Parts and Circumstance

[cocoscacao]

14 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

Oh yes, early access, or rather early access of early access. Everyone should be happy, and the roadmap is apparently the end of early access.

I don't get it.

[schlosrat]

1 hour ago, Alexoff said:

If I was given a dollar each time for telling me "if you don't like something, then get out," then I might not work. It's amazing that the same people write the same thing over and over again.

I, too, am amazed by the same people writing the same things over and over. You and I may be equally amazed, though I think in diametrically opposite perspectives. That's cool. The world is a big place, and it's certainly big enough for both of our perspectives. That said, from your posts it does seem like there's nothing plausible that would satisfy you. Even with Nate being more open and up front about bugs you seem to be unsatisfied. Am I mistaken about that? What would satisfy you? Not that I think those in your camp need or deserve to be appeased, but I am curious if perhaps I'm wrong here. What is the perfectly reasonable thing that you seek and which would satisfy you?

Here - to be fair I'll go first. I would like to continue to see open communication from the devs and clear progress on addressing bugs and adding features. As it happens, I feel like this is already occurring, so I am, and remain, cautiously optimistic about this game and it's progress on the roadmap. I say "cautiously" only because the eventual completion of any complex project  is uncertain. Nevertheless what I've seen in the first 2 patches and in the dev communication so far encourages me. I'm having fun in the game right now, and look forward to a lot more fun as they continue to address bugs and add features. The thing that I'd really like to see change on this forum has very little to do with the devs.

[Alexoff]

5 minutes ago, schlosrat said:

That said, from your posts it does seem like there's nothing plausible that would satisfy you. Even with Nate being more open and up front about bugs you seem to be unsatisfied. Am I mistaken about that? What would satisfy you? Not that I think those in your camp need or deserve to be appeased, but I am curious if perhaps I'm wrong here. What is the perfectly reasonable thing that you seek and which would satisfy you?

I wrote more than once that could satisfy me. Something specific from what is included in the roadmap. It is desirable that this be in the video from the game itself. The last time we saw something about colonies was in 2021, for example, after that we were shown only a cut of the old colony from 2020 (just a mesh?). Since then, there are many non-specific words that can be interpreted as you like. If you filter out Nate's entire post, then the patch will have a few common parts and possibly fix complex bugs. That's all. But as I understand it, polite words are enough, we came here for some petting, right?

 

[Scarecrow71]

30 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

I wrote more than once that could satisfy me. Something specific from what is included in the roadmap. It is desirable that this be in the video from the game itself. The last time we saw something about colonies was in 2021, for example, after that we were shown only a cut of the old colony from 2020 (just a mesh?). Since then, there are many non-specific words that can be interpreted as you like. If you filter out Nate's entire post, then the patch will have a few common parts and possibly fix complex bugs. That's all. But as I understand it, polite words are enough, we came here for some petting, right?

 

Well, in one of the recent videos Nate did provide a screenshot of devs playing multiplayer.  Which is, technically, on the roadmap.  Beyond that, I highly doubt you will get anything more specific than "We are working on roadmap features" because they aren't singularly focused on them right now.  I mean, apart from the screenshot of the new scienc-y part from the Taste of Science post from Nate (which can be found at this link here).  Or the continued statements that they are in fact working on science, which is in the very first post in this thread.

It's been stated multiple times that nobody has any idea right now of when any of the roadmap features are coming out.  You won't get an answer on that until IG has a definitive answer and a date set for release.  Until then, I surmise, you are simply going to be wholly unsatisfied because you aren't getting the answers they don't have yet.

[RocketRockington]

45 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Well, in one of the recent videos Nate did provide a screenshot of devs playing multiplayer.  Which is, technically, on the roadmap.  Beyond that, I highly doubt you will get anything more specific than "We are working on roadmap features" because they aren't singularly focused on them right now.  I mean, apart from the screenshot of the new scienc-y part from the Taste of Science post from Nate (which can be found at this link here).  Or the continued statements that they are in fact working on science, which is in the very first post in this thread.

