KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.

[gluckez]

[Snip]

14 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

3 years at least, as per the sources.

As per the wikipedia article: "Kerbal Space Program 2 was announced at Gamescom 2019 on August 19, with an initial release date set for early 2020." 

= a year or even less.

14 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

So, a group of about 15 people with an already existing base to look at and lift stuff from should totally work faster than 3 to 5 independent devs, most of which were working on games for the first time. Glad we agree.

no.. and that's not even remotely what I said. those 3-5 devs don't need to have meetings with scientists in different fields, they don't need to deal with management and constantly changing team structures. they don't need to deal with junior developers causing merge conflicts or breaking changes, and they don't need to deal with architects leaving the project or anything like that. There's a point I made earlier about how all of this also affects time to market, I don't think it quite got through...

Edited August 29, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[Alexoff]

3 hours ago, gluckez said:

= a year or even less.

Did development start with the trailer? Here many times someone  posted the news that the development of KSP2 began in 2017, but every time there are people who believe that the development began the day after the trailer was shown.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Alexoff

[GGG-GoodGuyGreg]

Just now, Alexoff said:

Did development start with the trailer? Here many times someone  pisted the news that the development of KSP2 began in 2017, but every time there are people who believe that the development began the day after the trailer was shown.

Heart says no, Brain says yes. 

[gluckez]

2 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

Did development start with the trailer? Here many times someone  pisted the news that the development of KSP2 began in 2017, but every time there are people who believe that the development began the day after the trailer was shown.

no, my point was to say that first they promised to deliver within a year. 

 

42 minutes ago, PDCWolf said:

I wouldn't call it a "measurement" by a long shot. Saying the game is going to be done in a year is not a measurement, and it didn't help the customer in any way.

was what I originally said, and the guy countered saying:

15 minutes ago, gluckez said:

3 years at least, as per the sources.

 

[RocketRockington]

3 hours ago, The Aziz said:

It's aaaaaall about how you read it, isn't it 

No it's more about what the reality is vs what the speaker says, and context. 

If a 5 year old told me 'look at this at this masterpiece" and it's a 5year old's kindergarten fingerpainting, I'd think it was cute and tell them good job.  If an otherwise mentally sound seeming adult  did the same, and also said they'd been working on it for the past 5 years, I'd what and think it was very cringe. 

1 hour ago, cocoscacao said:

Can't pass the bug section and imagine what they are trying to make, eh? 

I can imagine a lot of things.  Saying many of them out loud would be deceptive.  If I was selling you a car, and said it gets 60mpg, but didn't mention "only with the engine in neutral going downhill, if the engine was able to run." that would be extremely deceptive, for instance, even if I aspired for that to be the reality of the car, vs actual reality.

That's my perspective, as I don't think KSP2 physics is at all better than KSP1 - even if the bugs were fixed.  At best, they're equivalent, and 6 months before the abomination that was released to the public for $50... Tom was basing that on some seriously aspirational thinking.

Edited August 28, 2023 by RocketRockington

[Alexoff]

23 minutes ago, gluckez said:

no, my point was to say that first they promised to deliver within a year. 

And this has not been done in 4 years, I think it will not work out in 6 years

[PDCWolf]

[Snip]

14 hours ago, gluckez said:

As per the wikipedia article: "Kerbal Space Program 2 was announced at Gamescom 2019 on August 19, with an initial release date set for early 2020." 

= a year or even less.

Professional developers should know that announcing a product to the public is not always related to the start of development, that's why I sourced claims that clearly put the start of development in 2017. How would they show gameplay on a trailer when they're supposedly just beginning work on it... yeah, 2+2.

14 hours ago, gluckez said:

no.. and that's not even remotely what I said. those 3-5 devs don't need to have meetings with scientists in different fields, they don't need to deal with management and constantly changing team structures. they don't need to deal with junior developers causing merge conflicts or breaking changes, and they don't need to deal with architects leaving the project or anything like that.

