KSP2 EA now on sale for 20% off?!....

[whatsEJstandfor]

2 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

people were working under the communication that the price was going to remain the same during EA and increase on 1.0

But the screenshot you posted didn't say that. The entirety of the interaction was "Will the game be more expensive at 1.0" answered with "Yes". Adding your own imaginary implicit "But the price won't change until then" and then getting annoyed at the devs for not honoring that is p silly imho

[RocketRockington]

3 hours ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

But the screenshot you posted didn't say that. The entirety of the interaction was "Will the game be more expensive at 1.0" answered with "Yes". Adding your own imaginary implicit "But the price won't change until then" and then getting annoyed at the devs for not honoring that is p silly imho

A lot of people in this forum posted that they thought it was a good idea that they spent $50 on KSP2 because even with a rocky start, it was going to get better and also because it was going to go up in price.   

Besides one post buried in a discord by PD Dakota - well after launch - the dev team did not go out of their way to change any impression that was promoted by Nate's statements of the price going up on launch. And I didn't see other people jump in to correct them either, even though now after the fact people are saying it's ok because none of the fine print actually said KSP2 wouldn't do sales, only that on launch specifically the price would go up - even if multiple sales happened before, after, maybe immediately after launch, who knows, anything could be lawyered into being true if you're willing to allow a sale to not be included in those statements.

This is a continued pattern where the KSP2 team says things like "We're slaying the kraken" (not T2 marketting, that was a dev) which lead people to think "oh the physics are actually going to be better in KSP2" - something any reasonable person would take that to mean.   But after the fact when those statements obvious implications are clearly not true, supporters put on their lawyer hats and now it's always 'caveat emptor ' and 'read the exact letter of what they said, they didn't say we 'slayed' the kraken, it only means that was something they might be doing', yadda yadda.

But also those supporters still keep saying say 'trust the devs'.   

Which is it?  Trust the devs, or caveat emptor?

[Yakuzi]

On 6/27/2023 at 2:45 AM, MechBFP said:

You complain about bad faith arguments, and then say that. Not very consistent.

Not sure what you're on about. KSP2 started development in 2017 after Take Two acquired the IP in May (source1, source2). Even if they started on the 31st of December 2017 that puts development well over 5 years before they went into EA.

[The Aziz]

5 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

none of the fine print actually said KSP2 wouldn't do sales, only that on launch specifically the price would go up

And this is what matters. Again, you wouldn't file a lawsuit if you put your hand in kettle full of boiling water because the user manual didn't strictly forbid it. Common sense?

5 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

This is a continued pattern where the KSP2 team says things like "We're slaying the kraken"

Misquoted, as usual. I'll let you find the correct one on your own.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

5 hours ago, RocketRockington said:

But also those supporters still keep saying say 'trust the devs'.   

Which is it?  Trust the devs, or caveat emptor?

Caveat emptor with absolutely everybody short of my grandmother.  Assess your sources based on how well informed and connected they are.

The devs are our best informed, most connected, and therefore most credible sources.  

[Wheehaw Kerman]

3 hours ago, Yakuzi said:

Not sure what you're on about. KSP2 started development in 2017 after Take Two acquired the IP in May (source1, source2). Even if they started on the 31st of December 2017 that puts development well over 5 years before they went into EA.

The mistake you’re making is confusing acquisition of IP with commencement of actual development work, unless you’re including the underlying commercial and legal work in your definition of “development”.  
 

The development work proper would have started at some point after Private Division engaged Star Theory (then Uber Entertainment), and Star Theory ramped up to begin work - planning, reassigning resources, hiring new ones, getting them organized and set up to work.  Speculating about that on zero evidence is pointless.  I don’t know that we’ve got a date for Star Theory being hired, but given the timing and lack of technical detail of the first Star Theory announcement (August 2019) I doubt a lot of actual coding happened before August 2019.  Can’t say for sure, though, and those who know aren’t talking.

I hope that somebody breaks NDA at some point.  The story is probably pretty interesting. 

27 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

And this is what matters. Again, you wouldn't file a lawsuit if you put your hand in kettle full of boiling water because the user manual didn't strictly forbid it. Common sense?

Misquoted, as usual. I'll let you find the correct one on your own.

You need an actual cause of action before you sue somebody, or at least convince a licensed lawyer that you have one.   Not gonna happen here - IG’s putting the game on sale is perfectly normal commercial behaviour.  Also, lawyers like to get paid, and the ones who do pro bono work tend to do it for causes better than this one.

Edited June 28, 2023 by Wheehaw Kerman

[PDCWolf]

9 hours ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

But the screenshot you posted didn't say that. The entirety of the interaction was "Will the game be more expensive at 1.0" answered with "Yes". Adding your own imaginary implicit "But the price won't change until then" and then getting annoyed at the devs for not honoring that is p silly imho

That was not the answer. The literal answer from Nate is "The price will increase in 1.0". The incomplete statement is there, the FOMO is there (signaling price increases to drive sales as "investment" vs higher future prices), and the "implicits" were exactly what they wanted the community to understand, until problem brew and Dakota had to come in and change the implicit part by adding that last bit. Sure, they might not be legally liable, but anyone with 2 braincells knows this is a big betrayal of trust.

13 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

The mistake you’re making is confusing acquisition of IP with commencement of actual development work

The game was ready for release in 2020, as stated by them. It was also ready to release in 2021, and 2022, as stated by them. If the game was ready for release in 2020, when did development start? There's a big lie somewhere along the line, or many lies. I agree there's not more than 4 years of work in current KSP, but we can't in good faith take that as the truth when they said it was ready for release almost 4 years ago.

