KSP2 refund

[Siska]

Well, 

this game violates  Steam rules of early acces, rule number 2, 4, 5 and 6.

I requested a refund and i think most of the people should. We are not here to fund development, and it clearly says game has to be playable.

Rule 2. Do not make specific promises about future events.

As i see, multiplayer was promised, i think we are not getting it. Also we didn't get bug fixes we should to be able to play the game.

Rule 4. Don't overcharge Steam customers.

If 50$ is not overcharging, i do not know what it is.

Rule 5. Make sure you set expectations properly everywhere you talk about your game.

I don't have to spend words on this

Rule 6. Don't launch in Early Access without a playable game.

This neither needs explanation.

[The Aziz]

Go ahead, report it to Valve.

[Infinite Aerospace]

54 minutes ago, Siska said:

Well, 

this game violates  Steam rules of early acces, rule number 2, 4, 5 and 6.

I requested a refund and i think most of the people should. We are not here to fund development, and it clearly says game has to be playable.

Rule 2. Do not make specific promises about future events.

As i see, multiplayer was promised, i think we are not getting it. Also we didn't get bug fixes we should to be able to play the game.

Rule 4. Don't overcharge Steam customers.

If 50$ is not overcharging, i do not know what it is.

Rule 5. Make sure you set expectations properly everywhere you talk about your game.

I don't have to spend words on this

Rule 6. Don't launch in Early Access without a playable game.

This neither needs explanation.

The game is playable though? Dare I say it's actually more or less stable at 0.1.4.1 so I'm not sure where the 'the game needs to be playable' argument comes from. Sure I'd have agreed at version 0.1.0 as that was a hard sell, but beyond that. Don't overcharge Steam customers is a bit of an ambiguous statement to be honest.

[Alpha_star]

56 minutes ago, Siska said:

Well, 

this game violates  Steam rules of early acces, rule number 2, 4, 5 and 6.

I requested a refund and i think most of the people should. We are not here to fund development, and it clearly says game has to be playable.

Rule 2. Do not make specific promises about future events.

As i see, multiplayer was promised, i think we are not getting it. Also we didn't get bug fixes we should to be able to play the game.

Rule 4. Don't overcharge Steam customers.

If 50$ is not overcharging, i do not know what it is.

Rule 5. Make sure you set expectations properly everywhere you talk about your game.

I don't have to spend words on this

Rule 6. Don't launch in Early Access without a playable game.

This neither needs explanation.

OK, I feel you as someone who wants to get the money back for purchasing an unplayable game. However, I do believe that the points you make do not apply for anyone. Below are my own ones:

You are fearing that KSP2 won't get to the point where multiplayer comes in. This a reasonable worry given slow feature updates, and many have also expressed the same. However, I seemingly can't agree with you with the "no bugfix" point since we already have 4 patches and 3 hotfixes down to this point, containing 698 bugfixes/optimizations and 8 new parts. If we do the math, it seems like the quantity of the bugfixes and optimizations are not that low compared to other games, despite the low frequency of updates. Maybe you want there to be even more patches, so yeah, I am not going to further disagree with you on this point.

And you are also talking about KSP2 being unplayable to you, which might be due to the varied definition of "playable" between people. I have played KSP2 the day before yesterday with the latest version and it seems playable to me. I will not judge you on this since "playable" is a subjective definition rather than an objective one.

(Not disagreeing with you. Players should have the right to refund if the game does not match their expectations.)

[Periple]

2 hours ago, Siska said:

Rule 2. Do not make specific promises about future events.

I think this might be a legitimate complaint. It’s hard to argue that the roadmap isn’t a set of specific promises about future events. Although I don’t know how different this is from other EA games.

2 hours ago, Siska said:

Rule 4. Don't overcharge Steam customers.

If 50$ is not overcharging, i do not know what it is.

I think it’s a silly rule because indeed it’s not possible to say what’s overcharging and what’s not!

3 hours ago, Siska said:

Rule 5. Make sure you set expectations properly everywhere you talk about your game.

This was legit back when it launched but isn’t anymore. If you wanted to complain about it, you should have done so six months ago.

3 hours ago, Siska said:

Rule 6. Don't launch in Early Access without a playable game.

This is not legit. In this context, “playable” has a very narrow definition. By that definition, the game has been playable from day 1. It launches, you can start a new game, you can build a vessel, you can launch it, you can fly it. That more than meets this threshold.

[Alexoff]

It seems to me that these are not rules, but recommendations. For example, KSP1 left early access in 2015 on a specific promised date, no one was indignant.

And the placement rules should be looked at in the agreement with Gaben.

[The Aziz]

12 minutes ago, Periple said:

Although I don’t know how different this is from other EA games.

