A Taste of Science

[Bej Kerman]

On 5/16/2023 at 5:25 PM, PDCWolf said:

It's not on the game > because it's not vital > but X thing is vital and not on the game > because the game is not done > the game is not done because X is not on the game > because it's not vital

You get the idea, plus just like me, you have zero source on what's vital or not, specially for things not on the roadmap.

It has literally 0 impact on the game besides existing, unlike vital features.

[AtomicTech]

4 hours ago, cocoscacao said:

Me neither... I went old-school and bought a basketball ball, and I'm shooting hoops for the first time after 15 years. I highly recommend it 

Think I'll get back on the radio some more!

[PDCWolf]

3 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

It has literally 0 impact on the game besides existing, unlike vital features.

Sorry but you don't seem an authoritative source on what's vital or what isn't.

[Scarecrow71]

15 minutes ago, AtomicTech said:

Think I'll get back on the radio some more!

I'll just learn new songs on the guitar.

[kdaviper]

41 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

Sorry but you don't seem an authoritative source on what's vital or what isn't.

What is your evidence that IVA support will be vital to anything other than itself?

[cocoscacao]

42 minutes ago, kdaviper said:

What is your evidence that IVA support will be vital to anything other than itself?

I hate to jump to "KSP 2 infidels" side here, but... It doesn't have any gameplay impact now, true... But why bother with it, if it won't serve any purpose?

Edited May 18, 2023 by cocoscacao

[PDCWolf]

49 minutes ago, kdaviper said:

What is your evidence that IVA support will be vital to anything other than itself?

I never called them a vital feature. What I did say is IVAs are not cosmetics, on account of them being part of Interactive IVAs, a promised feature. Saying this or that feature is not vital or is "just cosmetic" is just the agitators' way to say it's not their currently preferred feature. Burden of proof is not on me.

[AtomicTech]

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

I'll just learn new songs on the guitar.

Sounds like fun!

[Sylvi Fisthaug]

On 5/12/2023 at 9:58 PM, Alexoff said:

Very convincing pictures of the multiplayer, Wow!

Apparently they forgot about the scientific parts and quite suddenly remembered them, therefore, in the sixth year of development, they are creating models. Apparently testing science somewhere far ahead.

On the one hand, you do not know, but on the other, you believe.

Spit on the nonbelieva 

[Nicrose]

8 hours ago, The Aziz said:

Closing yourself on one thing ain't healthy

Well I am reluctantly going back to cities skylines while I wait for the sequel to come out but tbh I’m already getting bored of it again. Other than that, the other games I have I’ve burned out and I also don’t have the budget to go out and buy games I don’t fully love, hence why when this game launched I was hopeful it would be at least playable two months in. I get what you’re saying but tbh that’s not an accurate depiction of my life 

8 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Free games every Thursday on Epic.  This week is several DLC packs for The Sims 4...which is also free on Epic.

Ayyy thanks for the tip! 

[kdaviper]

2 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

I never called them a vital feature. What I did say is IVAs are not cosmetics, on account of them being part of Interactive IVAs, a promised feature. Saying this or that feature is not vital or is "just cosmetic" is just the agitators' way to say it's not their currently preferred feature. Burden of proof is not on me.

I think my point, and possibly the point others are trying to make is that there is little reason to expect them to add a non-vital feature until other more intertwined features are fleshed out.

I would have been disappointed if painting your parts was not included so I understand that you are disappointed that IVA is not in the game. 

[ccbeastie]

Excited to see development continue and not hint of devs being disheartened by negativity surrounding early access. Looking forward to a bright future for KSP2 :)

[AtomicTech]

17 minutes ago, ccbeastie said:

Excited to see development continue and not hint of devs being disheartened by negativity surrounding early access. Looking forward to a bright future for KSP2

They are resilient!

[LUCINNDA]

I miss when an EVA meant being able to fix a part, or put something I forgot in its place, or get some science... I mean, when the EVA made sense, apart from putting a flag.

 

[Scarecrow71]

So, with it being Thursday, I went and re-read @Nate Simpson's post again to make sure I didn't remember anything wrong about when we can expect communication on the next patch.  And I was, unfortunately, remembering wrong.  Here is what Nate said:

On 5/12/2023 at 11:55 AM, Nate Simpson said:

We expect to be able to communicate timing for the upcoming v0.1.3.0 update next week.

Read that again.  It's not a promise that we will get communication this week, but rather we MIGHT get communication this week.  Not feeling really good about KSP2, TT, IG, PD, or anything associated with this at the moment.  We can't even get straight answers from the devs on stuff at this point.  I'm about ready to just wave goodbye until something actually happens.

[The Aziz]

Like if that was any different every other time.

 

You'll get the date if the rest of the team says it's possible to release it on time. 

I appreciate that they aren't using the word "promise" too often because it leads to a lot of heat if the date slips.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

On 5/12/2023 at 5:01 PM, schlosrat said:

If I could like this +1000 I would. I for one am sick to death of the whiners that only want to whine. You nailed it @Sylvi Fisthaug. Non constructive complaining is just that, and it does nothing to make this forum a healthy vibrant place. Personally, I'm having a ton of fun in the game. I'm sorry that some others aren't, but it's a big world and there's room for them in it too. I'd just like to see more constructive feedback and less whining. I may not get that, but it's what I'd like.

