KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.

[78stonewobble]

23 hours ago, tstein said:

The weather being bad in a specific day  is out of control of the  hotel. Now if the hotel was built in a place where it rains   300 days per year, YES it is  a fault of the guy with this dumb idea! Beign PROFESSIONAL means you need to  think ahead and be prepared. The drama of the studios were  fault of HUMANS INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT!

[snip]

So pandemics is like weather? Unforeseeable events? 

How about your company being replaced with another company? Unforeseeable event? 

How about your company suddenly being put on a new project by the company your company is owned by? Unforeseeable event? 


 

In any case KSP1 needed 2-2½ years in "early access" (all previous public available releases) before I found it worthy of purchase. 

That's my point of comparison. 

Edited February 28, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[tstein]

23 hours ago, 78stonewobble said:

[snip]

So pandemics is like weather? Unforeseeable events? 

How about your company being replaced with another company? Unforeseeable event? 

How about your company suddenly being put on a new project by the company your company is owned by? Unforeseeable event? 


 

In any case KSP1 needed 2-2½ years in "early access" (all previous public available releases) before I found it worthy of purchase. 

That's my point of comparison. 

[snip] KSP is not the only game that crossed the pandemic, yet is  one of the WORST results.

Your company being put into anotheer project?  Put this in your mind.. this game is a TAKE 2 product! NOT A PRIVATE/INTERCEPT product! When someone says  KSP 2 project sux it means  Take 2 failure, be it direct or indirect.

 

Edited February 28, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[AtomicTech]

This is a rough game to play right now

[IncompetentSpacer]

From Rock Paper Shotgun:

Quote

If you were stranded on a desert island and had to recreate Kerbal Space Program from memory using nothing but coconuts and string, it would look something like Kerbal Space Program 2. The game is nowhere approaching finished, it barely resembles the promotional videos, and it isn’t ready, even by Early Access standards.

Source:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/kerbal-space-program-2-early-access-review

It goes without saying that devs need to do some damage control ASAP...

[tstein]

8 minutes ago, IncompetentSpacer said:

From Rock Paper Shotgun:

Source:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/kerbal-space-program-2-early-access-review

It goes without saying that devs need to do some damage control ASAP...

I was not much of a rock paper shotgun reader, but this sentence of their summarize very well "Shoved out of the Early Access airlock before it could put its EVA suit on, Kerbal Space Program 2 is in need of a rescue mission."

[bmyers831]

Well...  here we are.

PD released an extremely buggy, unplayable build on Friday.  Two days go by with multiple prominent youtubers reluctantly posting that the game was unplayable and a forum filled with bug reports.  It's now Monday and I don't see any sort of response from PD.  I just sent in a refund request as a pitiful protest that may get their attention.

I started KSP 1 around version 0.24.  This feels worse.  After a 3 year release delay I wouldn't expect to roll a craft out to the pad, see it sponge around, revert to VAB and then have that craft permanently stuck below the floor of the VAB.  I wouldn't expect to not see any TWR values.  I wouldn't expect to see delta V readouts barely functioning, and I wouldn't expect to see medium-complexity builds like a Saturn V replica bug out.

I agree that the game is unplayable.  KSP 1 has a passionate following.  All PD had to do was release KSP 2 with a similar feature set as KSP 1, reasonably free of show stopper bugs, and with an updated look, in a code base that could be built on for the future.  I could accept the rest of the roadmap as an early access situation.   It would have been a long awaited, huge hit.

Instead it's like we got something that really is early access for KSP 1, more than 10 years after KSP 1 went into early access.

Putting money into anything that is early access is really putting money where trust is.  You've broken my trust. Now your going to have to prove to me that KSP 2 is worth my money.

bye for now.

[Guest]

o7m8m8

[Missingno200]

20 hours ago, Axelord FTW said:

"We killed the Kraken."

The actual quote is "we are going to kill the kraken."

You shouldn't try to wrap reality just to fit your pessimistic views.

 

Oh I got it wrong too, though mine is much closer to reality. And somehow I missed the fact you were replied to moments later. My apology.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Missingno200
bleh.

[Flipflops]

16 hours ago, TLTay said:

The thing I find odd is how the positive/negative review count is almost perfectly tracking 50/50 positive/negative, and has been since I started watching around 3k reviews. If they weren't game reviews, I'd swear someone was throwing the numbers to keep it at least 50% positive... I mean, I've checked in on the numbers and have repeatedly seen them within a double digit number of reviews of eachother. The odds are too low to be coincidence..

Even if it is 50/50 there is a heap of people that are waiting to buy it but were also waiting for the initial reviews. These people aren't going to review it favourably, seeing as they haven't bought it yet. The ratio of negative/positive feelings must surely be weighted heavily in the negative.

