Mohopeful

[PDCWolf]

11 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

I'm finding it somewhat surreal that the KSP1 bugtracker, which was always widely hated and frequently complained about, is now being help up as the shining example from the good old days that would save KSP2. 

You have A, it might not be great, but if someone takes A away, you're going to miss A.

Really not that hard.

Edited May 22, 2023 by PDCWolf

[Scarecrow71]

2 hours ago, Sylvi Fisthaug said:

Nope, I'm including both parties in my rant. Although, most members here know which party I'm at. Trying to not let that sature my post.

In this section I am highlighting the party that enjoys the game.

Thank you for confirming.  Probably my old eyes when I read the post originally!

[gussi111]

22 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

And this is why the developers should listen to the fanbase less, if anything. People who go in circles regarding their views just for the sake of framing KSP 2 in a negative light won't provide much helpful input

You think that people are saying these things just to make KSP 2 sound as negative as possible or are they doing it because they are wishing for the game to succeed?

[Alexoff]

24 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

And this is why the developers should listen to the fanbase less, if anything. People who go in circles regarding their views just for the sake of framing KSP 2 in a negative light won't provide much helpful input

And how will the party of fans of KSP2 help the developers? Like cheerleaders?

[AtomicTech]

11 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

I'm finding it somewhat surreal that the KSP1 bugtracker, which was always widely hated and frequently complained about, is now being help up as the shining example from the good old days that would save KSP2. 

I thought that was pretty funny 

[LUCINNDA]

They say that virtue is in the middle ground. Fair is criticism and fair is disappointment. Surely those who expect more are more disappointed. The most patient, or conformist, do not feel so disappointed and for this reason, perhaps, they are less negative. But he is also very right in saying that the forum becomes toxic at times. I think we should continue to express ourselves, but let's try to be constructive. And this is my contribution: I think that no one in that company is qualified to hire the half dozen programmers that they lack. As much as we complain, that is a reality. So if we want to be here, let's try to be more constructive, maybe outlining our 10 priorities, so they know what we think are the most urgent things. Let's see if we can agree on that.

[Alexoff]

2 minutes ago, LUCINNDA said:

but let's try to be constructive.

So what does it mean? All critical bugs have been known for a long time, the developers know that we know that we have been deceived before with stories about polishing the game and how fun it is to play multiplayer. What can be constructive? Singing to the developers? There is almost nothing to discuss in the game, the gameplay is the same ksp1, news are given drop by drop a week, so what do you want?

[Nate Simpson]

There's been a lot of activity on this thread, and a lot of valid concerns expressed. I'll try to address the points I saw most frequently, but there's a lot here. I'll do my best.

• Some have wondered why we are showing the progress we've made on features peripheral to the larger mission of "fixing the game." Eg. why are we working on grid fins when we still have trajectory bugs? That's actually a really apt question, as we had a major breakthrough on wandering apoapses last week (and it probably deserves its own post in the future). The issue, as many have pointed out, is that we have a lot of people on this team with different skill sets, working in parallel on a lot of different systems. Our artists and part designers have their own schedules and milestones, and that work continues to take place while other performance or stability-facing work goes on elsewhere. I like to be able to show off what those people are working on during my Friday posts - it's visual, it's fun, and I'm actually quite excited about grid fins! They're cool, and the people who are building them are excited about them, too. So I'm going to share that work even if there is other ongoing work that's taking longer to complete.
• A few people are worried that because I haven't yet posted an itemized list of bugs to be knocked out in the next update, that the update will not contain many bug fixes. As with earlier pre-update posts, I will provide more detail about what's being fixed when we have confirmation from QA that the upgrades hold up to rigorous testing. As much as I love being the bearer of good news, I am trying also to avoid the frustration that's caused when we declare something fixed and it turns out not to be. I will err on the side of conservatism and withhold the goodies until they are confirmed good.
• The June update timing does not mean "June 30." It means that I cannot yet give you a precise estimate about which day in June will see the update. When I do know that precise date, I will share it.
• We continue to keep close track of the bugs that are most frequently reported within the community, and that guidance shapes our internal scheduling. As a regular player of the game myself, my personal top ten maps very closely to what I've seen in bug reports, here on the forums, on reddit, and on Steam. The degree to which I personally wish a bug would get fixed actually has very little impact on the speed with which it is remedied. We have a priority list, and we take on those bugs in priority order. We have excellent people working on those issues. I can see with my own eyes that they're as eager to see those bugs go down as I am, so there's not much more that I or anybody else can do but to let them do their work in peace.
• We - meaning, our team and the game's fans - are going to be living together with this game for many years. As aggravating as the current situation may be, and as much as I wish we could compress time so that the waiting was less, all I can do for now is to keep playing the game and reporting on what I experience. The game will continue to get better, and in the meantime I will choose to interpret the passionate posts here on the forums as an expression of the same passion that I feel for the game. 