It's been stated multiple times that nobody has any idea right now of when any of the roadmap features are coming out.  You won't get an answer on that until IG has a definitive answer and a date set for release.  Until then, I surmise, you are simply going to be wholly unsatisfied because you aren't getting the answers they don't have yet.

However, Nate does mention 'Features' 11 times in this post.  Noting he didn't want to share about them early, to give promises, but then he's had a change of heart due to the anger on the forums... and then doesn't actually talk about any features.  Despite the claim that this patch is delayed so long due to working on features as well as bugs.  And no - I don't think a few parts are actually new 'features'.  That's what the game industry calls 'content'.  Features generally involve new systems.  You might call the airbrakes a new 'feature' but they're not - they're a part that leverages the aerodynamics feature, and if its anything like KSP1, they're not greatly different from a control surface, they just deploy and cause a lot of drag because the control surface is deflected so far that the AOA is very high.  You can do all of that with tuning curves in KSP1.

So I can see why some people would actually expect both more communication about actual feature development - or news that a feature was actually coming in the next patch, rather than some nebulous future.  Me on the other hand, I don't expect anything like that, I'm just hoping they'll fix enough bugs that it'll be an adequate sandbox for people to do more than just build planes fly through obstacles around KSC.   It's almost like KSP2 is a stealth version of HarvestR's Balsa model flight simulator rather than a successor to KSP at this point. 

[Spicat]

While I like this post I do wonder, where are heating and reentry? Can we get at least a word on it?

The last time that heating was mentioned, it was before patch 2 (Nearly 2 months ago):

And since 10 weeks since the lastest sneakpeek of it:

So, are devs making progress on it or does bugs hunting slow the progress on this (which is understandable)? Just wanted to know.

Edited May 28, 2023 by Spicat

[Redneck]

i wanna know who made the call that the game was ready for release when it clearly was not and nothing more than a buggy demo pre alpha game. 

[GGG-GoodGuyGreg]

1 minute ago, Redneck said:

i wanna know who made the call that the game was ready for release when it clearly was not and nothing more than a buggy demo pre alpha game. 

I'm gonna go with someone who never has and never will play KSP2, but is important enough to not be ignored over there. At least I hope someone else is to blame that didn't know what in the hell he/she was doing.

No one who ever spent more than 5 minutes in the gaming industry would have slapped a good to go sticker on this and charge 50$. At least I hope it's that, and not that we're as gullible as we would hate to admit.

[The Aziz]

11 minutes ago, Redneck said:

i wanna know who made the call that the game was ready for release when it clearly was not and nothing more than a buggy demo pre alpha game. 

You're an high level employee in a company that answers to a company that answers to a bigger company that decides that the game must be out before certain date, even if it means early access. You plan your next steps including stripping the game out of unfinished features to meet release date few months prior because you have to, and all the fluff that's related, including events, marketing etc.

In the meantime, software, being software, doesn't cooperate as nicely as you would want it to and your target deadline slips. You're not allowed to pull a CDProjektRed and post yet another apology letter explaining why it's late because it must be out there and then. What do you do? Make the right call.

[cocoscacao]

2 hours ago, Alexoff said:

I wrote more than once that could satisfy me. Something specific from what is included in the roadmap. It is desirable that this be in the video from the game itself. The last time we saw something about colonies was in 2021, for example, after that we were shown only a cut of the old colony from 2020 (just a mesh?). Since then, there are many non-specific words that can be interpreted as you like.

I partially get that. Giving something specific would also leave a vacuum for everything else left unspecified... and we're in the same position again. There are a few (?) videos about colonies, but what was added/scrapped from things presented back then, I guess it's gonna be a subject when time for it arrives.

