My Response To KSP2 Critics

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

Hello everyone. After being away for 3 years, i am completely shocked at how mixed the reviews are for KSP2. Too often do i hear about performance and bug issues, too often do i hear "Parallax 2.0 is better than KSP2", and too often do i hear people whining, complaining, and glooming over an amazing game in early access.

Wake up people, Its EARLY ACCESS!

I think some people have forgotten what Early Access is.

"Early access, also known as alpha access, alpha founding, paid alpha, or game preview, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug the game, provide feedback and suggestions, may have access to special materials in the game. The early-access approach is a common way to obtain funding for indie games, and may also be used along with other funding mechanisms, including crowdfunding. Many crowdfunding projects promise to offer access to alpha and/or beta versions of the game as development progresses; however, unlike some of these projects which solicit funds but do not yet have a playable game, all early access games offer an immediately playable version of the unfinished game to players." - Wikipedia

We all know KSP2 got us all hyped at some point or another. I remember my first stroke with KSP2 was the most blind ever. On August 20th, in the middle of the night, only a few hours after the KSP2 first cinematic trailer released, i curiously typed up KSP2, looking to get a good laugh at some clickbait. When i saw the trailer, all i can say is that it touched me so hard, it teared me up. I watched it about 50 more times that night. Later on, the community was the biggest hype train i've ever boarded upon. And it stayed like this for more than 3 years. Sure we had our ups and downs. You do not want to know how many people who were willing to boycott the KSP2 game just for the "procedural wing" feature. Well guess what? That was one of the first things to be added. Over time, as new episodes were released from the Kerbal Space Program channel, and as Nate Simpson and other dev. members shared more information, boy we were hyped as ever. That's all i remember though... because I left the forum. Little did i know that people would tear the game apart for Performance requirements and bugs, both things that come with most beta to early access games. What do you think of when you hear the word "Version 1.0"? i can tell you, Early Access is not one of them. Haven't we not realized this is a work in process? Have we not realized this is an investment to the future of the KSP Franchise. The some of the same people who i saw worshipping KSP1 are now brutalizing the successor. So what if only 3% of steam users meet recommended requirements? Do we not realize we have in our hands what is possibly the most expansive game ever? This is literally Minecraft 2.0 that we have here.  Of course it's going to be hefty on the CPU/GPU! And better part is, the developers are already hard at work at optimizing this. I guess people are frightened that the KSP2 devs are going to turn into the mindset of Nintendo, who sells half completed games that fully release... and are still very bad. Private Division and the devs are different. These are run by individuals who are known and trusted by the community. Many people are from the community itself and got fortunate with real promotions with joining the KSP2 development team. Heck, i even think i once got a promotional offer (although i may be wrong on this). The bugs are minor; we shouldn't be busting our heads over it. People say that Parallax 2.0 is better than KSP2. Well, if KSP2 is already competitive in early access, imagine what it will be like in a completed state! If KSP1 was as good as KSP2 is right now, there would be little need for Parallax as it would look the same. Plus, its convenient not to downlad external mods. With 281 bugs smashed in the last patch, there will be much more bug smashing and squishing to come. For KSP2 to be a success, it needs to reinforce the one thing that kept KSP1 together. That is, community feedback. This is exactly why early access is surprisingly one of the best things to happen to KSP2. Unless, of course, you're willing to wait until 2025 for perhaps almost a full game. The community feedback will help prioritize fixing the game internally before we go on massive ambitions, such as colonies, interstellar travel, and automatic trade routes (which totally caught me off guard). I think bringing the game down with criticism is unnecessary. We are always going to move on. What we made of a big stink like with "procedural wings" will be the next fresh breeze. This game is going to get better! If KSP1 did it good, KSP2 can do it better! Hopefully we can all look back and have a good chuckle on this matter but whatever happens in the end, all i know is:

"When i purchase the game, Nate Simpsons definitely got my 50 dollars."

 

Let me know what you guys think.

