Is the game doomed?

[Observe]

1 hour ago, miklkit said:

Does anyone know if they just tried to fix the KSP source code or if they started over from scratch?  I've been watching KSP2 videos and have seen some of the same KSP bugs in KSP2.  It looks like they used old code and not new code.

I'm guessing that they started from scratch, while at the same time, looking for solutions from KSP1 code whenever it made sense. At least that's how I'd do it. Regardless of the disorganized mess that KSP1 code may be, it still achieved much of what KSP2 was attempting to do and would provide insight into KSP2 development.

[rjbvre]

9 hours ago, stephensmat said:

And then have Colonies and Interstellar as paid DLC.

I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if there's anything in Steam's EA policy that wouldn't allow it since they posted those in the roadmap for 1.0

[K33N]

6 hours ago, miklkit said:

Does anyone know if they just tried to fix the KSP source code or if they started over from scratch?  I've been watching KSP2 videos and have seen some of the same KSP bugs in KSP2.  It looks like they used old code and not new code.

Some things are better. The load times are significantly faster. Everything else is worse. Game breaking bugs are still everywhere, time warp doesn't work, dV calc doesn't work, you can still fall through the ground, docking has a high chance of bugs, etc etc

[PDCWolf]

15 hours ago, K33N said:

Some things are better. The load times are significantly faster. Everything else is worse. Game breaking bugs are still everywhere, time warp doesn't work, dV calc doesn't work, you can still fall through the ground, docking has a high chance of bugs, etc etc

Akshually , KSP2 lacking 4 out 6 features from the roadmap, and only when no saves are created, loads barely 15 seconds faster from launching the game to a rocket on the launchpad.

[AVaughan]

On 5/22/2024 at 3:10 AM, Scarecrow71 said:

There's no way to know for sure without confirmation from the dev team themselves.  The general theory is that they started from scratch, but somehow ended up with the same bugs BECAUSE they didn't use the original code as a starting point.  At least, that's my theory.

I've been told by someone who worked on KSP 1 whilst Nate and Co were working on KSP 2, that they started with the KSP 1 source code, then changed the bits they wanted to change.  Hence many of the same bugs, (often including bugs that had been fixed in KSP 1, because they removed the fixes).

Edited May 22 by AVaughan

[moeggz]

Game is doomed. I’m now less sure we’ll even get colonies. I know that my personal boycot of Take Two for their disrespectful handling of this won’t change anything.

But for me that’s not really the point. It’s just being free of my dollars going to such a business, and on that part my boycott will be successful.

And it’s a little ironic, because although my best wishes are to all that are affected, just canceling it probably wouldn’t have warranted a perma boycott from me had they been upfront about it. But this is the worst handling of this issue imaginable.

[herbal space program]

On 5/21/2024 at 9:28 AM, miklkit said:

Does anyone know if they just tried to fix the KSP source code or if they started over from scratch?  I've been watching KSP2 videos and have seen some of the same KSP bugs in KSP2.  It looks like they used old code and not new code.

In a recent interview, HarvesteR basically admitted that the entire KSP1 code base was not really in a state that could readily be ported to a new version, so no, it appears that they did not try to use it as a starting point. As to it having some of the same bugs, based upon what I have gathered from various sources here I think those are inherent to trying to do an iterative simulation of an utterly unsolvable set of differential equations using single precision floats rather than double.

Edited May 23 by herbal space program

[miklkit]

13 hours ago, herbal space program said:

In a recent interview, HarvesteR basically admitted that the entire KSP1 code base was not really in a state that could readily be ported to a new version, so no, it appears that they did not try to use it as a starting point. As to it having some of the same bugs, based upon what I have gathered from various sources here I think those are inherent to trying to do an iterative simulation of an utterly unsolvable set of differential equations using single precision floats rather than double.

Is that why everything slides across the ground?  Is that why things simply explode just because they are close to other things?

[Meecrob]

13 hours ago, herbal space program said:

In a recent interview, HarvesteR basically admitted that the entire KSP1 code base was not really in a state that could readily be ported to a new version, so no, it appears that they did not try to use it as a starting point.

I don't follow your logic. I believe what HarvesteR said, I don't believe that ANYONE (that makes decisions) at IG or T2 would listen to him.

In fact, I'd bet on them going "HarvesteR said this, lets prove him wrong. He is just an amateur, we are professionals with deep pockets!"

[Superfluous J]

9 hours ago, Meecrob said:

In fact, I'd bet on them going "HarvesteR said this, lets prove him wrong. He is just an amateur, we are professionals with deep pockets!"

I expect most of the people in charge at T2 would be more like "HarvesteR? Like the farm machinery? What does that have to do with a Star Wars game? This game is about Star Wars, right?"

[Jacke]

Welp, if ShadowZone's investigation is accurate, KSP 2 was doomed from the start.

 

[K^2]

3 hours ago, Jacke said:

Welp, if ShadowZone's investigation is accurate, KSP 2 was doomed from the start.

Yeah, $10M and 2y sounds very close to what I expected the original ST project to fall under. I hope that this at least makes it clear that Intercept was making a very different game than what Star Theory was originally contracted to do.