Thanks as always for your patience. 

 

[Redneck]

8 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

There's been a lot of activity on this thread, and a lot of valid concerns expressed. I'll try to address the points I saw most frequently, but there's a lot here. I'll do my best.

• Some have wondered why we are showing the progress we've made on features peripheral to the larger mission of "fixing the game." Eg. why are we working on grid fins when we still have trajectory bugs? That's actually a really apt question, as we had a major breakthrough on wandering apoapses last week (and it probably deserves its own post in the future). The issue, as many have pointed out, is that we have a lot of people on this team with different skill sets, working in parallel on a lot of different systems. Our artists and part designers have their own schedules and milestones, and that work continues to take place while other performance or stability-facing work goes on elsewhere. I like to be able to show off what those people are working on during my Friday posts - it's visual, it's fun, and I'm actually quite excited about grid fins! They're cool, and the people who are building them are excited about them, too. So I'm going to share that work even if there is other ongoing work that's taking longer to complete.
• A few people are worried that because I haven't yet posted an itemized list of bugs to be knocked out in the next update, that the update will not contain many bug fixes. As with earlier pre-update posts, I will provide more detail about what's being fixed when we have confirmation from QA that the upgrades hold up to rigorous testing. As much as I love being the bearer of good news, I am trying also to avoid the frustration that's caused when we declare something fixed and it turns out not to be. I will err on the side of conservatism and withhold the goodies until they are confirmed good.
• The June update timing does not mean "June 30." It means that I cannot yet give you a precise estimate about which day in June will see the update. When I do know that precise date, I will share it.
• We continue to keep close track of the bugs that are most frequently reported within the community, and that guidance shapes our internal scheduling. As a regular player of the game myself, my personal top ten maps very closely to what I've seen in bug reports, here on the forums, on reddit, and on Steam. The degree to which I personally wish a bug would get fixed actually has very little impact on the speed with which it is remedied. We have a priority list, and we take on those bugs in priority order. We have excellent people working on those issues. I can see with my own eyes that they're as eager to see those bugs go down as I am, so there's not much more that I or anybody else can do but to let them do their work in peace.
• We - meaning, our team and the game's fans - are going to be living together with this game for many years. As aggravating as the current situation may be, and as much as I wish we could compress time so that the waiting was less, all I can do for now is to keep playing the game and reporting on what I experience. The game will continue to get better, and in the meantime I will choose to interpret the passionate posts here on the forums as an expression of the same passion that I feel for the game. 

Thanks as always for your patience. 

 

@Nate Simpsonat least open up the game to modding before science and after reentry. Modders came through before for ksp1 no reason that cant happen again. 

 

 

[The Aziz]

5 hours ago, Dakitess said:

Be sure that people complaining mostly are passionate players who definitely want to see a good KSP2 emerging, be it a few months or a few years

ago*

[Davidian1024]

Just now, Redneck said:

@Nate Simpsonat least open up the game to modding before science and after reentry. Modders came through before for ksp1 no reason that cant happen again. 