It isn't. If EA game devs weren't allowed to put out plans for the future, people would stop playing and purchasing them. You need something to advertise and encourage potential customers to buy your product at all times, regardless of its current state, and there's only one way to do this: announcing future content. 

This particular rule is very vague.

2 hours ago, Alpha_star said:

Players should have the right to refund if the game does not match their expectations

They do. Idk about others but I think after 119 minutes I would be able to tell whether I want to play more or not. 

[Siska]

2 hours ago, Alpha_star said:

OK, I feel you as someone who wants to get the money back for purchasing an unplayable game. However, I do believe that the points you make do not apply for anyone.

Well it think it was my emotional outburst, being frustrated for waiting and be excited for something that i think will never reach the end of development. It is not at all because of 50$, but bare principles.

 

21 minutes ago, Periple said:

This was legit back when it launched but isn’t anymore. If you wanted to complain about it, you should have done so six months ago.

Why, i kind of expected the game to be playable in six months. 

 

2 hours ago, Alpha_star said:

And you are also talking about KSP2 being unplayable to you, which might be due to the varied definition of "playable" between people.

Playable means game without "gamebreaking" bugs that makes it unplayable. I would understand that you cannot expect that ships of 150+ parts works without bugs, but honestly, a one off launch in first try without being frustrated defines "playable.

[Periple]

11 minutes ago, Siska said:

Why, i kind of expected the game to be playable in six months. 

It has been playable since day 1.

11 minutes ago, Siska said:

Playable means game without "gamebreaking" bugs that makes it unplayable. I would understand that you cannot expect that ships of 150+ parts works without bugs, but honestly, a one off launch in first try without being frustrated defines "playable.

That’s not the definition Steam uses. It’s a very low bar. You’re entitled to your own definition of course!

[VlonaldKerman]

I think that these points speak more to the common-sense frustration that people have with the game. Is KSP 2 in clear violation of these to the point where it should be removed from steam? No. But does using these points as a framework for judging what an early access should be highlight the ways in which it is reasonable to expect a better game at launch? Yes.

[TLTay]

What needs to happen is all of the "let them cook" and "it's crap now but will be good later" positive reviews need to go, then this dumpster fire will burn out on its own.

The only people buying right now have to be uninformed kids dazzled by the salesmanship of Nate and the flashy-fun trailers. Almost nothing on steam gets as bad reviews as KSP2, it's really rare to see.

Sales for this game should be suspended or it should be cancelled. It's the only good faith way of handling a game that they've apparently got a skeleton crew working on part time.

Scummy company. Scummy management. Scummy marketing.

Hey T2: that game you moved the devs to will be just as bad. 

Edited October 8, 2023 by TLTay

[Periple]

26 minutes ago, TLTay said:

Sales for this game should be suspended or it should be cancelled. It's the only good faith way of handling a game that they've apparently got a skeleton crew working on part time.

Do you have a source for this? If you don’t, then you’re just spreading misinformation and starting rumors and I don’t think that’s OK even if you are upset!

[Alexoff]

20 minutes ago, Periple said:

Do you have a source for this? If you don’t, then you’re just spreading misinformation and starting rumors and I don’t think that’s OK even if you are upset!

Why is this misinformation? He expresses his opinion that the game is of too low quality and therefore should be stopped selling. Is this misinformation because he actually thinks differently?

In my opinion, a significant problem was the crowd of fans who looked forward and told from everywhere that the game would soon be fixed. This really was misinformation, because of which many people bought KSP2 and did not make a refund, expecting that everything would be fixed soon.

[TLTay]

42 minutes ago, Periple said:

Do you have a source for this? If you don’t, then you’re just spreading misinformation and starting rumors and I don’t think that’s OK even if you are upset!

Misinformation: KSP2 is being actively developed by a large team of talented developers intent on making it the best it can be.

They aren't going to tell you that the team of 50 people is working on something else 97% of the time and giving KSP2 scraps of time as it earns money. You have to infer that from the rate of progress on KSP2, the knowledge that the publisher is working on another space game, and the insufficient job postings to support hiring a new team.

Let me ask you plainly: do you think the progress on KSP2 since EA launch is the result of 50 full time employees? Do you really need to see a company-embarassing and shareholder value dropping press release telling you this?

They want the investors to see profit at the end of the rainbow so they don't sell stock. You are not going to be told since it would impact valuations. You'll have to figure it out yourself.

Let me also ask: What of their official information has proven reliable that you trust them to tell the truth about this now?

[PDCWolf]

9 hours ago, Siska said:

Well, 

this game violates  Steam rules of early acces, rule number 2, 4, 5 and 6.

I requested a refund and i think most of the people should. We are not here to fund development, and it clearly says game has to be playable.

Rule 2. Do not make specific promises about future events.

As i see, multiplayer was promised, i think we are not getting it. Also we didn't get bug fixes we should to be able to play the game.

Rule 4. Don't overcharge Steam customers.