[Vl3d]

I find the game very playable. I've landed on Mun, Minmus and Eve. Going to land on Duna a little later. Some people take themselves a little too serious.

[Monger]

You and many others, including myself. 

And honestly, it's fair for both sides. You showed that you are interested in buying the game, and made clear on what conditions. We should do that far more often with new games, especially early access. 

[DunaManiac]

21 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

Gameplay elements are missing but at least Intercept has bothered to include fundamental elements of the foundation like non-impulsive maneuvers and persistent thrust. Given that Squad managed to do something as daft as add ion engines and not for one second think of adding the persistent thrust needed to use them properly, I heavily doubt KSP 1 deserves its current price tag. KSP 2 is missing gameplay features, but at least it's functional unlike KSP 1

See, you missed what I was trying to say. I think that gameplay is more important than those two right now. While we're talking about the fundamental elements of the game, I think KSP2 just as bad as KSP1. You name "non-impulsive maneuvers" and "persistent thrust," as improvements over KSP1, but you neglect the fact that the code base is every bit as dysfunctional, unintuitive, buggy, and unoptimized as KSP1 ever was. You could have all the delta v calculators, transfer wimdow planners,  innovative new systems you want but that won't make the game any better if you don't have features. If you have veteran KSP1 players struggling, then how will the newbies fare? Also you and I have very different definitions of functional, as is somewhat inevitable, but it's interesting that you claim that KSP1 is overpriced but KSP2 is not. It'll be worth $50 when it reaches 1.0, and that version will be worth $60. You accuse me of having a sentimental attitude towards KSP1, while you completely ignore your own bias in the opposite direction. It seems you look at KSP1's failings and see them as making the game "overpriced," but look at KSP2's equal failings, and discount them.

21 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

the last thing I want to see is KSP 2 doing what Squad

That's the issue - they're doing exactly what squad did. They catapulted a barebones version that wasn't ready out to the public, they created a bad code-base, they went early access and will probably be stuck there for years. They designed bad systems that will probably have to be substantially reworked (i.e part manager, maneuver nodes, etc.). Let me counter your ion engine example with the maneuver nodes in KSP2, one of the most crucial, but frustrating, things about KSP1, which are at best buggier versions of the existing ones. They were daft enough to do that without thinking about what that would mean for 75% of the game?

[Guest]

I really like Steam's 2-hour refund window. You can take a risk with something and refund if it's not for you for whatever reason. I've done that with a few games that weren't broken at all, they just weren't what I hoped for.  You can always buy it again when it's further along!

[kerbiloid]

2 minutes ago, Periple said:

I really like Steam's 2-hour refund window. You can take a risk with something and refund if it's not for you for whatever reason.

That's why advanced devs make a HalfLife-like half-hour-long intro, and then a good first level.

Then it's late to refund.

[MarcAbaddon]

It's important to remember that Squad didn't really plan for all that KSP grew into. They certainly didn't think of ion engines when they designed the basic time warp and physics system. Intercept Games doing better with basic systems when knowing what engines will be in the game, is definitely a good thing but should be expected.

And that's exactly why I am so worried that so many of the fundamental mechanics are either not working or well designed.

• Orbits are not stable. Your AP and PE will shift. You may be on an intercept course, but won't be anymore next time you look.
• SAS that spins you out of control.
• The maneuver node UI is so much worse than the one in KSP 1.
• Underlying physics have exactly the same issues as in KSP 1, planes veering to the side, wheels being buggy, noodly rockets, exploding vessels when undocking... it's a really strong indicator that they have basically the same Unity physics causing the same issues.

Especially with the physics engine it looks and not conserving orbital parameters it feels like the foundation is as unsound as it was for KSP 1.2

[Bej Kerman]

15 hours ago, DunaManiac said:

See, you missed what I was trying to say. I think that gameplay is more important than those two right now. While we're talking about the fundamental elements of the game, I think KSP2 just as bad as KSP1. You name "non-impulsive maneuvers" and "persistent thrust," as improvements over KSP1, but you neglect the fact that the code base is every bit as dysfunctional, unintuitive, buggy, and unoptimized as KSP1 ever was. You could have all the delta v calculators, transfer wimdow planners,  innovative new systems you want but that won't make the game any better if you don't have features. If you have veteran KSP1 players struggling, then how will the newbies fare? Also you and I have very different definitions of functional, as is somewhat inevitable, but it's interesting that you claim that KSP1 is overpriced but KSP2 is not. It'll be worth $50 when it reaches 1.0, and that version will be worth $60. You accuse me of having a sentimental attitude towards KSP1, while you completely ignore your own bias in the opposite direction. It seems you look at KSP1's failings and see them as making the game "overpriced," but look at KSP2's equal failings, and discount them.