 

 

This is a genuine question.  Not trying to start an argument or anything.

How did the devs open KSP1 up for modders?  How is that different from what's been done with KSP2?

I ask because there are mods for KSP2.

[Redneck]

1 minute ago, Davidian1024 said:

This is a genuine question.  Not trying to start an argument or anything.

How did the devs open KSP1 up for modders?  How is that different from what's been done with KSP2?

I ask because there are mods for KSP2.

Modding tools those kinds of things. Yes there are mods but they are limited 

[LUCINNDA]

25 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

There's been a lot of activity on this thread, and a lot of valid concerns expressed. I'll try to address the points I saw most frequently, but there's a lot here. I'll do my best.

• Some have wondered why we are showing the progress we've made on features peripheral to the larger mission of "fixing the game." Eg. why are we working on grid fins when we still have trajectory bugs? That's actually a really apt question, as we had a major breakthrough on wandering apoapses last week (and it probably deserves its own post in the future). The issue, as many have pointed out, is that we have a lot of people on this team with different skill sets, working in parallel on a lot of different systems. Our artists and part designers have their own schedules and milestones, and that work continues to take place while other performance or stability-facing work goes on elsewhere. I like to be able to show off what those people are working on during my Friday posts - it's visual, it's fun, and I'm actually quite excited about grid fins! They're cool, and the people who are building them are excited about them, too. So I'm going to share that work even if there is other ongoing work that's taking longer to complete.
• A few people are worried that because I haven't yet posted an itemized list of bugs to be knocked out in the next update, that the update will not contain many bug fixes. As with earlier pre-update posts, I will provide more detail about what's being fixed when we have confirmation from QA that the upgrades hold up to rigorous testing. As much as I love being the bearer of good news, I am trying also to avoid the frustration that's caused when we declare something fixed and it turns out not to be. I will err on the side of conservatism and withhold the goodies until they are confirmed good.
• The June update timing does not mean "June 30." It means that I cannot yet give you a precise estimate about which day in June will see the update. When I do know that precise date, I will share it.
• We continue to keep close track of the bugs that are most frequently reported within the community, and that guidance shapes our internal scheduling. As a regular player of the game myself, my personal top ten maps very closely to what I've seen in bug reports, here on the forums, on reddit, and on Steam. The degree to which I personally wish a bug would get fixed actually has very little impact on the speed with which it is remedied. We have a priority list, and we take on those bugs in priority order. We have excellent people working on those issues. I can see with my own eyes that they're as eager to see those bugs go down as I am, so there's not much more that I or anybody else can do but to let them do their work in peace.
• We - meaning, our team and the game's fans - are going to be living together with this game for many years. As aggravating as the current situation may be, and as much as I wish we could compress time so that the waiting was less, all I can do for now is to keep playing the game and reporting on what I experience. The game will continue to get better, and in the meantime I will choose to interpret the passionate posts here on the forums as an expression of the same passion that I feel for the game. 

Thanks as always for your patience. 

 

I totally agree with you, Nate.
I still want to launch my 3000 part ship. We will surely make it.

Edited May 22, 2023 by LUCINNDA

[Davidian1024]

19 minutes ago, Redneck said:

@Nate Simpsonat least open up the game to modding before science and after reentry. Modders came through before for ksp1 no reason that cant happen again. 

 

 

So again, not trying to start an argument.  But I have to say I disagree with this.

Not before science and reentry.  Putting effort towards supporting modders is something that I for one do not see as a priority.

I'm happy with the progress that's been made so far, the direction things are heading in, and what Nate has outlined as the priorities.

[Redneck]

12 minutes ago, Davidian1024 said:

So again, not trying to start an argument.  But I have to say I disagree with this.

Not before science and reentry.  Putting effort towards supporting modders is something that I for one do not see as a priority.

I'm happy with the progress that's been made so far, the direction things are heading in, and what Nate has outlined as the priorities.