2 hours ago, Alexoff said:

If you filter out Nate's entire post, then the patch will have a few common parts and possibly fix complex bugs. That's all. But as I understand it, polite words are enough, we came here for some petting, right?

I'm here to see improvements on the current state mostly. Not what science/colonies/multiplayer will bring. Any additional info on those is welcomed from my side, but for now, I'm more interested for core stuff to be fixed.

[Scarecrow71]

46 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

However, Nate does mention 'Features' 11 times in this post.  Noting he didn't want to share about them early, to give promises, but then he's had a change of heart due to the anger on the forums... and then doesn't actually talk about any features.  Despite the claim that this patch is delayed so long due to working on features as well as bugs.  And no - I don't think a few parts are actually new 'features'.  That's what the game industry calls 'content'.  Features generally involve new systems.  You might call the airbrakes a new 'feature' but they're not - they're a part that leverages the aerodynamics feature, and if its anything like KSP1, they're not greatly different from a control surface, they just deploy and cause a lot of drag because the control surface is deflected so far that the AOA is very high.  You can do all of that with tuning curves in KSP1.

So I can see why some people would actually expect both more communication about actual feature development - or news that a feature was actually coming in the next patch, rather than some nebulous future.  Me on the other hand, I don't expect anything like that, I'm just hoping they'll fix enough bugs that it'll be an adequate sandbox for people to do more than just build planes fly through obstacles around KSC.   It's almost like KSP2 is a stealth version of HarvestR's Balsa model flight simulator rather than a successor to KSP at this point. 

Nate:  We can't tell you much because we don't want to give anything away or be wrong.

Community:  You need to tell us something!

Nate:  OK, we hear you.  Here is what we are working on.

Community:  You didn't tell us what we wanted to hear!

[The Aziz]

↑ this is what has been happening in the last 3 months in a nutshell.

[schlosrat]

2 hours ago, Alexoff said:

I wrote more than once that could satisfy me. Something specific from what is included in the roadmap. It is desirable that this be in the video from the game itself. The last time we saw something about colonies was in 2021, for example, after that we were shown only a cut of the old colony from 2020 (just a mesh?). Since then, there are many non-specific words that can be interpreted as you like. If you filter out Nate's entire post, then the patch will have a few common parts and possibly fix complex bugs. That's all. But as I understand it, polite words are enough, we came here for some petting, right?

Thanks for summarizing what you're looking for. I think @Scarecrow71's reply covers the reality of our situation. Unfortunately it seems unlikely you'll be satisfied by anything we're likely to see in the near future. What we've been told, and what we've seen so far, is that the near future is about squashing bugs and incremental development of features toward more long term roadmap goals.

I'm sure you understand that the game's devs are broken into teams that are not all working on the same things, nor delivering on the same schedules, so some dev posts may seem like they advance common concerns we're all passionate about while others may seem more like window dressing. That's to be expected with a complex project like this, and visible progress in one area doesn't mean that nothing is going on in another. If anything, this particular thread shows a new and improved openness that many here are grateful to see. I hope we get more like it with insights into the progress being made even when things are still being worked or still at QA and not ready to be delivered.

It looks like Science will be seen sooner than colonies, so if colonies are what you're itching to see most you may be waiting a while. I kindly ask that you wait patiently. We all want to see these features! But demanding them now and not being satisfied when you don't get them on your time table is not really going to add much to our community other than strife. It just comes across as an unreasonable demand - at least to me it does, but opinions vary. If the time table for these developments seems unreasonable to you, then by all means please spend your time on other pursuits that bring you more joy!

What do you think of the new engines Nate showed off in his post? Or the new docking ports for that matter! I've been more focused on the engines since Nate had a cool video to share, but those new docking ports may be very handy for the station builders around here.

Edited May 28, 2023 by schlosrat

[RocketRockington]

14 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Nate:  We can't tell you much because we don't want to give anything away or be wrong.

Community:  You need to tell us something!

Nate:  OK, we hear you.  Here is what we are working on.

