A poll on predictions

[RayneCloud]

I'm starting to worry about a project cancelation myself. 

[chefsbrian]

Can't say the thought hasn't crossed my mind, but I think a flop and bail of this magnitude would be too damaging to the Private Division brand as a whole to be worth any financial cut and run. More likely you see the roadmap delivered poorly/cut down, with no further additions and an ignoble end, over a full bail.

Whatever the behind the scenes issues, I don't think its worth tanking the possibility for Private Division to basically ever be trusted with early access again. Small indies get away with it, someone backed by Take2 isn't going to be so lucky.

[RocketRockington]

11 minutes ago, chefsbrian said:

Can't say the thought hasn't crossed my mind, but I think a flop and bail of this magnitude would be too damaging to the Private Division brand as a whole to be worth any financial cut and run. More likely you see the roadmap delivered poorly/cut down, with no further additions and an ignoble end, over a full bail.

Whatever the behind the scenes issues, I don't think its worth tanking the possibility for Private Division to basically ever be trusted with early access again. Small indies get away with it, someone backed by Take2 isn't going to be so lucky.

Disintegration, published by PD ,was already a bare bones title - though not called an EA - and support was dropped after 6 months.

I think you overestimate how much blowback a publisher receives from any one bad title.  The kerbal franchise might be torched, if KSP2 gets canned, unless IGs other game so ehow resurrects it.  But the grand bulk of game purchasing players do not even know who published a particular title unless it's a hugely iconic game, and even then most will cut a publisher slack.  How many games/franchises has EA, Bethesda, Activision, etc wrecked while remaining in business after all.

[Strawberry]

Honestly Im not really concerned about cancellation yet, as far as we can tell their funds have been increasing (as they've been hiring more people). Intercept games is very close to PD (and thus Take2) as PD literally owns intercept games and is their pet project. Not to mention relative to everything else take2 works, intercept games is cheap and despite whatever the total production costs for ksp2 will be, the profit potential is high. As far as I can tell, they have enough political influence to last them a fair bit. Where I will get concerned is if come science/colonies, we don't see a noticeable turn around (note I dont think this needs to be a full u turn for them to avoid cancellation). I don't personally think no change in community will happen mind you but we shall see.

[RocketRockington]

10 minutes ago, Strawberry said:

Not to mention relative to everything else take2 works, intercept games is cheap and despite whatever the total production costs for ksp2 will be, the profit potential is high

Not at this point.  Going 3 years over time + extra manpower and setting up a new studio + another 2years to get to 1.0 (at least) means that the project is costing them 3x what they expected before getting to a real, multiplatform release.  Current sales are low (400k units from vginsights) vs the projection they likely had of selling 5+ million copies like KSP1 did - and in a quicker time frame since they likely expected a 'normal' game launch vs the slow drip of KSP1.

I'd estimate they've burned 30+ million dollars on KSP2, for that sort of headcount in Seattle, even if the project was smaller/cheaper at points in its past, and have recouped 8-9m of it.  And they're burning more every month, considering sales are tiny while headcount is flat or even rising.  That doesn't look good on a P/L, even if its just a small fraction of T2.    They're going to have to burn yet more when/if it reaches 1.0 for a marketting push to remind the gaming audience 'hey we exist and don't suck now'.

It's true that 50 people on a game is relatively small potatoes for a T2 title (though its big for a PD title) but T2 titles are expected to sell a lot more - especially factoring in most T2 titles doing MTX.   

[Periple]

I don’t think cancellation is on the cards. It does seem possible that they’ve missed a milestone and usually the publisher takes action if that happens. They’re often reviewed quarterly. It could be that their relative radio silence since July (start of Q3) has something to do with that.

If that is the case, I’d expect to see something happen soon.

[modus]

Can't wait for that version the devs play, you know, the one they're having so much fun with. 

That's probably what's distracting them.

[Alpha_star]

Might be a *few* days too late, but I want to share my opinions.