37 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

Hello everyone. After being away for 3 years, i am completely shocked at how mixed the reviews are for KSP2. Too often do i hear about performance and bug issues, too often do i hear "Parallax 2.0 is better than KSP2", and too often do i hear people whining, complaining, and glooming over an amazing game in early access.

Wake up people, Its EARLY ACCESS!

I think some people have forgotten what Early Access is.

"Early access, also known as alpha access, alpha founding, paid alpha, or game preview, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug the game, provide feedback and suggestions, may have access to special materials in the game. The early-access approach is a common way to obtain funding for indie games, and may also be used along with other funding mechanisms, including crowdfunding. Many crowdfunding projects promise to offer access to alpha and/or beta versions of the game as development progresses; however, unlike some of these projects which solicit funds but do not yet have a playable game, all early access games offer an immediately playable version of the unfinished game to players." - Wikipedia

We all know KSP2 got us all hyped at some point or another. I remember my first stroke with KSP2 was the most blind ever. On August 20th, in the middle of the night, only a few hours after the KSP2 first cinematic trailer released, i curiously typed up KSP2, looking to get a good laugh at some clickbait. When i saw the trailer, all i can say is that it touched me so hard, it teared me up. I watched it about 50 more times that night. Later on, the community was the biggest hype train i've ever boarded upon. And it stayed like this for more than 3 years. Sure we had our ups and downs. You do not want to know how many people who were willing to boycott the KSP2 game just for the "procedural wing" feature. Well guess what? That was one of the first things to be added. Over time, as new episodes were released from the Kerbal Space Program channel, and as Nate Simpson and other dev. members shared more information, boy we were hyped as ever. That's all i remember though... because I left the forum. Little did i know that people would tear the game apart for Performance requirements and bugs, both things that come with most beta to early access games. What do you think of when you hear the word "Version 1.0"? i can tell you, Early Access is not one of them. Haven't we not realized this is a work in process? Have we not realized this is an investment to the future of the KSP Franchise. The some of the same people who i saw worshipping KSP1 are now brutalizing the successor. So what if only 3% of steam users meet recommended requirements? Do we not realize we have in our hands what is possibly the most expansive game ever? This is literally Minecraft 2.0 that we have here.  Of course it's going to be hefty on the CPU/GPU! And better part is, the developers are already hard at work at optimizing this. I guess people are frightened that the KSP2 devs are going to turn into the mindset of Nintendo, who sells half completed games that fully release... and are still very bad. Private Division and the devs are different. These are run by individuals who are known and trusted by the community. Many people are from the community itself and got fortunate with real promotions with joining the KSP2 development team. Heck, i even think i once got a promotional offer (although i may be wrong on this). The bugs are minor; we shouldn't be busting our heads over it. with 281 bugs smashed in the last patch, there will be much more bug smashing and squishing to come. For KSP2 to be a success, it needs to reinforce the one thing that kept KSP1 together. That is, community feedback. This is exactly why early access is surprisingly one of the best things to happen to KSP2. Unless, of course, you're willing to wait until 2025 for perhaps almost a full game. The community feedback will help prioritize fixing the game internally before we go on massive ambitions, such as colonies, interstellar travel, and automatic trade routes (which totally caught me off guard). I think bringing the game down with criticism is unnecessary. We are always going to move on. What we made of a big stink like with "procedural wings" will be the next fresh breeze. This game is going to get better! If KSP1 did it good, KSP2 can do it better! Hopefully we can all look back and have a good chuckle on this matter but whatever happens in the end, all i know is:

"When i purchase the game, Nate Simpsons definitely got my 50 dollars."

 

Let me know what you guys think.

i might edit this more so it carries more weight.

Edited April 4, 2023 by DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE
adding more persuasive connotation

[Tazooka]

I agree that this game is early access, the devs are working hard and we should try to remain positive/optimistic. But people were disappointed.