Thats fine disagreeing is ok no harm no foul. No offense taken

5 minutes ago, Redneck said:

Thats fine disagreeing is ok no harm no foul. No offense taken

What i meant was after reentry and iva but before science i would like to see some unity tools and api. When the basic foundation of game is complete  imo before science 

Edited May 22, 2023 by Redneck

[Davidian1024]

17 minutes ago, Redneck said:

When the basic foundation of game is complete

I'll prefix this by saying, I don't know how much time/effort it would take for them to produce unity tools, apis etc.  Maybe it would be trivial.

But I agree with this sentiment.  When the basic foundations of the game are complete.  I definitely want to see the modders supported.

Although, I think my idea of what the basic foundations are is different.  I would include science.  And colonies and interstellar.  I actually want colonies and interstellar really badly.

[PDCWolf]

1 hour ago, Nate Simpson said:

There's been a lot of activity on this thread, and a lot of valid concerns expressed. I'll try to address the points I saw most frequently, but there's a lot here. I'll do my best.

• Some have wondered why we are showing the progress we've made on features peripheral to the larger mission of "fixing the game." Eg. why are we working on grid fins when we still have trajectory bugs? That's actually a really apt question, as we had a major breakthrough on wandering apoapses last week (and it probably deserves its own post in the future). The issue, as many have pointed out, is that we have a lot of people on this team with different skill sets, working in parallel on a lot of different systems. Our artists and part designers have their own schedules and milestones, and that work continues to take place while other performance or stability-facing work goes on elsewhere. I like to be able to show off what those people are working on during my Friday posts - it's visual, it's fun, and I'm actually quite excited about grid fins! They're cool, and the people who are building them are excited about them, too. So I'm going to share that work even if there is other ongoing work that's taking longer to complete.
• A few people are worried that because I haven't yet posted an itemized list of bugs to be knocked out in the next update, that the update will not contain many bug fixes. As with earlier pre-update posts, I will provide more detail about what's being fixed when we have confirmation from QA that the upgrades hold up to rigorous testing. As much as I love being the bearer of good news, I am trying also to avoid the frustration that's caused when we declare something fixed and it turns out not to be. I will err on the side of conservatism and withhold the goodies until they are confirmed good.
• The June update timing does not mean "June 30." It means that I cannot yet give you a precise estimate about which day in June will see the update. When I do know that precise date, I will share it.
• We continue to keep close track of the bugs that are most frequently reported within the community, and that guidance shapes our internal scheduling. As a regular player of the game myself, my personal top ten maps very closely to what I've seen in bug reports, here on the forums, on reddit, and on Steam. The degree to which I personally wish a bug would get fixed actually has very little impact on the speed with which it is remedied. We have a priority list, and we take on those bugs in priority order. We have excellent people working on those issues. I can see with my own eyes that they're as eager to see those bugs go down as I am, so there's not much more that I or anybody else can do but to let them do their work in peace.
• We - meaning, our team and the game's fans - are going to be living together with this game for many years. As aggravating as the current situation may be, and as much as I wish we could compress time so that the waiting was less, all I can do for now is to keep playing the game and reporting on what I experience. The game will continue to get better, and in the meantime I will choose to interpret the passionate posts here on the forums as an expression of the same passion that I feel for the game. 

Thanks as always for your patience. 

 

First off, it's really good to see you coming back to one of these threads when the main discourse is critical instead of praising, hope this becomes a habit, and thank you for your time.

I just find it necessary to repeat that, track record aside, speaking of this or that bug being near done, acknowledged and so on is almost useless without a public bugtracker. Darrin mentioned the topic was in the talking stage back in one of the replies to his blog, May 4, so have the talks advanced since then? As for the update timing, saying it's not "June 30" can be as counterproductive as saying it is June 1, and whilst I'm completely in favor of firm compromise with dates (shows professionalism and what not), if it comes out June 29, being "technically" correct won't do any good in this case. After all, June starts literally next week, so it's safe to assume it's not gonna be that early in the month either

[Bej Kerman]

2 hours ago, gussi111 said:

You think that people are saying these things just to make KSP 2 sound as negative as possible or are they doing it because they are wishing for the game to succeed?