0.1.4 just came out yesterday (relative to my time zone), fixing 13 of the top 20 issues. Now I expected the number to be around 15, so it does not match my expectations perfectly. But from what I've seen in the patch notes and KERB updates, their progress is at a rate of about 3 major bugs per two weeks. If it stays out to be the same for the next several months or so, then by patch 5 we'll likely have around 18 of the major bugs squashed. Of course, as old ones are fixed and new ones popping up, the current list would be wildly different from what we'll have by the next update. All in all, my very own guess is that we'll have most of the major bugs gone two months from now, which is (based on community assumption) the targeted release time of the science update.

Bug fixing is a one time labor. Simply put, if you have a bug fixed in an update, you do not have to re-write the entire fix in the next one. Putting this into account, patches after the science update would probably a fair bit smaller than compared to patches in version 0.1. It is likely that they would come out at a much faster pace and would focus on fixing new issues brought by the thermal and science update. My personal guess is around two patches every month or so.

Still, I believe it's unlikely for the game to reach colonies, given that it needs to introduce an extremely complexed building/construction system. Adding all things up, I'd vote science and I believe that there's a slim chance for colonies to be implemented. I'm not talkin about anyone or anything specific, just a general idea.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Alpha_star

[Infinite Aerospace]

I really genuinely hope that cancellation is not on the cards, that said I also don't have much faith we'll see science before the first anniversary of the launch. I find the lack of any communication regarding science concerning to say the least.

[GGG-GoodGuyGreg]

10 minutes ago, Infinite Aerospace said:

I really genuinely hope that cancellation is not on the cards, that said I also don't have much faith we'll see science before the first anniversary of the launch. I find the lack of any communication regarding science concerning to say the least.

Although it's my money burning I do hope they pull it and come back starting on the right foot when they want, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years.

Or if they can't deliver the roadmap, at least sell the IP to someone who can.

I just don't want to remember the sequel to KSP2 like this. For me, there is no sequel as of now.

[Alexoff]

As I wrote earlier, T2 will force the developers to finish the game at level 1.0.5, releasing colonies and so on in the same form that the game was in 0.1.0, that is, in its raw form with a bunch of bugs. Thus, the formally announced task will be completed, but the players are unlikely to be satisfied.

[Turbo Ben]

On 8/25/2023 at 9:47 AM, Turbo Ben said:

My prediction is 0.2.2 - Science with with a couple of bug fixes, but still many bugs remaining. I think we'll get 0.1.5 in November and 0.2.0 for Christmas period to help drive sales. It will be full of bugs and there will be a couple of rushed out fixes before the anniversary.

I'd like to amend my prediction. After seeing how little of consequence has been fixed in 0.1.4, I don't think we'll be seeing science this year. If we do, it will be to milk the last bit of hype there is for the game and will be as bug ridden as the initial release. I'd like to think we'll have science within a year of release, but I think we'll be lucky to be past 0.1.6. I lost interest in the game 3 months ago, now I've lost hope it will ever be what was promised. Cancellation is looking likely now.

[Superpluto126]

My Predictions are as follows:

KSP2 0.1.5 In Mid November, fixing the Last of the Big Bugs and Adding Re-Entry VFX

KSP2 0.2.0 during the Christmas sale, KSP2 Price drops to 20-30$ and the game has a small sale recovery.

KSP2 0.2.1 on the Feb 24th 2024, Full Heating System implemented.

KSP2 0.4.0 in July 2024, Adding Colonies.

KSP2 0.7.0 in the 2024 Christmas Sale, Adding Interstellar.

KSP2 0.8.0 in Early 2025, Development begins to Snowball as Bugs are dwindling and FPS increasing. The Addition of the Exploration update see's a Resurgence in sales.

KSP 0.9.0 in Mid 2025, Adding Multiplayer.

KSP 1.0.0 in Fall 2025, An Additional star system and the Completion of EA.

Beyond:Although its Impossible to predict where it goes from here but should it not be cancelled its possible its now a profitable project with sales recovering enough. 

KSP3 in the Mid-Late 2030s.

Yep, Its Optimistic and Cancellation is possible, but I choose Optimism 

[chefsbrian]

4 hours ago, Superpluto126 said:

Yep, Its Optimistic and Cancellation is possible, but I choose Optimism 

If I put on my big optimism hat, the only thing I'd still have to disagree with is the big bugs being solved - Orbit decay is a massive problem, and phantom forces in any complex physics simulation is an absolute nightmare to untangle, even for experienced teams. There's a reason most games flagrantly fake it, rather than deal with anything approaching realistic behavior. The nature of how the systems work makes it really difficult to simply itemize input and output, and often you think you've solved the problem only to have solved a symptom, and amplified a problem elsewhere.