Based on this poll I submitted, people are excited and optimistic, but disappointed:

I personally am very disappointed. KSP 2's release was a disaster, almost as bad as No Man's Sky (a lot of promised stuff was not implemented or delayed)

I'm glad the devs are communicating, but the amount of bugs and issues the game still has isn't right. No company big or small should be allowed to release a game in this state. I'm unhappy but I hopeful that the future of KSP 2 is bright and happy.

But for now, I'm disappointed and bored

Edited April 4, 2023 by Tazooka
Added my opinion

[The Aziz]

21 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

So what if only 3% of steam users meet recommended requirements?

Then only 3% can play it. Not a good sign if you're planning to sell a product, even if it's unifinished.

25 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

Of course it's going to be hefty on the CPU/GPU!

There are better looking games with much more detailed terrain that are easier on my GPU than KSP2.

28 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

The bugs are minor; we shouldn't be busting our heads over it

If [a bug] is effectively preventing me from doing [a thing] no matter what I try, then it's not minor.

Look, I bought it day 1 and spent over 50 hours on it. But that was about 25 hours in each version, after which I dropped it for another couple of weeks, unable to deal with the game any longer. I'm having a blast but I'd have even better blast if I didn't have to revert every 5 seconds because the game did something weird. I'm one of the patientest men you can find, but this game is testing me very hard. If next update arrives before 19th, I'm probably going to check it, play around and drop again (this time because I'll have a different thing to do for at least a month).

35 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

When i purchase the game, Nate Simpsons definitely got my 50 dollars

Nah, he got his salary. Take2 got your 50 dollars.

[TickleMyMary]

What a terrible opinion... People are reviewing the game as they are because that is what they have to review and that is EXACTLY in line with the review guidelines for reviewing products in EA (on Steam in particular)... See here for the official guidelines regarding EA releases as wiki is not a source, for anything; Early Access (Steamworks Documentation) (steamgames.com)

All you are doing here is the exact thing you're trying to blame other people for... You're trying to turn valid criticism into some sort of confusion on their part and that any possible issues that can be found are most certainly down to the CONSUMER over the DEVELOPER. This is not the case.

I enjoy the game, the bugs are hella annoying but I can still gleam a slither of enjoyment from it in its current form... That doesn't mean I wont call out the terribly handled release and update schedule when I feel it is required. Quite a lot of the bugs we still see to this day where there at the 'Influencer' event held a few weeks before release... On a build that was already a few weeks old at that stage... I feel any criticism has been earned and any bad reviews given are subject to change as the game develops, blaming people for having an opinion of what they currently have in their hands is nonsensical... Just as somebody creating a post deriding "blind devotion" in regards to any particular user screaming "It's Early Access!" would be as equally nonsensical.

I think it's quite possible to both love AND hate the game at the same time... Because, I do.

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

Quote

Then only 3% can play it. Not a good sign if you're planning to sell a product, even if it's unifinished.

You forgot the Early Access part. The finished game will look nothing like the buggy mess we have now. We are criticizing a game that hasn't been given a fair chance. Its still in developement. Also, the 3% margin is for recommended usage. you can technically get away with going below the margin and hopefully that won't be an issue in the future.

Spoiler

There are better looking games with much more detailed terrain that are easier on my GPU than KSP2.

I can tell you, KSP2 has more Polygons than any makeshift game with supposed "better terrain quality". Like i said, We shouldn't be criticizing the game yet. Its too early. Yet we still do so anyway, which dissapoints me.

7 minutes ago, TickleMyMary said:

All you are doing here is the exact thing you're trying to blame other people for... You're trying to turn valid criticism into some sort of confusion on their part and that any possible issues that can be found are most certainly down to the CONSUMER over the DEVELOPER. This is not the case.

Ummm... that's not what i intended..? We cannot be criticizing a game that has yet to fruition

Im not saying that we cannot be worried or skeptical, but that's not the vibe i've been getting from this community. The game is not that bad. and its going to get much better! i give it maybe a year or two and this discussion will age very poorly due to how great this game will become

7 minutes ago, TickleMyMary said:

What a terrible opinion... People are reviewing the game as they are because that is what they have to review and that is EXACTLY in line with the review guidelines for reviewing products in EA (on Steam in particular)... See here for the official guidelines regarding EA releases as wiki is not a source, for anything; Early Access (Steamworks Documentation) (steamgames.com)

These are "official" guidelines coming from a (.com) URL, instead of an (.org). Your defending a place trying to take your money over an organization trying to explain things. Also, that was my opinion, it doesn't make it terrible.