Edit: It was clear to me that development started on a much smaller budget and suffered a disruption that effectively reset the process. But this is   so    much      worse...       Watching Shadowzone's investigation, I'm impressed we got Early Access that kind of works sometimes at all.

Edited May 24 by K^2

[KerbolExplorer]

when was it not doomed

[Meecrob]

On 5/23/2024 at 8:44 PM, Superfluous J said:

I expect most of the people in charge at T2 would be more like "HarvesteR? Like the farm machinery? What does that have to do with a Star Wars game? This game is about Star Wars, right?"

Actually, your Star Wars theory makes an insane amount of sense. Compare KSP2 to KSP1 then new Star Wars to the Original Trilogy. Maybe they thought they had to ruin it?

Edited May 26 by Meecrob

[Ker Ball One]

10 hours ago, Meecrob said:

Actually, your Star Wars theory makes an insane amount of sense. Compare KSP2 to KSP1 then new Star Wars to the Original Trilogy. Maybe they thought they had to ruin it?

Jar Jar Kermin

[almagnus1]

My 2 copper... yes KSP2 is in a state of "run away from it and warn others not to buy it" doomed.

Unless we hear something from Take 2, best thing we can do is flame it out of existence in the reviews.

12 hours ago, Meecrob said:

Actually, your Star Wars theory makes an insane amount of sense. Compare KSP2 to KSP1 then new Star Wars to the Original Trilogy. Maybe they thought they had to ruin it?

Great irony is that the ST is so bad that it makes the PT good by comparison.  OT still the best, though - although Rogue 1 comes close.

Edited May 27 by almagnus1

[Meecrob]

5 hours ago, Ker Ball One said:

Jar Jar Kermin

NOOO! Get this thought out of my head!!!

 

4 hours ago, almagnus1 said:

Great irony is that the ST is so bad that it makes the PT good by comparison.  OT still the best, though - although Rogue 1 comes close

Lol, shut up or Take Two is gonna get ideas. We don't need a KSP3 so bad it makes KSP2 look good by comparison

 

What I really hope comes out of all this is big publishers internalize the fact that when they go against the fanbase, they lose money.

[Izny]

6 hours ago, Ker Ball One said:

Jar Jar Kermin

I don't think i've hated anyone as much as I hate you right now.

[WelshSteW]

I don't know how much the Kerbal IP would cost (and you'd want it all - KSP1, KSP2, and anything else that may have been in development). Once you've bought that, you have to basically write off what currently exists as KSP2, and start over. People who have already bought KSP2 aren't going to be happy about having to buy it again, essentially, so you'd have to work out some sort of offer for those (well, you wouldn't have to, but it'd be nice!  ), so you'd be losing out there.

But, I think that if the price for the IP was right, you'd be able to make it profitable long term.

 

As someone who has bought and paid for KSP2, I'd be a bit irked at having it written off and redone, or done as KSP3. But, I'd buy the new game. Even if there was no deal for those of us who've bought KSP2.

There's plenty of DLC that they could do, especially if the get interstellar and colonies working. Release a new star system every now and then for £5 or whatever. Could even do a real world one. I'd buy that.

 

Then you've got spin off games involving Kerbals. Could have a racing one, where you build cars to a set budget or part count, then compete against other players?

Merchandise could be something. Could look at some sort of deal with Lego, or some other brick toy maker...

 

But yeah, any sort of profit would be long term. It'd have to be done by someone who's got money already, and doesn't mind waiting to see any return.

[Scarecrow71]

16 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

I don't know how much the Kerbal IP would cost (and you'd want it all - KSP1, KSP2, and anything else that may have been in development). Once you've bought that, you have to basically write off what currently exists as KSP2, and start over.

This is pretty much the agreed-upon approach by everyone in the community after seeing SZ's video.  Granted, we don't know what the current codebase looks like.  But it's obvious that the developers didn't use the codebase from KSP1 as a starting point, and that is evident through the bugs that exist (either the same ones from KSP1 OR bugs that were solved by KSP1 that aren't resolved in KSP2).  Starting over is, unfortunately, the most likely way to go.

18 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

People who have already bought KSP2 aren't going to be happy about having to buy it again, essentially, so you'd have to work out some sort of offer for those (well, you wouldn't have to, but it'd be nice!  ), so you'd be losing out there.

This is the tricky part.  If a new company purchases the IP, they are under zero obligation to provide any sort of discount or freebie for anything they produce with KSP.  Even if they called their new game KSP2, they have no obligation to give existing customers a discount.  Whether or not it's the right thing to do has no bearing here because, as you've stated at the end of your post, any sort of profit is a long-term thing.  And giving away the game at a discount to existing customers is eating into future profits.

On top of this, you have to have some way of verifying if someone has a copy of KSP2 that they purchased and didn't refund.  And at that, how do you differentiate the people who paid full price ($50, or however many pounds/rubles/rupees/whatever your home currency is) vs. those who got it when it was on sale?  And if you got it on sale, what kind of a discount do you get?  Surely not equal to the discount someone who paid full price, right?