And falling outta space is about as big of a bug as a space game can have. Everything else is plausible if we go optimistically and assume good resource allocation and outcomes. Except for KSP3 maybe - Unless the feature implementations turn out poorly, they're really covering all the bases here. You're more likely to see paid content expansions for KSP2 into 2030 just by the game having been built as a much more robust platform - a lot of things are built so far to maximize loading performance, asset handling etc in a way thats not just modding friendly, but expansion friendly.

[Superpluto126]

54 minutes ago, chefsbrian said:

If I put on my big optimism hat, the only thing I'd still have to disagree with is the big bugs being solved - Orbit decay is a massive problem, and phantom forces in any complex physics simulation is an absolute nightmare to untangle, even for experienced teams. There's a reason most games flagrantly fake it, rather than deal with anything approaching realistic behavior. The nature of how the systems work makes it really difficult to simply itemize input and output, and often you think you've solved the problem only to have solved a symptom, and amplified a problem elsewhere.

And falling outta space is about as big of a bug as a space game can have. Everything else is plausible if we go optimistically and assume good resource allocation and outcomes. Except for KSP3 maybe - Unless the feature implementations turn out poorly, they're really covering all the bases here. You're more likely to see paid content expansions for KSP2 into 2030 just by the game having been built as a much more robust platform - a lot of things are built so far to maximize loading performance, asset handling etc in a way thats not just modding friendly, but expansion friendly.

Yeah, your probably right about Orbital Decay But I think by the time Colonies and Orbit bases become a thing It'll be solved or patched.

KSP3 I'd disagree on though, there are still things like Intergalactic Travel, Interstellar radiation, Procedural Star systems, Terraforming, Paraterraforming Ect that are possible future things a game could focus on.

 

Also I had random Ideas on the KSP2 Post 1.0 Updates.

 

Red skies:Adds Red and Brown Dwarf systems to the Game.

Unknown Waters:Adds Systems with More Oceanic Planets

Future Vistas:Adds new Colony parts and a New Star system.

 

[Geredis]

I am well past the point of caring what happens anymore to this game, and I think that we'll find that our February 2024 milestone, whatever it is, will be quite disappointing. I have this sense that we'll probably be at Science and a major bug patch. What exactly the other patches (probably 1 more between now and Science) will look like I don't know, but I figure we might have one more patch in Octoberish, then Science come December...and yeah, and as an anniversary I'll be sorely disappointed by all of that. I also imagine that around this point the roadmap will change severely and that PD/IG will start moving the goalposts, adjusting the roadmap so that they can finally get a 1.0 out in a reasonable period of time. But that it's gonna be a rushed job with quite a few substantial cuts - not so much to the headlines, but to the details. Colonies and interstellar will be in, somehow by that point, but a lot of the accompanying stuff will be left in the dust. Multiplayer is probably going to be on the chopping block for what will be available at 1.0 with a promise of it coming soon enough post-launch. That said, once the game hits 1.0 in whatever state it does, I figure that everyone will want to wash their hands of this game and move on with their lives.

[Spicat]

5 hours ago, Superpluto126 said:

KSP 0.9.0 in Mid 2025, Adding Multiplayer.

Multiplayer should be 1.0:

And console version is for after 1.0 so they will also focus on this when they release multiplayer.

[chefsbrian]

58 minutes ago, Superpluto126 said:

KSP3 I'd disagree on though, there are still things like Intergalactic Travel, Interstellar radiation, Procedural Star systems, Terraforming, Paraterraforming Ect that are possible future things a game could focus on.

Terraforming would make good sequel content, but I'm not sure it'd make good design sense - KSP's focus is all about building rockets to explore. Colonies facilitate making exploration meaningful by providing resource constraints, new places to start exploration from, which in turn makes exploration both more mechanically interesting as you design craft around available resource limits, and mechanically rewarding as colonization makes future explorations easier. Terraforming is cool, but has little influence on that loop - Atmosphere makes launches harder, and the theoretical benefit of an endless colony unconstrained by life support is only of benefit if that unconstrained scale is put to unconstrained resource and part production. You'd end up with a colony that ends up no longer serving either of its design purposes. It would probably serve a new purpose, as an immense resource sink, but KSP isn't factorio, its not really going to be about scaling your industrial base.