After all, its not like im saying your opinion is terrible. We just have different slices of the pie.

Edited April 4, 2023 by DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE

[Tazooka]

2 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

We shouldn't be criticizing the game yet. Its too early. Yet we still do so anyway, which dissapoints me.

2 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

We cannot be criticizing a game that has yet to fruition

I disagree completely.  Early access is also where people can state their concerns and opinions. Just because it's new doesn't mean it cannot be criticized.

4 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

I can tell you, KSP2 has more Polygons than any makeshift game with supposed "better terrain quality". 

This is also part of why the game is running poorly, its unoptimized.

More polygons does not equal better

5 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

The finished game will look nothing like the buggy mess we have now.

I agree and I'm glad you agree its a buggy mess

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

Just now, Tazooka said:

I disagree completely.  Early access is also where people can state their concerns and opinions. Just because it's new doesn't mean it cannot be criticized.

There's a difference between constructive criticism and  deeming the game "an overall dissapointment"

14 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Nah, he got his salary. Take2 got your 50 dollars.

Who, in turn, uses it to pay for the salaries of the hard-working developers.

[Tazooka]

Just now, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

There's a difference between constructive criticism and  deeming the game "an overall dissapointment"

For sure, I agree. But if people are  "deeming the game "an overall dissapointment"" its for a reason. It'd be nice to know what it is exactly, but if that's how they feel we shouldn't dismiss it

Spoiler

I try to be as helpful as possible and I personally have contributed to many bug reports.
In my Steam review I mentioned why I don't recommend the game.

[The Aziz]

10 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

I can tell you, KSP2 has more Polygons than any makeshift game with supposed "better terrain quality".

In total, it may have. But when I'm on the launchpad, seeing only few miles of ground in front of me, definitely not.

12 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

Like i said, We shouldn't be criticizing the game yet.

It's available to the public, which means I can, and will, criticize it. "Too early" ended at 2:59PM CET on February 24th.

That said, I can include some praise for improvements because there are plenty, but that and criticism are not mutually exclusive.

Take off your rose colored glasses.

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

2 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Take off your rose colored glasses.

What is that supposed to mean?

3 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

It's available to the public, which means I can, and will, criticize it. "Too early" ended at 2:59PM CET on February 24th.

"Too Early" ends when the developers claims its end. Especially since it still says "Early Access". Your opinion is also an unconfirmed source as well. No offense

[Tazooka]

4 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

7 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Take off your rose colored glasses.

What is that supposed to mean?

It means "to see things as better than they really are" or "to see only the positives in a situation (and therefore in a way that is unrealistic)"

[PDCWolf]

"Early Access" is not a free pass to publish whatever.

1. Early Access is for games that are still in the oven, yes, but when they already propose a solid foundation to build upon, which KSP2 fails at due to using broken unity systems and KSP1 leftovers.
2. Bugs on EA are expected of the features that are added as a result of laid plans or community input. Foundational bugs like KSP2 has point to the game being raw, and being forced into EA. See point 1.
3. KSP2 fails to comply with basic EA features you describe: Private bugtracking means the community has no input besides what Nate happens to read, or a big enough ruckus, also
4. EA games are not supposed to be unplayable for most people. I'm talking both bugs and performance here. A release is when the game is at its capture and retention peak, and only targeting 3% of the Steam userbase is laughable. This points to 2.
5. EA is supposed to be for fast paced updates and experimentation. Private bugtracking, Private QA (what did I pay for?), and long updates are also in violation of the spirit of EA.
6. EA IS the point where criticism should be, as it matters most and has the higher chance of steering the game in the right direction.