Are you now saying that those 3 to 5 indie dudes working on a game for the first time had a smoother road? [Snip]

13 hours ago, gluckez said:

no, my point was to say that first they promised to deliver within a year.

Which makes a total of 3 years of work. This is another can of worms that anyone with the smallest sense of what they imply would avoid:

1. Did the biggest, most experienced publisher in gaming give Star Theory a date knowing there was no game?
2. Did Star Theory lie about the state of the product to T2 prompting the "short" date?
3. Did they throw the entire progress away and start from scratch?

13 hours ago, gluckez said:

was what I originally said, and the guy countered saying:

You got those quotes attributed backwards, very confusing.

Edited August 29, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[Alexoff]

No wonder the KSP2 forum isn't filled with ponies that eat rainbows and poop butterflies. I have feeling that the developers are trying to make every mistake possible.

Edited August 29, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[RocketRockington]

33 minutes ago, Alexoff said:

No wonder the KSP2 forum isn't filled with ponies that eat rainbows and poop butterflies. I have feeling that the developers are trying to make every mistake possible.

I'm also not finding @PDCWolf's points tedious or miserable, , quite the opposite.  Just unfortunate that there are still people who can't grow the facts of KSP2 and of reasonable game development that need some help understanding. 

Maybe if every thread that did so didn't get merged with the grand discussions thread, it would be easier to point people at the relevant information of th development time frame, the history of communications, the state of the code, etc, rather than repeating it because no one wants to scroll through 70 pages. 

Edited August 28, 2023 by RocketRockington

[Alexoff]

22 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

I'm also not finding @PDCWolf's points tedious or miserable, , quite the opposite.  Just unfortunate that there are still people who can't grow the facts of KSP2 and of reasonable game development that need some help understanding. 

Maybe if every thread that did so didn't get merged with the grand discussions thread, it would be easier to point people at the relevant information of th development time frame, the history of communications, the state of the code, etc, rather than repeating it because no one wants to scroll through 70 pages. 

I think that many years of encouraging the developers did not do them any good and they relaxed a lot. Since many people think that they should be treated like children taking their first steps, then they should grow up and learn such words as "responsibility", "seriousness" and "honesty"

[Pthigrivi]

41 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

I'm also not finding @PDCWolf's points tedious or miserable, , quite the opposite.  Just unfortunate that there are still people who can't grow the facts of KSP2 and of reasonable game development that need some help understanding. 

Maybe if every thread that did so didn't get merged with the grand discussions thread, it would be easier to point people at the relevant information of th development time frame, the history of communications, the state of the code, etc, rather than repeating it because no one wants to scroll through 70 pages. 

Id say things getting merged here is about the only solution left because its the only way having any other kind of conversation is possible. But Im sure if we spend another 70 pages repeating the same complaints over and over again something good will happen. Sorry I don't think I understand the point anymore. 

Edited August 28, 2023 by Pthigrivi

[moeggz]

0.1.4 now moved from “early this week” to “this week”

Also the reentry video that was going to come out 10 days ago remains completely unacknowledged.

Edited August 28, 2023 by moeggz

[chefsbrian]

2 minutes ago, moeggz said:

0.1.4 now moved from “early this week” to “this week”

Also the reentry video that was going to come out 10 days ago remains completely unacknowledged.

Honestly, probably a good call, considering public sentiment. If they come out with a big, high effort production around a feature, while the patch is still delayed and needing work, people will gripe endlessly that they're still not even finishing the patches before going off on tangents. I know I'd probably feel that way, even with full knowledge that most of the production overhead should be designers and not core devs. Best to hold off a few days to focus on whatever this issue is. And who knows, maybe its related, some heat foundational change in the guts might just be what's tanking performance - We know they've been doing occlusion reworks already, and heat would touch heavily into those.

Still a bad taste, but the best options of a bad situation.

2 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Id say things getting merged here is about the only solution left because its the only way having any other kind of conversation is possible. But Im sure if we spend another 70 pages repeating the same complaints over and over again something good will happen. Sorry I don't think I understand the point anymore. 