If the fact they go back and forth on whether bug trackers are good or not is anything to go off of, the former.

[Davidian1024]

6 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

...it's really good to see you coming back to one of these threads when the main discourse is critical instead of praising...

I want to echo this sentiment.  I've been really taken aback by alot of the negativity on this forum in general.  I know I couldn't handle Nate's job.

I would say I tend to be quiet and not engage.  As someone who, overall has been quite pleased with the game so far, I'm regretting having been quiet.

[adsii1970]

57 minutes ago, Davidian1024 said:

Although, I think my idea of what the basic foundations are is different.  I would include science.  And colonies and interstellar.  I actually want colonies and interstellar really badly.

Oh, me, too! I was hoping that a DLC for the original KSP would add this. The more that’s handled in stock KSP2, the less mods I’ll need . 

[Sylvi Fisthaug]

2 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

We have a priority list, and we take on those bugs in priority order.

A lot of people in the community have expressed that they submit countless bug reports, often substantial, only to hear nothing in return. I have experienced this as well.

Reaching out to every and each one submitting bugs sounds time consuming and tedious, but is it possible that a dev looking at the bug report on the forum simply "likes" it? 

2 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

all I can do for now is to keep playing the game and reporting on what I experience.

uhm can we see your coolest spacecraft please

1 hour ago, Davidian1024 said:

I've been really taken aback by alot of the negativity on this forum in general.

Me too.

1 hour ago, Davidian1024 said:

I know I couldn't handle Nate's job.

Me neither.

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

First off, it's really good to see you coming back to one of these threads when the main discourse is critical instead of praising, hope this becomes a habit, and thank you for your time.

Thank you so much for this respectful mention (not saying you are not respectful the rest of your time on the forums, but still felt the need to highlight this)

4 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Thank you for confirming.  Probably my old eyes when I read the post originally!

Are you old as well?? Congratulations! (I only view my self as old, so the rest of the world might not agree with my views)

[Superfluous J]

2 hours ago, Redneck said:

@Nate Simpsonat least open up the game to modding before science and after reentry. Modders came through before for ksp1 no reason that cant happen again. 

 

 

Opening the game to modding - at least in the way you mean here - is a huge undertaking.

[adsii1970]

6 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

Opening the game to modding - at least in the way you mean here - is a huge undertaking.

And one that’s ill advised. I remember the days in KSP (original) when every update meant every mod was broken! 
Nah, let’s bypass that massive headache, please!

[TickleMyMary]

43 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

And one that’s ill advised. I remember the days in KSP (original) when every update meant every mod was broken! 
Nah, let’s bypass that massive headache, please!

They're not 'broken' now though, are they? Quite honestly, the only reason I stayed with KSP for so many hours/years is because of the modding scene... The community have expanded the game to such a beautiful degree. 

So, no... Let's not bypass that 'headache' because as a customer, that is exactly what I'm looking out for in my KSP2 experience, alongside whatever the team ends up creating over the coming years... Seeing as there have been quite a few replies asking the same, it would appear it is a feature that is wanted.

Again, it's what I want out of my experience of KSP2 and doesn't effect the development at IG in the slightest... It is what it is.

Edited May 22, 2023 by TickleMyMary

[Wheehaw Kerman]

5 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

And this is why the developers should listen to the fanbase less, if anything. People who go in circles regarding their views just for the sake of framing KSP 2 in a negative light won't provide much helpful input

I’m pretty sure the devs aren’t listening to the naysayers at all.  When you get people complaining about the lack of updates and then stating that the updates are proof positive that the devs are doing everything wrong, in the same post…

Edited May 22, 2023 by Wheehaw Kerman