Now that we're clear on EA. Let's address performance:

Performance is unjustified. This game has higher requirements than recent AAA releases whilst having nothing to show for it. Graphics are subpar, pairing a cartoony style with aggressive pop-in and laughable render distance. Most particle effects are not properly instantiated and eat away at hardware, terrain is the literal same buggy imported mess from KSP1 and hacked further to produce the current terrain, killing performance for little gain on looks.

Saying that Parallax looks the same as KSP2 is disingenuous at best, much worse if you get the full combo of Parallax + Scatterer + EVE, and so on, surpassing KSP2 graphics whilst still having like triple the frames.

They effed up, all we can do as a community is provide our input in it. Some people write up on the forums, others leave negative reviews, others have refunded the game. Others like me have done all 3.

Edited April 4, 2023 by PDCWolf

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

5 minutes ago, Tazooka said:

It means "to see things as better than they really are" or "to see only the positives in a situation (and therefore in a way that is unrealistic)"

What i mean't was: "Is there a nice way for you to said what you did?" 

I mean, its things like this that i've seen in some bug feedback that are completely unnecessary. 

6 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

They effed up

No they did not.

13 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Saying that Parallax looks the same as KSP2 is disingenuous at best, much worse if you get the full combo of Parallax + Scatterer + EVE, and so on, surpassing KSP2 graphics whilst still having like triple the frames.

Since, of course, as compared to KSP2, KSP1 is simplistic on the CPU

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

The game is literally V0.1 as compared to an 11 year old game thats what? V1.12.something-something with hundreds of mods indexed over the years. 

 

The scales are obviously not balanced here

Maybe it is best to leave this as an agree-to-disagree since we cannot achieve an even ground here.

Edited April 4, 2023 by DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE

[Kerbart]

You’ll find me genrally on the side of supporters of KSP2, because the critique, in many cases, seems overly dramataic and exagerated. I have little sympathy for claims that anything less than 60 FPS is unbearable, that “all rockets” behave like noodles (I never needed autostrutting in the first place)  or that the game is missing features. Especially the latter when it comes from “I,ve been playing the game since […] because those are the players that shoukd know better about what state to expect the game in.

At the same time, Intercept did paint a very rosy picture about the game and could have done a much better job in managing expectations, especially given the price For me, the price isn’t the issue  itself but if you’re setting your EA price at 75% of the launch price, I expect to get 75% of the game. Again, managing expectations.

At the current pace it looks like we’ll need two or three more patches before the game, by most standards, becomes enjoyable—most players can handle the lack of features, it’s the bugs that limit the enjoyment one can get from the game right now. 
 

A dev-insights post on what the game’s QA entails and why we have the large number of “should have caught that” bugs in the game despite that would be welcome.

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

14 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

You’ll find me genrally on the side of supporters of KSP2, because the critique, in many cases, seems overly dramataic and exagerated. I have little sympathy for claims that anything less than 60 FPS is unbearable, that “all rockets” behave like noodles (I never needed autostrutting in the first place)  or that the game is missing features. Especially the latter when it comes from “I,ve been playing the game since […] because those are the players that shoukd know better about what state to expect the game in.

At the same time, Intercept did paint a very rosy picture about the game and could have done a much better job in managing expectations, especially given the price For me, the price isn’t the issue  itself but if you’re setting your EA price at 75% of the launch price, I expect to get 75% of the game. Again, managing expectations.

At the current pace it looks like we’ll need two or three more patches before the game, by most standards, becomes enjoyable—most players can handle the lack of features, it’s the bugs that limit the enjoyment one can get from the game right now. 
 

A dev-insights post on what the game’s QA entails and why we have the large number of “should have caught that” bugs in the game despite that would be welcome.

I agree since this post is a bit more moderate.

 

Also, check out this post here:

Its "feedback" like that why i have such a noticeable problem with the community

[The Aziz]

Well, there's that, and there's yours "it's fine, it's early access, hakuna matata".

Meanwhile there's a whole spectrum in-between where most people exist.

[Tazooka]

3 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Meanwhile there's a whole spectrum in-between where most people exist.

