little 908]

The already have most of the interstellar done, they have a bunch of colony parts, they have  a rough multiplayer working, all except for science... weird since its the next update, but maybe they just don't wanna spoil it. 3 Months max I would say between each update.

[jastrone]

4 hours ago, Dantheollie said:

Multiplayer could take a long time, but adding 1-2 star systems shouldn't

i think it is pretty much the opposite, we have already been shown multiplayer and i only think they wait with releasing it because it needs to work with colonies and science. and the only reason star systems will take a short amount of time is because they have already been worked on. we have seen a few planets but i think they are all from the same system. i doo think it will take a long time because i dont think they have decided what all planets should be and making the planets and the textures could take some time 

4 hours ago, Little 908 said:

most of the interstellar done, they have a bunch of colony parts, they have  a rough multiplayer working, all except for science...

i guess it is that its because you cant sow a little bit about how science works without spoiling the entire thing. we have seen a few colony parts but we have no idea how they work or if that is all of the parts. and i would say that they arent functional yet and that is what will be added in the update.  multiplayer really cant be spoled, we know we play with other players and that is about everything important. and i dont think they have finished all solar systems i just think we have been shown planets from one system.  with science they either show us the tech tree and how things are unlocked or how science is gathered. it is also kind of a ui thing and we havent really been shown any of the building uis at all so its possible they where mostly placeholder when we stil had a bunch of images from ksp2 being released.

[didkodidko]

I don't believe private division. There is more than a month since release and there is no info for the second patch. I doubt that roadmap updates will be in less than 6 months in between.

 

We got broken modded with worse physics and some eyecandy coated KSP1 instead of true stellar physics sim.

I'm playing KSP1 until physics engine is changed for good.

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by didkodidko

[Observe]

When development is not doing well, as is and has been clearly the case with KSP2, six months is not a very long time. The next roadmap step (Science) can probably be released in spite of a very buggy foundation, so that could come fairly soon (within 3 months), with the same EA excuse for it not working or working poorly.

If they want to heap bugs upon more bugs, before ironing out some serious underlying problems with their code, I think they could come out with a malfunctioning Colonies implementation within six months.

For Interstellar, I'd give that six months to one year before we see it. Exploration shouldn't be too big of a deal as such. We may see it in nine months. Probably the biggest challenge here, is adding enough stuff to make exploring interesting.

Multiplayer is a pipe dream for this game. I'm guessing we will never see it, or if we do, it'll be some kind of Multiplayer light, that does little other than make everything worse.

So, I expect the game to limp past the one year mark, with a mostly crippled roadmap in place, while still struggling to compete with KSP1.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Observe

[zeekzeek22]

I'll echo the sentiment that all the features exist in vaguely playable states...at least they've said as much. It's just a matter of really fixing the core system pretty well. Once that's done, I feel like the time between roadmap updates will be 40% bugfixing the new features, 40% prepping the next update, and 20% continued work on core optimization like the new terrain system. I'd guess about halfway between patch 2 and 3 they'll really rev up on the science update, and patch 4, if it happens before science, will only be minor fixes.

[Alexoff]

11 hours ago, jastrone said:

we have already been shown multiplayer

Wow! And where did you see the multiplayer? And can I see?

[jastrone]

57 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

And where did you see the multiplayer? And can I see?

i think its on the forum but i know that its on steam if you go to ksp2 store page and scroll down to recent events and announcements and click one the one that says: ask me a few more things. its just two pictures but now  we know its working and that you can collide with eachoter

[Alexoff]

22 minutes ago, jastrone said:

i think its on the forum but i know that its on steam if you go to ksp2 store page and scroll down to recent events and announcements and click one the one that says: ask me a few more things. its just two pictures but now  we know its working and that you can collide with eachoter

Wow, two pictures and a lot of words, everything is probably ready for release! True, I still did not understand what kind of pictures we are talking about and what is so multiplayer on them.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Alexoff

[Strawberry]

13 hours ago, jastrone said:

i think it is pretty much the opposite, we have already been shown multiplayer and i only think they wait with releasing it because it needs to work with colonies and science. and the only reason star systems will take a short amount of time is because they have already been worked on. we have seen a few planets but i think they are all from the same system. i doo think it will take a long time because i dont think they have decided what all planets should be and making the planets and the textures could take some time 