And you say [snip] that KSP 2 as it is now reflects how it'll be in a few years, or even a few months? You're forgetting that this isn't the release and it's already dealt with a bunch of loose bolts that knackered the KSP 1 experience. Forget the newbies, EA is not for them. Newbies will get to enjoy KSP 2 when it's in a more presentable state.

"It seems you look at KSP1's failings and see them as making the game "overpriced," but look at KSP2's equal failings, and discount them."

Because Squad's got a full release title that, for a good chunk of that release period, didn't have a dV indicator. That's just depressing. Is it not? KSP 2's failings are inevitably going to be ironed out, unlike KSP 1's as it seems Squad gives up on adding features.

Edited February 28, 2023 by James Kerman
Redacted by a moderator

[FleshJeb]

2 hours ago, IncompetentSpacer said:

had to recreate Kerbal Space Program from memory using nothing but coconuts and string

My running (completely unfounded) theory is that they somehow lost the entire codebase but still had all the art assets. Then they called in the maintainers of KSP 1 to help make a recreation in a hurry. That would explain a lot about both games being in the state they're in.

[Walker]

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

I find the game very playable. I've landed on Mun, Minmus and Eve. Going to land on Duna a little later. Some people take themselves a little too serious.

So I am, I'm having great fun with it. I've encountered some bugs, but nothing game breaking, performance is really good, fps only drops shortly after liftoff and only with large launch vechicles. Much, much better than KSP 1 at 0.15 version (when I started playing it). So I was shocked by amount of negatve comments. I guess that the game plays very differently on various machines and systems, with more bugs for some than for others...? 

[whatsEJstandfor]

30 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

That's why advanced devs make a HalfLife-like half-hour-long intro, and then a good first level.

Then it's late to refund.

My favorite was how MSFS had to open its own launcher to download about 5000 megagigs before you could actually play it, but Steam counted that as playtime because, technically, the game was running. It's a great game, but, boy howdy, that takes the cake and eats it too for being one of the sketchiest things I'd ever seen.

[nubcaker]

FYI, the reason you haven't heard anything is because the weekend just ended. There is no work during the weekends.

[RayneCloud]

Did you expect them to work through the weekend? After launching on Friday? 0o

[ImLazy]

20 minutes ago, RayneCloud said:

Did you expect them to work through the weekend? After launching on Friday? 0o

I believe he was expecting KSP2 to be a little bit less buggy after so many delays. Yes it is playable but for that price ( it is pricey ! ) and years in dev. we could expect a little bit more, am I right ?

[IncompetentSpacer]

50 minutes ago, RayneCloud said:

Did you expect them to work through the weekend? After launching on Friday? 0o

As someone who has been parts of over dozen successful software "launches" and even more importantly few failed ones - you do your damnedest to avoid launching on a Friday.  And management and all parts of organization dealing with communication  never "sleep" before or during initial week post launch* regardless days of the week. During last launch I was awake 36 hours straight, emptied a fridge of red bull and went temporarily blind afterwords for couple of days due to eyes drying out (I am no longer in my 20s so this ordeal was difficult for me). 

Of course gaming industry is very different and there is limit on how much you can compare different industries in different countries. But anyway - I don't think devs can improve massively the game in couple of days so no point of trying but customer communication part of the org?  Yeah, I expect them to be active 24/7.

BTW, liked your SWOT analyses in the thread you posted (although I do not agree with all parts of the approach but that is neither here or there).

*Because if you "sleep", you do not own the narrative and people fill in the gaps  in info with their own imagination.

 

[RayneCloud]

What you're doing is justifying something we call an "Is-Ought Gap". Just because a thing, IS, does not mean it Ought be. Just because we crunch, doesn't mean it's right, moral, ethical, or healthy. While I agree with the general statement that you should never launch before a stand-down or a weekend, because of the strain on communication and public relations, that's not an excuse to /Expect/ the team to work over the weekend. 

[Chilkoot]

6 hours ago, IncompetentSpacer said:

From Rock Paper Shotgun:

Source:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/kerbal-space-program-2-early-access-review

It goes without saying that devs need to do some damage control ASAP...

The review is really well-written.  I had John Oliver reading the first few paragraphs in my head, and was laughing out loud at times.

It's sad to see these early reviews panning the game (though there's no real hyperbole here).  It's very uncommon for a game to bounce back after a broad lambasting in the media like KSP 2 is receiving.  For years, anyone typing "KSP 2 review" in Google is going to get the EA reviews as top results, and that's bad press you can't just turn around with a stellar 1.0 release