Agreed, just like politics, there the extremes, the ones who don't really care and the in-betweens.

13 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

Also, check out this post here:

Its "feedback" like that why i have such a noticeable problem with the community

I agree its quite 'aggressive', they're obviously annoyed.

But I do agree that the "we’re holding ourselves to a very high standard of performance." is a bit hypercritical (I think that's the right word) as the performance, especially on release was abysmal.

I'm getting my comments in before this thread becomes locked

[PDCWolf]

57 minutes ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

Since, of course, as compared to KSP2, KSP1 is simplistic on the CPU

KSP2 doesn't require more CPU at all, in fact most reports point to mis-using hardware. KSP2 is not "more demanding", it is badly done.

 

https://steamcommunity.com/app/954850/discussions/0/3772364949848356785/

 

Edit: Seems the forum tried to embed reddit and failed horribly, not sure how to fix that but you can still click the links.

Edited April 4, 2023 by PDCWolf

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

26 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Well, there's that, and there's yours "it's fine, it's early access, hakuna matata".

No offense whatsoever, but your dry sarcasm is getting a bit annoying. I meant this post to be a sort of inspiration for the community to maybe lighten up but now this post is starting to become a sour-house.

Edited April 4, 2023 by DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE

[Klapaucius]

For me personally, I got what I expected. The communications from the developers prior to release indicated to me that it would be a rough and restricted game. Of course, others may see Alpha differently.

 

I don't mind the criticism. But what I think many of us are rebelling against is the nastiness of some of it.  There is constructive criticism and there is simply venting.  I think, unfortunately, that the internet exacerbates that.  One of the reasons I stick to this forum is that the moderators are pretty good at weeding out the worst of it.

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

Just now, Klapaucius said:

For me personally, I got what I expected. The communications from the developers prior to release indicated to me that it would be a rough and restricted game. Of course, others may see Alpha differently.

 

I don't mind the criticism. But what I think many of us are rebelling against is the nastiness of some of it.  There is constructive criticism and there is simply venting.  I think, unfortunately, that the internet exacerbates that.  One of the reasons I stick to this forum is that the moderators are pretty good at weeding out the worst of it.

Wait. The game isn't even in beta yet?

[Alexoff]

Are there other games in Early Access from multi-billion dollar publishers? Have T2 released early access games before? Early access was created for poor lonely developers who can't quit their job and make the games of their dreams on the energy of the sun. In fact, we were not told about any early access until the end of 2022, since 2020 the game has been undergoing constant polishing and improvements. But if now in April 2023 the game received only one patch and is in such a deplorable state, then what happened to the game in the summer of 2022? Was there a game at all, were there playable builds, or just fragments of the game in the editor? What else do we have to prepare for? PD released a paid patch for Outer Worlds not so long ago, maybe such a trick will happen with KSP2?

[Maria Sirona]

On 4/4/2023 at 4:53 PM, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

Too often do i hear about performance and bug issues...

...Wake up people, Its EARLY ACCESS!

Isn't people being allowed to report these things the whole point of Early Access?

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

On 4/6/2023 at 9:49 AM, Maria Sirona said:

Isn't people being allowed to report these things the whole point of Early Access?

@Maria SironaMy problem isn't people reporting the issues. its people using it as an excuse to say unnecessary things or to exaggerate beyond belief. This is literally the reason why we NEED a Positive Forum Movement.

On 4/4/2023 at 10:34 AM, TickleMyMary said:

What a terrible opinion... People are reviewing the game as they are because that is what they have to review and that is EXACTLY in line with the review guidelines for reviewing products in EA (on Steam in particular)...

 

On 4/4/2023 at 11:52 AM, The Aziz said:

Well, there's that, and there's yours "it's fine, it's early access, hakuna matata".

Meanwhile there's a whole spectrum in-between where most people exist.

View these 3 messages and you'll get a taste of what i mean. (Snip)

 

 

Edited April 7, 2023 by Gargamel
Portions redacted by moderator