The main hurdle for ksp2 seems to be on the technical side. Everything we've seen on the artistic side has been great, and everything we've seen has been finished and polished. Considering the fact that during the star theory merger, most of the engineers were fired (we know only 4 remained from star theory), while most of the artistic team was left in tact it makes sense. Judging by the patch we got the current engineering team seems competent (though we'll know more with next patch which will come out next week), but while I think they got a phase 1 stage working for a lot of the main concepts, for more of the technically involved concepts like resources and colonies theyre in a weak state. Personally Im not worried about planets at all because as previously mentioned the art side of ksp2 is pretty good and planets with the exception of things like Rask and Rusk tend to be mostly art heavy.

[RocketRockington]

45 minutes ago, Strawberry said:

Considering the fact that during the star theory merger, most of the engineers were fired (we know only 4 remained from star theory), while most of the artistic team was left in tact it makes sense.

They weren't fired, they stayed with star theory which shut down after they couldn't find another project.  Can't fire someone you never actually hired.  Maybe they didn't get an offer to come over, or maybe they refused because they knew what working with Intercepts poached management team was like.

Aso I'd say the problem with intercept is primarily really bad project management, as demonstrated by their constantly missed schedule and need to launch an alpha game to EA,  more so than just technical challenges.  Building KSP2 was always going to be more demanding of engineering than art. Thats obvious from day 1.  Especially if you want to add multiplayer.

  The fact that they kept their art team and didn't keep or quickly get a new engineering team is more an example of poor planning, poor understand of the scope of the tasks ahead, poor ability to hire, and/or poor prioritization.

 

[Alexoff]

The planets in KSP2 differ little from the planets in KSP1. In Kopernicus, you can make planets pretty quickly if you have a height map and a surface texture on hand. Over the years of development, artists could make many hundreds and thousands of planets. But they would be rather boring and monotonous, if you do not add any interactive objects to them. Well, in life, for example, the satellites of the giant planets are rather boring and monotonous round pieces of stone.

[Strawberry]

16 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

or maybe they refused because they knew what working with Intercepts poached management team was like.

The fact that 2/3s of them left makes me feel like this wasn't the case for most of them. I highly doubt that the decision to let them go was the star theory teams (aka Nate and the crew) call, afterall they've been working with them on the floor of ages and presumably bonded. Id blame the decision on take two, I dont know what criteria they made the decision off of (my best bet is they viewed the star theory engineering team as underqualified). From what we know Id blame this letgo as the biggest reason why KSP2 is like this, needing to make a new engineering team essentially from scratch in a highly technically involved game is going to lead to massive setbacks.

[Chilkoot]

1 hour ago, Alexoff said:

Well, in life, for example, the satellites of the giant planets are rather boring and monotonous round pieces of stone.

Many people romantically dream of traveling to far-off planets thanks in part to sci-fi making them look so appealing.  Even freezing, desolate, dark Mars, people are lining up, willing to sell their homes and everything they have to travel there and colonize.

I was the same:  absolutely enamored with the thought of space travel until I got my hands on a good "walk on Mars" VR experience.  It uses photogrammetry and real footage to recreate a patch of the surface for you to explore, with a fully rendered sky, horizon, etc.

Let me just say that the moment I put on that headset and looked out over the vast, yawning lifeless void that is the surface of Mars I realized how foolish I was to romanticize a trip like this.  There is nothing - absolutely nothing - to break the endless sea of dust and rock.  No cove of shelter or respite, just the emptiness.  I can see the appeal for a geologist or perhaps an exobiologist, but otherwise, it's an unwelcoming, barren hellscape.

It's a bit like that old saying "never meet your childhood heroes" (which I also had the chance to do).  Dreams can be shattered in an instant when you are exposed to the reality behind them.  My interest in other *lifeless planets is purely scientific now and decidedly unemotional.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Chilkoot

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

To simplify, I think they are going to simply do the majority of the Kraken slaying first to make the game more playable, then focus on re-entry heating add-ons, then following the road-map while simply polishing any bugs encountered in between. Bug fixing's a life-long thing so it will end when the development of the game ends, but the super-super-super high importance bug problem should be fixed before the Science add-on hits.  Although i personally believe bug fixes will be in weeks, the roadmap may be months so i think 4 months is an appropriate approximation. (lots of "a's" there)

1 hour ago, Alexoff said:

 Well, in life, for example, the satellites of the giant planets are rather boring and monotonous round pieces of stone.