I exist solely to mald at the KSP2 development cycle, and build rigid rockets. And I'm all outta rigidity. /s

To be a bit more serious, I'm not really sure what other conversations people can really have at this point. The AMA's haven't provided a great deal of discussion material, and its been over a month since the last developer insight/showcase. And while that one provided some insight into the design plans behind heat, it wasn't the sorta big feature/implementation reveal that gets conversations going. Everything else that already exists has mostly been talked to death. We've found the easter eggs, flown the meme missions (The determined have, at any rate) and seen the sights. The remaining conversations are all forward looking, and folks are pretty pessimistic about that so far.

[moeggz]

1 minute ago, chefsbrian said:

Still a bad taste, but the best options of a bad situation

I hear you but “the reentry video will launch alongside/day after/ whatever/ the patch” would be a bit better to me.

To be clear, I think their best strategy from this point is to go near radio silent until science. But that’s after you tie up what’s already been announced. 

[chefsbrian]

10 minutes ago, moeggz said:

To be clear, I think their best strategy from this point is to go near radio silent until science. But that’s after you tie up what’s already been announced. 

Radio silence and build only really works when you have a relatively stable foundation. They'd need to resolve the orbital decay and parts falling off at a minimum before they could do that. Otherwise, going radio silent with major defects looks like you're bailing. Whereas if they go radio silent to work on Science, and the biggest issues are "The part manager sucks" and "The game keeps putting extra kerbals in my spacecraft" then they're probably fine. Maybe you could add wobbly rockets onto that list, but I'm pretty sure the 'community' fix of file editing still provides an unofficial workaround, so if they don't wanna make that the official fix, at least there's something.

[Pthigrivi]

7 hours ago, chefsbrian said:

To be a bit more serious, I'm not really sure what other conversations people can really have at this point. The AMA's haven't provided a great deal of discussion material, and its been over a month since the last developer insight/showcase. And while that one provided some insight into the design plans behind heat, it wasn't the sorta big feature/implementation reveal that gets conversations going. Everything else that already exists has mostly been talked to death. We've found the easter eggs, flown the meme missions (The determined have, at any rate) and seen the sights. The remaining conversations are all forward looking, and folks are pretty pessimistic about that so far.

Yeah I mean I really do understand folks being pretty frustrated but we had all kinds of good conversations for years about KSP1 without anything of any substance being added after Breaking Ground. People have short memories but Squad was much less communicative than Intercept has been. We might get an update every several months or so but other than that it was pretty quiet on that front. We knew even less in the years before KSP2 came out but still there were a lot of good folks here who were both excited and worried and even when folks disagreed there was a good balance. You could have real conversations even about things you didn't like. [Snip]. Thats not to say everyone who's not happy with the game as it is doesn't have a pretty legit point. I even agree with them. I think unfortunately for some though the relentless repetitive negativity is a deliberate tactic to make the environment here so miserable that everyone else throws up their hands and leaves. I don't know why they would want that, but, hey, what are you gonna do.

Edited August 29, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[chefsbrian]

2 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

I think unfortunately for some though the relentless repetitive negativity is a deliberate tactic to make the environment here so miserable that everyone else throws up their hands and leaves. I don't know why they would want that, but, hey, what are you gonna do.

Hardly a deliberate tactic, just passion. Remember that a forum (or any community) is mostly made up of the most passionate people for a project, both positive and negative. Those who don't really care and just play occasionally tend to lurk at best, but usually just don't engage these kinds of spaces at all. The negative speakers are speaking out because they want to be heard - the prospect of driving others away makes that harder, not easier. And its not some effort to tank/punish/etc the developers for it, as again, the majority of people don't interact with communities at this level. They'll see the steam ratings, a few suggested and top reviews, and make a decision there.