Procedural Star Systems are probably possible on paper in the current engine, and could be fun, but I think its solving a problem that won't exist - For the same reason intergalactic gameplay wouldn't make sense. KSP is still grounded in hard science - Even if you could hit 80% of the irl speed of light, traveling to a galaxy like andromeda is on the order of millions of years for the trip. Even with KSP's compressed space scale, and a theoretically hard science fusion torch, its just not within feasible for a player to launch a hundred millenia long cruise. It'd have to give up the hard science grounding that its working so hard to stick with, and it'd do so only to reveal star systems that could have simply existed as a kerbol neighbor.

If a player really is starved for star system content faster than the team can hand make it, Modders already went to great lengths to make it happen in KSP1, I guarantee you folks will be putting full light years of content out for KSP2.

As for Interstellar Radiation, there's nothing preventing it from being in KSP2, just depends on if they want a life support focus or not. And a life support focus is a gameplay complexity decision, not an engine or game release issue, so KSP3 will still face the same complexity/value comparison of any life support mechanics. Too simple, and its just a bar you slap a part on to track. Too complex, and its inscrutable for a lot of players to deal with.

1 hour ago, Superpluto126 said:

Also I had random Ideas on the KSP2 Post 1.0 Updates.

These would all make great post-updates or paid expansions - New parts and 'professionally' authored content is always nice. Just because there is modding, there's always puritans who prefer the 'official' experience, and folks like me who mod like crazy, but prefer official content for stability reasons. Brown dwarves in particular have my interest, would be really cool, moody, darker systems to venture through.

[Superpluto126]

2 hours ago, chefsbrian said:

Terraforming would make good sequel content, but I'm not sure it'd make good design sense - KSP's focus is all about building rockets to explore. Colonies facilitate making exploration meaningful by providing resource constraints, new places to start exploration from, which in turn makes exploration both more mechanically interesting as you design craft around available resource limits, and mechanically rewarding as colonization makes future explorations easier. Terraforming is cool, but has little influence on that loop - Atmosphere makes launches harder, and the theoretical benefit of an endless colony unconstrained by life support is only of benefit if that unconstrained scale is put to unconstrained resource and part production. You'd end up with a colony that ends up no longer serving either of its design purposes. It would probably serve a new purpose, as an immense resource sink, but KSP isn't factorio, its not really going to be about scaling your industrial base.

Procedural Star Systems are probably possible on paper in the current engine, and could be fun, but I think its solving a problem that won't exist - For the same reason intergalactic gameplay wouldn't make sense. KSP is still grounded in hard science - Even if you could hit 80% of the irl speed of light, traveling to a galaxy like andromeda is on the order of millions of years for the trip. Even with KSP's compressed space scale, and a theoretically hard science fusion torch, its just not within feasible for a player to launch a hundred millenia long cruise. It'd have to give up the hard science grounding that its working so hard to stick with, and it'd do so only to reveal star systems that could have simply existed as a kerbol neighbor.

If a player really is starved for star system content faster than the team can hand make it, Modders already went to great lengths to make it happen in KSP1, I guarantee you folks will be putting full light years of content out for KSP2.

As for Interstellar Radiation, there's nothing preventing it from being in KSP2, just depends on if they want a life support focus or not. And a life support focus is a gameplay complexity decision, not an engine or game release issue, so KSP3 will still face the same complexity/value comparison of any life support mechanics. Too simple, and its just a bar you slap a part on to track. Too complex, and its inscrutable for a lot of players to deal with.

These would all make great post-updates or paid expansions - New parts and 'professionally' authored content is always nice. Just because there is modding, there's always puritans who prefer the 'official' experience, and folks like me who mod like crazy, but prefer official content for stability reasons. Brown dwarves in particular have my interest, would be really cool, moody, darker systems to venture through.

There's already a Procedural Star system mod for KSP1...and its pretty good too!

[caipi]

The poll is closed after only two days*? Too bad. :-/

*original post 08/25, Poll closed on 08/27/2023