Community:  You didn't tell us what we wanted to hear!

A: I didn't ask for more comms myself:
B: I am just pointing out a discrepancy - Nate seems to be upselling 'parts' to be called 'features' when features is what the game is missing.  The PR/marketting hype is lighter this time, but it hasn't gone away.  
C: If the community hadn't complained - and the complaint wasn't just 'we haven't been told about bugs in progress enough', though that was one complaint - we wouldn't have gotten any redress.   

The kneejerk reaction from people against any post that's negative is so tiresome, especially when it's a strawman arguement.

[Strawberry]

I can guarantee you if they showed off colonies people would be like "Why arent you working on the vab struts bug!!" 

[Kenobi McCormick]

Reviving the Experimentals program would be a godsend for bugfixing.

[webward]

Thank you for the update, Nate and Team!

I work in software myself so I understand the challenge that managing expectations poses, and I appreciate that you're working on ways to increase transparency. As early access purchasers, we become stakeholders, we put our money down as an investment, and we're looking for a return in the form of a game that veteran KSP players will recognize as a meaningful step forward from KSP1. Transparent communication about both your progress and the obstacles you're facing goes a long way toward making us feel good about our investment and bolstering our confidence that the ROI we were promised will be realized.

For my part, I will try to exercise patience and remember that until anything is actually released, it's a work in progress and issues that keep a fix or a feature out of a release are sometimes discovered late in the QA process. I hope other members of this community will join me in extending that patience and understanding as our end of the increased transparency bargain.

[LoSBoL]

3 hours ago, Alexoff said:

I wrote more than once that could satisfy me. Something specific from what is included in the roadmap. It is desirable that this be in the video from the game itself. The last time we saw something about colonies was in 2021, for example, after that we were shown only a cut of the old colony from 2020 (just a mesh?).

I don't know, I'd rather be shown what is on the roadmap next so there is something to look forward to in the near(er) future instead of what is in the far future and far out of grasps. 

I can only imagine what reactions it would cause, like; Why are you hyping the game again, haven't you learned?  Why are we being shown stuff that is miles away in the roadmap, how about showing us...  Why are we getting shown stuff we're not getting for years, fix the game first! Why aren't you working on what is needed now? Where are your priorities! When are we getting this. We're being scammed...

Everybody is different and finds other things important, gather 10 people and tell them they have a meeting Tuesday and ask them to write down 3 questions, share all questions and be amazed at what questions are asked which you would never even think about asking yourself. 

Communication is hard in reaching and satisfying everybody. What someone needs may cause a rouse from others.

Edited May 28, 2023 by LoSBoL

[Sylvi Fisthaug]

7 hours ago, Alexoff said:

I wrote more than once that could satisfy me. Something specific from what is included in the roadmap. It is desirable that this be in the video from the game itself. The last time we saw something about colonies was in 2021, for example, after that we were shown only a cut of the old colony from 2020 (just a mesh?). Since then, there are many non-specific words that can be interpreted as you like. If you filter out Nate's entire post, then the patch will have a few common parts and possibly fix complex bugs. That's all. But as I understand it, polite words are enough, we came here for some petting, right?

 

 

[Delay]

5 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

Nate seems to be upselling 'parts' to be called 'features' when features is what the game is missing.

Parts are the things that implement the features.

Can't fly without wings or do science without science parts, right?

[Wheehaw Kerman]

19 hours ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

I don't know how to say this without it sounding like a personal attack, so I apologize to the mods in advance; let me know if this is out of line. But, since the version of the game that would satisfy you currently doesn't exist and almost certainly won't exist for at least the next several months, why keep making the same post every few hours but with different wording? Do you have any other points to make?