Folks are upset with the state of things, and they want to talk with other people who are upset with the state of things. Others are ok with the state of things, and they want to talk to people who are ok with the state of things. Both groups want to feel vindicated, justified in how they feel by confirming that no, they're not just crazy or stupid, others feel the same way. Some of those people just take it a bit too personally when they stumble across someone who doesn't feel the same way they do. The community ends up on defense mode, with all members wary that someone's there to tear them down for hate/hope for the project. Which in turn leads most conversations to be snippy and aggressive as everyone takes every quip by assuming the worst. The gap between the groups grows wider, and the outliers become more extreme. Back immediately following launch, the extreme positive side was "Wow this is rough but the bones are so good, they'll sort it out soon" and the extreme negative side was "Wow the games in a terrible state, how'd they think this was ok to release?". Now, six months on, the extreme positive side is more or less saying "Lol why did you expect a full price game to be any good or playable when its got the Early Access label? You're a fool if you expected anything else" and the extreme negative side is "The devs have cut and run, the ones left over can't tie their own shoelaces much less write a line of code, how hard is it to copypaste from a decade old game?". The moderate opinions and positions are still here, but frankly, nobody listens much to them lol, quirk of human nature.

So long as these narratives remain so extreme and so divergent, things won't get better in the community. The devs actions will shift the dial one way or another, but from a community perspective its in the worst possible state - Maximum risk of genuine incompetence and failure in the game, and maximum possibility that its all just around the corner. Six months with minimal quality patching is extremely poor. But six months plus change to a major feature release is pretty good. Frankly, until the devs land it, flat on their face or perfectly, its going to continue to diverge. Once they do the narrative will likely unify, either to "Yea it sucks" and "It sucks but recovery narrative NMS guys", or it lands it and goes "It sucked but its turning around" and "I told you guys to stop crying, its great".

But all the while, as the passionate community divides and bickers and hopes for some proof one way or another, the real danger is the quiet majority audience. They're not hanging around reading devblogs. They're not digging deep into community discussions and roadmap details and the rocky development cycle the game has. They're seeing a 29% Mostly Negative recent review score on steam, and skipping the game. They're taking a gamble, buying it, having a bad time, and refunding it with a negative review. They're folks who bought the game, tried playing for a bit, left a negative review and put the game down and probably won't come back, alter reviews if it gets good, etc. The easiest representation of this I can see is the mission reports forums for the two games. The first games one is still pretty active, with the entire first page of threads having been posted in this month. KSP2 has six threads that've been active this month, and its first page goes back to April. If the passionate forum goers aren't flying as much, what do you think the casual audience is doing? Nothing much, I'd imagine.

Balls in the developers court, but the clocks ticking - This lurch period of uncertainty isn't helping any aspect of the game or the community.

[moeggz]

question, if a dev posts on a personal Reddit account, “hey it’s me the dev x” and then says something else in another comment is that ok to share here? Im not trying to unmask a private account, this account openly claims to be a dev, would that comment be on to share?

[razark]

Just now, moeggz said:

question, if a dev posts on a personal Reddit account, “hey it’s me the dev x” and then says something else in another comment is that ok to share here? Im not trying to unmask a private account, this account openly claims to be a dev, would that comment be on to share?

If they are posting in public, they are posting in public.  Any issue would be on their end as possibly violating an NDA or company policy.  If the company doesn't like it, they can have it removed from here.

That does leave the question of the claim it really is the person claimed, though.

[moeggz]

Ok here goes…

An account on Reddit claiming to be Paul Furio has said that he is shocked that science hasn’t come out yet.

 

I’m also confident it’s him as the Reddit username is the name of the band he is in and is three years old, so a little hard to fake. His first post in Kerbal space program is a link to open jobs the same week as the launch of the game, he talks about floating point origins in video games with large spaces, everything likes up.

 

So again, the account is openly claiming to be Paul Furio, I didn’t try to unmask an anonymous account I read the self claim (as in the account said “I am Paul Furio” and I actually first saw this on the discord) then tried to see if I could verify. And it seems pretty solid that it’s him, and he is ok with it being known that it’s him,  so I’m sure he’s only saying what he’s allowed to with a presumed NDA. All his comments in r/Kerbal space program are very positive to the devs, and being shocked that science isn’t out yet isn’t necessarily a negative thing to say.