Amen.  What Science is going to look like and how it’s going to tie into the other roadmap milestones is much more interesting.

 

9 hours ago, AtomicTech said:

They are resilient!

Realistically, a dozen or so people on the forums getting all worked up probably doesn’t even hit their radar.  Toxic gamer culture is sadly a thing, and I expect that as professionals the devs are too busy executing to waste any time on speculation and meltdowns on the part of people with no real knowledge of what’s going on.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

19 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

So, with it being Thursday, I went and re-read @Nate Simpson's post again to make sure I didn't remember anything wrong about when we can expect communication on the next patch.  And I was, unfortunately, remembering wrong.  Here is what Nate said:

Read that again.  It's not a promise that we will get communication this week, but rather we MIGHT get communication this week.  Not feeling really good about KSP2, TT, IG, PD, or anything associated with this at the moment.  We can't even get straight answers from the devs on stuff at this point.  I'm about ready to just wave goodbye until something actually happens.

And frankly, the devs’ communication is fine, IMHO.  I’d rather they take their time and do it right, I don’t feel any entitlement to constant updates, and I’m not going to lose any sleep over not getting weekly progress reports.

I’m already well past the sub-dollar-per-hour play:pay ratio - a good entertainment deal by any sane measure.  If we get more and better (which I expect we will), fantastic.  The deal will just get better.  We’ve waited three years for KSP2 already - another year or two is nothing.

[Alexoff]

1 hour ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

as professionals the devs are too busy executing to waste any time on speculation and meltdowns on the part of people with no real knowledge of what’s going on.

Why do you think so? What do you think is done in the game at a professional level? What can other developers learn from Nate and his team?

[Bej Kerman]

16 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

20 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

It has literally 0 impact on the game besides existing, unlike vital features.

Sorry but you don't seem an authoritative source on what's vital or what isn't.

IVA's existence only justifies itself. It does not reach into any gameplay loops and that remains true whether anyone has said authority or not.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Bej Kerman

[Wheehaw Kerman]

20 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

Why do you think so? What do you think is done in the game at a professional level? What can other developers learn from Nate and his team?

I don’t write code, but believe me, the early discussion drafts of what I do usually get significantly improved through stakeholder input by the time I stamp the final version.

The game has been in EA for a bit less than three months.  It has some bugs.  It runs slowly on older machines.  The first patches didn’t magically bring the game to a finished state in advance of the roadmap.  A dozen or so gamers, none of whom have any inside information, are having prolonged toxic hissy fits over it on the forums.  All this is pretty normal - large, complex  projects take time to properly complete, often things look bleak along the way, and gamer culture is unfortunately what it seems to be.  
 

So I’m not going to cast aspersions on IG’s work based on the opinions of a few angry disappointed people who’re having a hard time dealing with mild disappointment.  If the game is still in bad shape at 1.0 I may wind up agreeing with the naysayers, but right now the prophets of doom are less credible than Nate is.

[Alexoff]

2 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

The game has been in EA for a bit less than three months

The game is in development for 6 years

3 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

 The first patches didn’t magically bring the game to a finished state in advance of the roadmap.  

The roadmap hasn't even started

4 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

All this is pretty normal - large, complex  projects take time to properly complete

What game would you compare KSP2 to in terms of complexity?

6 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

 If the game is still in bad shape at 1.0 I may wind up agreeing with the naysayers, but right now the prophets of doom are less credible than Nate is.

Really? Have you seen this?

[LoSBoL]

Seems fitting, whole day long on the bike today and Doris Day was in my head

 

 

[Wheehaw Kerman]

22 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

The game is in development for 6 years

The roadmap hasn't even started

What game would you compare KSP2 to in terms of complexity?

Really? Have you seen this?

So back in early 2020, I concluded that the global medical establishment would gear up, deal with COVID, and everything would be back to normal in a few years.  I was right, and I didn’t waste any time arguing with the angry folks who were doing their own research.

If you really care about being right on this, check in with me after 1.0 drops, or if the game gets cancelled.  If it turns out you are right, I’ll concede you (and the other naysayers) one (1) Internet Victory each.  

It’s not a biggie - those aren’t worth much.  I might even do a certificate in MSPaint that you can frame or something.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Wheehaw Kerman

[Alexoff]

11 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

So back in early 2020, I concluded that the global medical establishment would gear up, deal with COVID, and everything would be back to normal in a few years.

Every pandemic ends after a few years. Especially if it is overshadowed by more formidable events. But this is generally offtopic. I suggested looking at the specific facts of the development of KSP2.

14 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

If you really care about being right on this, check in with me after 1.0 drops, or if the game gets cancelled.  If it turns out you are right, I’ll concede you (and the other naysayers) one (1) Internet Victory each.  

I thought you would operate with some facts, but it turned out it was just a prediction of Nostradamus