As a real astronaut that has been to zero moons, and zero planets (yep, i haven't even visited Earth yet), i can confirm that this statement is false.

Edited April 4, 2023 by DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE

[Alexoff]

1 hour ago, Chilkoot said:

No cove of shelter or respite, just the emptiness.  I can see the appeal for a geologist or perhaps an exobiologist, but otherwise, it's an unwelcoming, barren hellscape.

But we're talking about a computer game where the developer's job is to entertain us. There is an empty space in the game, so let's fill it! To fill the planets, colonies were invented. They were impressive in the 2019 trailer. It must be that initially the KSP was supposed to turn into Surviving Dune after some time. But now the developers have assessed their strength and the colonies seem to be about the same as what YouTube bloggers have been doing for a very long time. At least that's how I understood Nate's words. But even these small colonies are very far away, I doubt that this year we will see something definite.

[Little 908]

Actually, if we do a simple calculation:

Say if we get a patch every three weeks, and taking that every three months we get a major update, 4 weeks is around a month (28 days) We will get a roadmap update every 3-ish patch's, meaning the science update, if everything before this is true, will be in the place of patch 3 or 4.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Little 908

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

On 4/4/2023 at 3:56 AM, Dantheollie said:

if they took a whole year in-between roadmap updates, the community would riot

Umm... There are about 600 people still playing.

Pretty small riot 

[stephensmat]

41 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Umm... There are about 600 people still playing.

Pretty small riot 

Yeah, but that number will likely jump with each update. I know science mode will get me back into the game full time.

Given how much they're putting into the patches, I'd estimate the time between Roadmap Updates isn't measured in time, but in patches. We know the 'foundations' are done. The point of EA was to tweak the 'Seasons'.  I can't imagine that takes a year. Those 600 players are full time beta-testers and bug hunters; plus the regular staff. And if I'm right about the players returning with each new Update, then the progress accelerates, with additional 'testers' at every stage.

[Ferio]

2 months... people are positive here. I sure hope you are right, but things are really complex, unless they already have a "beta" version of what is said, I doubt the roadmap appears in 2 months intervals. To grow the player base, to keep players and have a steady income from sales,  they have to step up their game and come with massive improvements, content & graphics in a short time period, next to bug/performance fixes.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Ferio

[RocketRockington]

11 hours ago, Little 908 said:

Actually, if we do a simple calculation:

Say if we get a patch every three weeks, and taking that every three months we get a major update, 4 weeks is around a month (28 days) We will get a roadmap update every 3-ish patch's, meaning the science update, if everything before this is true, will be in the place of patch 3 or 4.

3 months is 13 weeks.  That's 4 patches if they were every 3 weeks.. which, since it seems unlikely there will be a patch tomorrow as nothing has been said, is also not something that should be assumed.

Also the size of each feature is not the same.  People assuming that if Science takes 3 months, multiplayer will take 3 months are not being rational.  We don't know how much of each is already done and the one thing we can be very sure of is that Intercept games doesn't know how to schedule or forecast well at all, considering all the massive delays and the lackluster launch

Edited April 5, 2023 by RocketRockington

[Little 908]

52 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

3 months is 13 weeks.  That's 4 patches if they were every 3 weeks.. which, since it seems unlikely there will be a patch tomorrow as nothing has been said, is also not something that should be assumed.

Also the size of each feature is not the same.  People assuming that if Science takes 3 months, multiplayer will take 3 months are not being rational.  We don't know how much of each is already done and the one thing we can be very sure of is that Intercept games doesn't know how to schedule or forecast well at all, considering all the massive delays and the lackluster launch

It’s not perfect, but It’s what I would expect 

They say they have finished the “cherry picking” so 

On 3/31/2023 at 11:55 AM, Nate Simpson said:

We’ve just about wrapped up the cherry picking process and can say with confidence that it’ll be out sometime in the next two weeks.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Little 908

[Dantheollie]

4 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Pretty small riot 

haha   As with most things, a phantom crowd would appear to complain, for the sake of complainin'