Also, why, after several weeks of some people calling Nate a liar, incompetent, and borderline fraudster, does a post from him telling us nothing that we shouldn’t have expected (that they’re working on the bugs and the roadmap according to a well thought out plan) and telling us to expect some new parts (which should not be a surprise, really) suddenly make these same people start posting like rational if somewhat condescending adults?  Not that I’m complaining: I hope it lasts, in fact, but given that all the vitriol changed nothing beyond Nate telling us that IG was doing the predictable thing, was all the hate necessary?  Was all the making negative tsunamis worth it?

Edited May 28, 2023 by Wheehaw Kerman

[Razor235]

Oh boy I may regret saying this, and I apologize in advance to the moderators.  But I need to get this off my chest.

1 hour ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Also, why, after several weeks of some people calling Nate a liar, incompetent, and borderline fraudster, does a post from him telling us nothing that we shouldn’t have expected (that they’re working on the bugs and the roadmap according to a well thought out plan) and telling us to expect some new parts (which should not be a surprise, really) suddenly make these same people start posting like rational if somewhat condescending adults?  Not that I’m complaining: I hope it lasts, in fact, but given that all the vitriol changed nothing beyond Nate telling us that IG was doing the predictable thing, was all the hate necessary?  Was all the making negative tsunamis worth it?

The sheer irony of this statement is palpable.

For a while I'd been avoiding interacting here since the first patches because I had already said my piece after launch, but I stuck around lurking in announcement threads and the infamous playercount discussion threads to keep a pulse on the community and the game.

And in every single one, the pro-KSP2 (for lack of a better more concise term) posters were easily just as condescending, if not more so, than the anti-KSP2 posters.  Time and time again there would be people venting, constructively or not, and they would be shot down with the usual "it's early access why are you complaining," "you should have known what you were getting into," "you know nothing about programming," etc. type stuff.  Now, surprise surprise, biting sarcasm and sardonic quips tend not to go over well with annoyed people, so they'd retaliate in kind and start a massive firefight that inevitably spirals out of control into endlessly looping arguments until the thread got locked.  And in other threads, someone would call out the other side in a way like you just did, and start the fecal storm anew.  I admit I am biased and consider myself on the anti- side of this argument, but that was the pattern I'd see time and time again.

No personal attacks goes both ways.  Respecting opinions goes both ways.  And do not pretend that there was not absurd mudslinging on both sides of these posts.

And yes, the people who say things like that without evidence are absolute trash fires (descriptive phrases I feel fit better would probably break forum rules) and they should be called out for it - but in their eyes, so should someone who actually is one of those things and that they feel they have actual evidence of it. 

^^^(I REALLY want to emphasize that I'm not intending to refer to anyone here in this sentence and I don't think that Nate or anyone else as that, but there may be others that truly do and they are allowed to voice that)^^^

Mindless echo chambers do nothing to improve any situation , whether it's the game itself, the community around that game, or anything related to it.

And now here we are in the first announcement thread I've seen where there has been hardly any vitriol for once.  And I strongly doubt that it was your intention to incite more.  But please, please, please understand how callouts like this really invite more flamewar discussions, and please, please, please just let it rest for a while.

And yeah, I would say it was worth it if it got this more effective communication style.  Probably got a bit excessive at times, but I doubt it would have changed this soon without a strong negative presence, and would not have changed at all without anyone voicing their dislike of the other methods.  Yes, there wasn't a whole lot of new information, and it really just confirmed things we suspected were happening, but before this all we had were suspicions wrapped up in a spinny sunshine and rainbows language that just didn't sit right with the current state of the game.  Tone of communication matters just as much as its actual content, and seeing the tone of this post  and confirmation that they are actually seeing things that we see (i.e. bugs) instead of us feeling like we're just shouting into the void did wonders to alleviate some of the unease that I was feeling.  There is once again a tiny (ok VERY tiny) drop of optimism that something good might come out of this, but there was none before.

Boy this post got out of hand.  Oh well.  Let it fall where it may.

Edited May 29, 2023 by Razor235

[schlosrat]

19 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

The kneejerk reaction from people against any post that's negative is so tiresome, especially when it's a strawman arguement.

