Shadowzone's findings on KSP2 history

[Bej Kerman]

3 minutes ago, dlrk said:

Well, the thing is, is that isn't just a game. It's people's investments in time and money, it's people who lost their jobs due to mismanagement, it's art that will never be seen or built upon. It's also, as exposed in this video, dishonesty. Something doesn't have to be life and death for it to be important and relevant. In the grand scheme of things, is this earthshaking? No, of course not. But many people were disappointed, many people lost money, some people lost jobs. and some people acted dishonestly towards others - which is harmful and beyond "just a game" in and of itself. The way you conduct yourself matters (incidentally, I apologize for some ill-conceived posts I made right when the news of T2 closing IG broke).

So, yes, @Nate Simpson, and every other executive or decision maker should feel bad and sad for a while. Because when you screw something up badly, no matter what thing is or how relatively unimportant it may be in the grand scheme of things, you should feel bad and sad about it for a while. If dishonest behavior was part of that screw up, all the more reason to feel bad, sad, and reform yourself as a person so that you do things right and honestly in the future.

That's a massive dramatization.

[K^2]

Just now, dlrk said:

"Nate believed the difficulty introduced by wobble would be necessary to have a fun game."

I'll rest on that.

Yes, and even @linuxgurugamer specifies that some flex is necessary. The discussion was always about how much wobble, and what are the technical limitations.

Nate did not understand technical distinction. It was not Nate's job to understand the technical distinction. It was the engineering director's job to explain the specifics, likely relying on whoever is in charge of physics for input. The problem is that a lot of that discussion happened at ST/Intercept before they even hired their physics expert, who wasn't an expert on game physics.

So if that's all you've got, I find your competence lacking in making the call, and it is my professional opinion, both as a physicist and a game developer, as well as someone who's been playing KSP since before it rolled out on Steam, that you owe Nate an apology.

[Palshife]

2 hours ago, RayneCloud said:

I respectfully disagree with @linuxgurugamer's statement that KSP2 as it stands at the moment is an entirely unsalvageable "Start over" project. I can't believe people are even entertaining this as an idea. With respect to all of his work over the years, this is just not a statement I agree with at all.

Not at all? Not even a tiny bit? Keeping in mind that "KSP2 as it stands at the moment" is already an attempted do-over of an attempted do-over? I mean, yes, of course, anything is technically salvageable, but certainly there's some part of you that can agree he's got a point here...

[DeadJohn]

22 minutes ago, drhay53 said:

...I take a small amount of solace in them eating a huge loss on the mess they played a role in creating...

Take2 is so big that their KSP2 loss is near-invisible. It's not a huge loss from their perspective.

My workplace has a big computer system with some defects. We waste $2.0 M annually due to the incorrect business decisions that result from those defects. It would cost approx. $1.5 M to fix the defects, so the ROI would be almost immediate. We would save $2.0 M every year in perpetuity by investing $1.5 M once.

So, why isn't this problem been fixed? The $2.0 M annual loss is only 0.2% of our annual $1.2 Billion budget. No one really cares about it enough to move forwards. We've spent 3 years discussing the fix but just go in circles.

[chefsbrian]

Great work @ShadowZone - I can't say I'm much of a channel fan, but this is pretty good. Awful subject matter obviously, but good reporting on it.

If even a fraction of this is really representative, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, then I'm confident at this point saying KSP2 is dead dead, proper dead. If Take2's manglement and misunderstanding of the people they'd assigned to it went this deep, then they're not going to give it another dance. We're fully into cost cutting season and will be for years, such is the entertainment cycle in a downturn.

I also don't want to deflect any blame from Nate - Its equal between him and Take2. Take2 obviously takes blame for being bizarrely over involved in various aspects of the project as if they were making some world changer, rather than a niche sequel, and for placing Nate into a position of power and authority he clearly wasn't equipped to handle. But that doesn't deflect Nate of the blame for not learning to control his dreams and visions in favor of viable scope. He knew the budget and expectations better than anyone, and yet he evidently never let that stop him. That's not a good thing, that's a very bad thing, because stuff exactly like this happens. Take2 should have recognized this, good leaders don't put people in positions they can't handle, but that doesn't absolve Nate, just makes Take2 complicit in his failings.

That's not to say he's evil, or a bad person, or needs to be brought before the Hague. He's just a bad project manager, who doesn't seem to be able to compromise on his vision. I will, however, say that if the whole "Multiplayer comments were based on playing KSP1 mods" statement is true, then I am officially considering him a malicious liar as opposed to just a naive one. That is clear as day misrepresentation. 

[dlrk]

I understand you disagree, but I think it's reasonable to say that the creative director needs to have at least a basic understanding of the project they are the creative director of.  Of course, it's not just Nate that should feel bad and sad for a while, maybe he isn't even the one who should feel the most bad and sad. But when you screw something up, you should regret it.

Just now, chefsbrian said:

I also don't want to deflect any blame from Nate - Its equal between him and Take2. Take2 obviously takes blame for being bizarrely over involved in various aspects of the project as if they were making some world changer, rather than a niche sequel, and for placing Nate into a position of power and authority he clearly wasn't equipped to handle. But that doesn't deflect Nate of the blame for not learning to control his dreams and visions in favor of viable scope. He knew the budget and expectations better than anyone, and yet he evidently never let that stop him. That's not a good thing, that's a very bad thing, because stuff exactly like this happens. Take2 should have recognized this, good leaders don't put people in positions they can't handle, but that doesn't absolve Nate, just makes Take2 complicit in his failings.