 

But that would be our first confirmation that the update cycle is behind even internal expectations, specifically internal expectations after the state of the game at EA launch. If even the ex technical director is shocked at how long things are taking after knowing the state of the code at launch what exactly is happening?

Edited August 29, 2023 by moeggz
Formatting and spelling

[MechBFP]

15 minutes ago, moeggz said:

Ok here goes then.

 

An account on Reddit claiming to be Paul Furio has said that he is shocked that science hasn’t come out yet.

 

I’m also confident it’s him as the Reddit username is the name of the band he is in and is three years old, so a little hard to fake. His first post in Kerbal space program is a link to open jobs the same week as the launch of the game, he talks about floating point origins in video games with large spaces, everything likes up.

 

So again, the account is openly claiming to be Paul Furio, I didn’t try to unmask an anonymous account I read the self claim (as in the account said “I am Paul Furio” and I actually first saw this on the discord) then tried to see if I could verify. And it seems pretty solid that it’s him, and he is ok with it being known that it’s him,  so I’m sure he’s only saying what he’s allowed to with a presumed NDA. All his comments in r/Kerbal space program are very positive to the devs, and being shocked that science isn’t out yet isn’t necessarily a negative thing to say.

 

But that would be our confirmation that the update cycle is behind even internal expectations, specifically internal expectations after the state of the game at EA launch. If even the ex technical director is shocked at how long things are taking after knowing the state of the code at launch what exactly is happening?

That might be why they are an ex director and also why the game has had unrealistic targets before. 

[moeggz]

@MechBFP totally possible, but then very odd to even come close to breaching NDA if you left on bad terms.

[Periple]

8 minutes ago, moeggz said:

@MechBFP totally possible, but then very odd to even come close to breaching NDA if you left on bad terms.

To my knowledge he’s the only person who was laid off from IG during the T2 mayhem. His was an absolute key role in any game project. There’s no way they would have let him go if they were happy with what he was doing.

He’s also the one who made the dev post in 2020 about how he’s responsible for making sure everything ships on time, is performant, and is high quality. And indeed all that is ultimately the TD’s responsibility.

So I also think it’s a bit much if he really is posting stuff like that since he was responsible for the state of the game when it went into EA as well as the development, build, and quality processes and practices they had in place!

[moeggz]

@Periple agreed but again all of his comments were clearly defending and positive about the devs. And even being shocked that science isn’t out isn’t necessarily negative “they’re so good I really thought they’d have it by now” type of way.

Im not as interested in the specific percentage of blame between parties, we will never really know. My gripes are with publishong decisions as a whole, not trying to make anything personal.

But if it’s at least an accurate statement, that science was internally expected within 6 months, what has gone wrong since launch?

(also I tried to give you a thumbs up but I guess I’ve added too many today lol)

Edited August 29, 2023 by moeggz

[RocketRockington]

3 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah I mean I really do understand folks being pretty frustrated but we had all kinds of good conversations for years about KSP1 without anything of any substance being added after Breaking Ground. People have short memories but Squad was much less communicative than Intercept has been.

I think EVA construction was meaningful.  And comets are cool.  Maneuver creator and transfer planner and alarm clock were great additions for people who don't already have those in mod form. But yeah the project was clearly winding down and they were finishing off bits and bobs. 

On the other hand, the comms Squad did do were about improvements coming to the game because the game marketed itself (likely also they had 0 marketting budget). However, they would jump on streams after each version update and chat a bit with people in a genuine fashion - vs the highly produced , and misleading, communications that Intercept was known for pre launch, and the scattershot nature of post launch.  

Also, I suspect PD deliberately asked Squad not to add things that KSP2 was focusing on, and not to steal the thunder from. KSP2, as the post 2019 KSP2 announce additions to KSP1 were definitely not as good as breaking ground.

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by RocketRockington