If 50$ is not overcharging, i do not know what it is.

Rule 5. Make sure you set expectations properly everywhere you talk about your game.

I don't have to spend words on this

Rule 6. Don't launch in Early Access without a playable game.

This neither needs explanation.

Development is funded. Nate confirmed this in AMA 1, also one of the upnates.

As for the rest, I can't stress it enough that people should consult their local laws. Whatever Steam writes and whatever the EULA says are below local laws anyways, and it's very easy to find and/or spin a case from something the studio has done, or the game lacks, to actually file for a refund. Steam support has to be bone-headed about refunds so that people don't abuse the system, but if you pester them enough and with proper evidence they will budge.

I do agree that all EA games should have unlimited no-condition refund windows, specially this one.

[Periple]

1 hour ago, TLTay said:

They aren't going to tell you that the team of 50 people is working on something else 97% of the time and giving KSP2 scraps of time as it earns money. You have to infer that from the rate of progress on KSP2, the knowledge that the publisher is working on another space game, and the insufficient job postings to support hiring a new team.

I think you’re drawing some very big inferences from, basically, lack of information. It would be just as valid to ”infer” that they’ve been quietly working on multiplayer, the new terrain system, HDRP, and all the roadmap stuff with one overburdened developer bugfixing 0.1, and will spring it on us next Tuesday. You can make up any story you like!

1 hour ago, TLTay said:

Let me ask you plainly: do you think the progress on KSP2 since EA launch is the result of 50 full time employees?

Of course it isn’t! We’re only seeing a small part of the work — the work of the developers assigned to maintaining the 0.1 branch!

[Pthigrivi]

Well this thread is gonna be fun.

[cocoscacao]

7 hours ago, Alexoff said:

It seems to me that these are not rules, but recommendations

We had a thread  discussing Steam rules for EA. Many of them are contradictory and very much open to interpretation.

[Alexoff]

1 hour ago, cocoscacao said:

Many of them are contradictory and very much open to interpretation.

This sometimes happens in laws. But I have not heard a single example of someone being punished for non-compliance with such rules. There are plenty of games on Steam that violate these rules under any interpretation. But they, of course, almost always belong to one dude and cost $1

[TLTay]

4 hours ago, Periple said:

I think you’re drawing some very big inferences from, basically, lack of information. It would be just as valid to ”infer” that they’ve been quietly working on multiplayer, the new terrain system, HDRP, and all the roadmap stuff with one overburdened developer bugfixing 0.1, and will spring it on us next Tuesday. You can make up any story you like!

Of course it isn’t! We’re only seeing a small part of the work — the work of the developers assigned to maintaining the 0.1 branch!

They've had nearly a year to produce something meaningful.

I've seen teams of ONE PERSON produce more over that timespan! That is not exaggeration.

[Delay]

5 minutes ago, TLTay said:

They've had nearly a year to produce something meaningful

So we're just gonna ignore the bug fixes, dev chats, re-entry effects, new parts, science, etc?

Stuff that's worked on and not yet in the builds we have access to?

Don't get me wrong, this game is hateable, but please do it right.

[TLTay]

41 minutes ago, Delay said:

Stuff that's worked on and not yet in the builds we have access to?

You believe this? You must not have been watching since mid 2019 like many of us.

They showed colonies, interstellar, tons of parts we don't have, etc etc etc. They made entire feature videos about it. Here we are in late 2023, and we don't have things they showed in mid 2019.

Don't tell me about videos and supposed progress. They need to deliver it to paying customers, otherwise it's lies.

[Stoup]

32 minutes ago, TLTay said:

You believe this? You must not have been watching since mid 2019 like many of us.

They showed colonies, interstellar, tons of parts we don't have, etc etc etc. They made entire feature videos about it. Here we are in late 2023, and we don't have things they showed in mid 2019.

Don't tell me about videos and supposed progress. They need to deliver it to paying customers, otherwise it's lies.

I'm not one for throwing accusations around, but I do feel this is still a good point. It's hard to put faith in content that's in development, when a LOT of the content we've seen in development, over these past few YEARS still isn't in the game.

[TLTay]

13 minutes ago, Stoup said:

I'm not one for throwing accusations around, but I do feel this is still a good point. It's hard to put faith in content that's in development, when a LOT of the content we've seen in development, over these past few YEARS still isn't in the game.

They're still making videos about them discussing fixing things, and what routes they're considering taking with those fixes. It's laughable fraud and scamming.

 

It feels like they honestly expected the modders to leap to the rescue and finish the game for them for free.

Edited October 9, 2023 by TLTay

[Periple]

1 hour ago, TLTay said:

It's laughable fraud and scamming.

I don’t think it’s OK to accuse somebody of fraud based only on inference and conjecture. It’s a very serious accusation. People go to jail for fraud!