21 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

As someone who has bought and paid for KSP2, I'd be a bit irked at having it written off and redone, or done as KSP3. But, I'd buy the new game. Even if there was no deal for those of us who've bought KSP2.

Everyone who has a copy of KSP2 (or, rather, most people who have a copy) are pretty irked at it appearing to be dead and probably not going to be finished.  But I think you might be in the minority here about being irked if they came out with KSP3, provided that the new game is far more polished than the current one.  Heck, I think if we got a decent sequel at some point we'd all probably just forget about KSP2 and be pretty darned happy.

22 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

There's plenty of DLC that they could do, especially if the get interstellar and colonies working. Release a new star system every now and then for £5 or whatever. Could even do a real world one. I'd buy that.

Without having a completed game to this point, talking about DLC is an exercise in futility.  We have no way of knowing what is/can be/might be in the stock game, so trying to come up with DLC is pointless.  I CAN tell you that mods would probably include a boatload of new star systems; KSP1 has mods that include interstellar, so making them a pay-for-play thing in KSP2 would just be wrong.  Modders would probably add star systems after seeing the first stock one, and mods are free.  If you are talking about DLC possibilities, we need to know what is in the stock game first.  My first suggestion would be robotics (as that was confirmed as not being part of stock at any point), and that's something that everyone wants.

25 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

Then you've got spin off games involving Kerbals. Could have a racing one, where you build cars to a set budget or part count, then compete against other players?

I certainly hope not.  That game series with the plumbers fighting sewer crabs was great...right up until they spun off a billion other games, movies, a potential TV show, web comics, etc.  I would hate to see Kerbals get watered down like that.  And yes, I might be alone in that thought.

26 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

Merchandise could be something. Could look at some sort of deal with Lego, or some other brick toy maker...

Merchandising, like with plushies, is ok.  But going into Lego or other toys brings me back to my previous point about watering down the IP.

7 hours ago, Ker Ball One said:

Jar Jar Kermin

Sith Lord Jar Jar Kerman

[WelshSteW]

17 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

This is the tricky part.  If a new company purchases the IP, they are under zero obligation to provide any sort of discount or freebie for anything they produce with KSP.  Even if they called their new game KSP2, they have no obligation to give existing customers a discount.  Whether or not it's the right thing to do has no bearing here because, as you've stated at the end of your post, any sort of profit is a long-term thing.  And giving away the game at a discount to existing customers is eating into future profits.

On top of this, you have to have some way of verifying if someone has a copy of KSP2 that they purchased and didn't refund.  And at that, how do you differentiate the people who paid full price ($50, or however many pounds/rubles/rupees/whatever your home currency is) vs. those who got it when it was on sale?  And if you got it on sale, what kind of a discount do you get?  Surely not equal to the discount someone who paid full price, right?

Yeah, I kind of contradicted myself with this bit and the next bit of my post.

17 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Everyone who has a copy of KSP2 (or, rather, most people who have a copy) are pretty irked at it appearing to be dead and probably not going to be finished.  But I think you might be in the minority here about being irked if they came out with KSP3, provided that the new game is far more polished than the current one.  Heck, I think if we got a decent sequel at some point we'd all probably just forget about KSP2 and be pretty darned happy.

Maybe I didn't make it as clear as I could have, what I meant was I'd be a bit annoyed about having "wasted" the money I'd spent on this current version of KSP2, but I'd be happy to pay for a new, actually decent and finished version.

To try and be clear, I'd be delighted to have a new version of KSP2, or KSP3, whatever it'd be called. As long as it was done properly, and actually finished.

 

[almagnus1]

6 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

This is the tricky part.  If a new company purchases the IP, they are under zero obligation to provide any sort of discount or freebie for anything they produce with KSP.  Even if they called their new game KSP2, they have no obligation to give existing customers a discount.  Whether or not it's the right thing to do has no bearing here because, as you've stated at the end of your post, any sort of profit is a long-term thing.  And giving away the game at a discount to existing customers is eating into future profits.

Or what they could do is give everyone on the estores (like Steam) a giftable license to KSP1 as a thank you for their purchase.  That's going to be an old game, and a far better one by comparison.

[Tony Tony Chopper]

33 minutes ago, almagnus1 said:

Or what they could do is give everyone on the estores (like Steam) a giftable license to KSP1 as a thank you for their purchase.  That's going to be an old game, and a far better one by comparison.

I actually don't quite understand why one would care about the money loss. It's a day of cheap work at worst.

[Bej Kerman]

50 minutes ago, almagnus1 said:

Or what they could do is give everyone on the estores (like Steam) a giftable license to KSP1 as a thank you for their purchase.  That's going to be an old game, and a far better one by comparison.

Their token of gratitude should just a different but similarly broken version of the game?

[Skorj]

1 hour ago, almagnus1 said:

Or what they could do is give everyone on the estores (like Steam) a giftable license to KSP1 as a thank you for their purchase.  That's going to be an old game, and a far better one by comparison.

If T2 cared at all about the future of the KSP franchise, they'd be doing what City Skylines 2 is doing to try to save that franchise.   Clearly, T2 has written off our dear Kerbals as a lost cause, probably blaming the failure of KSP2 on the IP being bad.