You may see it as a kneejerk reaction, and you've a right to your perspective, but have you considered how tiresome it is for for the rest of us who did not come here to sip from the toxic tsunami, much less be inundated by it? You have every right to hold whatever opinion you care to, but if you're so dissatisfied with the progress on the roadmap and honestly can't see value in the dev posts, then why are you subjecting yourself to this? @Wheehaw Kermanis right. All the ranting has done nothing to actually change the state of the game in terms of when bugs will be squashed, or when features will be released. 

Edited May 29, 2023 by schlosrat
Fixed typo

[Wheehaw Kerman]

56 minutes ago, Razor235 said:

Oh boy I may regret saying this, and I apologize in advance to the moderators.  But I need to get this off my chest.

The sheer irony of this statement is palpable.

For a while I'd been avoiding interacting here since the first patches because I had already said my piece after launch, but I stuck around lurking in announcement threads and the infamous playercount discussion threads to keep a pulse on the community and the game.

And in every single one, the pro-KSP2 (for lack of a better more concise term) posters were easily just as condescending, if not more so, than the anti-KSP2 posters.  Time and time again there would be people venting, constructively or not, and they would be shot down with the usual "it's early access why are you complaining," "you should have known what you were getting into," "you know nothing about programming," etc. type stuff.  Now, surprise surprise, biting sarcasm and sardonic quips tend not to go over well with annoyed people, so they'd retaliate in kind and start a massive firefight that inevitably spirals out of control into endlessly looping arguments until the thread got locked.  And in other threads, someone would call out the other side in a way like you just did, and start the fecal storm anew.  I admit I am biased and consider myself on the anti- side of this argument, but that was the pattern I'd see time and time again.

No personal attacks goes both ways.  Respecting opinions goes both ways.  And do not pretend that there was not absurd mudslinging on both sides of these posts.

And yes, the people who say things like that without evidence are absolute trash fires (descriptive phrases I feel fit better would probably break forum rules) and they should be called out for it - but in their eyes, so should someone who actually is one of those things and that they feel they have actual evidence of it. 

^^^(I REALLY want to emphasize that I'm not intending to refer to anyone here in this sentence and I don't think that Nate or anyone else as that, but there may be others that truly do and they are allowed to voice that)^^^

Mindless echo chambers do nothing to improve any situation , whether it's the game itself, the community around that game, or anything related to it.

And now here we are in the first announcement thread I've seen where there has been hardly any vitriol for once.  And I strongly doubt that it was your intention to incite more.  But please, please, please understand how callouts like this really invite more flamewar discussions, and please, please, please just let it rest for a while.

And yeah, I would say it was worth it if it got this more effective communication style.  Probably got a bit excessive at times, but I doubt it would have changed this soon without a strong negative presence, and would not have changed at all without anyone voicing their dislike of the other methods.  Yes, there wasn't a whole lot of new information, and it really just confirmed things we suspected were happening, but before this all we had were suspicions wrapped up in a spinny sunshine and rainbows language that just didn't sit right with the current state of the game.  Tone of communication matters just as much as its actual content, and seeing the tone of this post  and confirmation that they are actually seeing things that we see (i.e. bugs) instead of us feeling like we're just shouting into the void did wonders to alleviate some of the unease that I was feeling.  There is once again a tiny (ok VERY tiny) drop of optimism that something good might come out of this, but there was none before.

Boy this post got out of hand.  Oh well.  Let it fall where it may.

Most of us have been optimistic all along.  Some disappointment in the EA was understandable, but the negative wave-making was never credible, or, as we’ve just seen, founded or justified.

If you go to a nice restaurant and pitch a screaming  tableware-throwing fit in the first five minutes because the breadsticks were underdone, you have to expect some flak from your fellow diners…

[18Watt]

Posts in this thread are starting to go off topic, with some finger-pointing.  Please stay on topic.