Edited June 28, 2023 by PDCWolf

[Yakuzi]

23 minutes ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

The mistake you’re making is confusing acquisition of IP with commencement of actual development work, unless you’re including the underlying commercial and legal work in your definition of “development”.  
 

The development work proper would have started at some point after Private Division engaged Star Theory (then Uber Entertainment), and Star Theory ramped up to begin work - planning, reassigning resources, hiring new ones, getting them organized and set up to work.  Speculating about that on zero evidence is pointless.  I don’t know that we’ve got a date for Star Theory being hired, but given the timing and lack of technical detail of the first Star Theory announcement (August 2019) I doubt a lot of actual coding happened before August 2019.  Can’t say for sure, though, and those who know aren’t talking.

I hope that somebody breaks NDA at some point.  The story is probably pretty interesting. 

 

Before you continue to make baseless assumptions and accusations I suggest you actually read the sources (edit: again source1, source2) I included in the very post you're quoting:

Quote

Star Theory began work on KSP2 in 2017, after Take-Two purchased the rights to the popular flight sim game from another independent studio, Squad.

 

Quote

In 2017, Star Theory began working with Take-Two on its most high-profile project. Take-Two had purchased the rights to a popular flight simulation game developed by another independent studio and contracted Star Theory to make a sequel.

 

Appreciate the irony of your post though. The forums definitely have become more... interesting... since KSP2 has been released.

 

Edited June 28, 2023 by Yakuzi
added the sources to this post as well, since they are hard to miss apparently

[Wheehaw Kerman]

6 minutes ago, Yakuzi said:

 

Before you continue to make baseless assumptions and accusations I suggest you actually read the sources (source1, source2) I included in the very post you're quoting:

 

 

Appreciate the irony of your post though. The forums definitely have become more... interesting... since KSP2 has been released.

Fair enough.  I’d gone to Wikipedia for the timeline.  Quibbling about credibility of sources and definitions of work (in my line of work there’s years of prep before we put metaphorical boots on the ground) aside, I expect that the quantity and quality of Star Theory’s work might have had something to do with their replacement.  We might be better served by looking at when work on the IG version started.  But again, this is all still pointless speculation.  Until somebody talks all we have is uninformed guesswork.

[Yakuzi]

1 minute ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Fair enough.  I’d gone to Wikipedia for the timeline.  Quibbling about credibility of sources and definitions of work (in my line of work there’s years of prep before we put metaphorical boots on the ground) aside, I expect that the quantity and quality of Star Theory’s work might have had something to do with their replacement.  We might be better served by looking at when work on the IG version started.  But again, this is all still pointless speculation.  Until somebody talks all we have is uninformed guesswork.

There's no quibbling on my end, I'm solely referring to sources that state that development of KSP2 began in 2017.

Additionally, why are you now including assumptions about the 'credibility of sources' and 'quantity and quality of ST's work'? Unless you can provide any sources that prove otherwise, it seems like you're just trying to move the goal posts.

[Wheehaw Kerman]

21 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

The game was ready for release in 2020, as stated by them. It was also ready to release in 2021, and 2022, as stated by them. If the game was ready for release in 2020, when did development start? There's a big lie somewhere along the line, or many lies. I agree there's not more than 4 years of work in current KSP, but we can't in good faith take that as the truth when they said it was ready for release almost 4 years ago.

So I like to defend the indefensible, just for bleeps and giggles - it drives my wife nuts.  But I’m not going to even attempt to defend IG’s comms in that timeframe.  Clearly, they were wrong.  Overly optimistic project scheduling, COVID, unanticipated technical roadblocks, PD having a gun pointed at Nate’s head when he said that?  Who knows, and besides, it’s kinda pointless except in one respect.  It’s almost like a Rorschach test for forum members - you can tell a lot from what they parse out of it. 

2 minutes ago, Yakuzi said:

There's no quibbling on my end, I'm solely referring to sources that state that development of KSP2 began in 2017.

Additionally, why are you now including assumptions about the 'credibility of sources' and 'quantity and quality of ST's work'? Unless you can provide any sources that prove otherwise, it seems like you're just trying to move the goal posts.

Your own source, which you just quoted a couple of posts ago, used “work”, not “development”.  

And yes, credibility of sources and quality of reporting does matter, especially when it’s midnight during a power failure and we can’t find the goal posts.

[Yakuzi]

2 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

Your own source, which you just quoted a couple of posts ago, used “work”, not “development”. 

[snip] What do you think development means?

 

2 hours ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

And yes, credibility of sources and quality of reporting does matter

Sure. Again, do you have any reliable info which would indicate that the Bloomberg or Videogameschronicle articles are not credible?

[snip]

Edited June 28, 2023 by Snark
Redacted by moderator

[Alexoff]

1 hour ago, Wheehaw Kerman said:

COVID

It seems to me that covid should not be mentioned at all without some clarification, for example, that one of the important employees ended up in intensive care for many months. Since absolutely all companies went through similar difficulties, but as a result, someone released Redfall, and someone Diablo 4.

 

And as for the discount - there is nothing surprising in this, just business. There was a similar story with cyberpunk, although the developers promised not to arrange price cuts.

 

[Westinghouse]

8 hours ago, The Aziz said:

And this is what matters. Again, you wouldn't file a lawsuit if you put your hand in kettle full of boiling water because the user manual didn't strictly forbid it. Common sense?

Misquoted, as usual. I'll let you find the correct one on your own.

The exact quote was "We're killing the Kraken...."
Kerbal Space Program 2: Episode 5 - Interstellar Travel - YouTube

The guy in the video did have to check himself immediately after saying that. 
But by making statements such as this, it is definitely reasonable to say they have been over-promising  and increasing expectations.

[Vanamonde]

As this thread has wandered from the Steam Summer Sale and into a repetition of discussions in other threads, it's time to move on.