That's not to say he's evil, or a bad person, or needs to be brought before the Hague. He's just a bad project manager, who doesn't seem to be able to compromise on his vision. I will, however, say that if the whole "Multiplayer comments were based on playing KSP1 mods" statement is true, then I am officially considering him a malicious liar as opposed to just a naive one. That is clear as day misrepresentation. 

This is very well said @K^2

[dave1904]

8 minutes ago, K^2 said:

All of you taking it out on Nate is bad tone on top of being just coming across as someone being ignorant and incapable of comprehending information presented even if it's broken down to you in a video.

I was not attacking anyone. I'm just sick of people defending the developers all the time no matter what they do. 

I think it's a absurd that players that are calling the developers out on those issues are always the bad guys. T2 is responsible for this mess because they gave the game to people that were incompetent period. The is no discussion there. They reaped what they sowed. Simple as that. Now they have to deal with it. Boo hoo. I'm not looking any sleep over it

 

On second thought I don't want to get into this discussion anyway. Nothing good comes from it. I end up say things I regret

[dlrk]

14 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

That's a massive dramatization.

No, it's not. It's a complete picture.

[drhay53]

10 minutes ago, DeadJohn said:

Take2 is so big that their KSP2 loss is near-invisible. It's not a huge loss from their perspective.

My workplace has a big computer system with some defects. We waste $2.0 M annually due to the incorrect business decisions that result from those defects. It would cost approx. $1.5 M to fix the defects, so the ROI would be almost immediate. We would save $2.0 M every year in perpetuity by investing $1.5 M once.

So, why isn't this problem been fixed? The $2.0 M annual loss is only 0.2% of our annual $1.2 Billion budget. No one really cares about it enough to move forwards. We've spent 3 years discussing the fix but just go in circles.

Yeah, you're right of course, "huge" is an overstatement on my part. But I have to take some solace from somewhere, and this is where I'm taking it!

[K^2]

4 minutes ago, chefsbrian said:

He's just a bad project manager, who doesn't seem to be able to compromise on his vision.

I'm not sure where you're getting that from. In order to have a compromise, you have to have somebody offering an alternative. I don't see T2 pushing to reduce the scope or a competent technical director telling Nate that what he wants to do is not feasible.

All of the people who have to work with the creative director to reach that compromise position were missing. I am amazed that KSP2 got as far as it did in these conditions, and I can't imagine anyone doing a better job in Nate's shoes. I've worked with a bunch of creative directors on a bunch of projects, and all of them want to build a bigger shinier thing. And I had to tell them, "No, we can't do this," or "No, it will be too expensive," or "No, but here's how we can do it differently," many, many times. I had to do that because I was the tech person on the project. And that led to discussions and either a scope reduction, approval of more resources, or some other adjustments.

It's the creative's job to want more. It's the technical, PM's, and production company's job to say, "we can't have that."

So unless a clear evidence is presented that Nate has been overruling good technical advice, or lying to Take Two, or in some other way doing something other than his job title required him, I see absolutely no reason to hold Nate accountable for things that weren't his bleeping job to do.

8 minutes ago, dlrk said:

This is very well said

Since you tagged me in, take note.

5 minutes ago, dave1904 said:

I was not attacking anyone. I'm just sick of people defending the developers all the time no matter what they do. 

Well, I don't know, maybe when you see someone with experience making a thing defend someone else's attempt at making a thing, instead of being "sick" of it, try to understand why?

Maybe, just maybe, a person who knows how games are made has a better idea of whose fault it is that something didn't get made right? Just a possibility, maybe?

[dlrk]

So, who do you put the blame on? Who should feel bad and sad?

[RayneCloud]

19 minutes ago, Palshife said:

Not at all? Not even a tiny bit? Keeping in mind that "KSP2 as it stands at the moment" is already an attempted do-over of an attempted do-over? I mean, yes, of course, anything is technically salvageable, but certainly there's some part of you that can agree he's got a point here...

I question how much of the code he's actually looked at before making that statement in the first place. To make that statement, he'd have to seen the entire code base and I doubt that's a thing that's actually happened considering we don't have the source for starters.

Edited May 24 by RayneCloud

[K^2]

Just now, dlrk said:

So, who do you put the blame on? Who should feel bad and sad?

Take Two. And I'm sure there are specific people within that org that we could put a blame on, but I don't know who they are, nor do I particularly care.

A publisher ensures that a) the project has resources to meet the scope and b) the people involved in development have competence to keep the project within the scope.

It was clear that one of these things did not happen, we just didn't know which. Now we have learned that the correct answer was both.

This is 100% on T2.

[RayneCloud]

29 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

 

That statement alone tells me he was the absolute wrong choice to lead this project.  I'm all for realism with joints; some flex, breaking under intense strain, maybe a slight jarring here or a minor shift there if you are being too overzealous.  But to just have a wet noodle flying through the atmosphere, and then try to sell it as both necessary and fun?  He has no clue.

Which a lot of us in the community have been saying since day 1.  We were told continuously that they wanted our feedback, and that the bug reports were good, and that we were important to the end product.  And then they clammed up and just pushed out whatever they thought was great, the community be damned.  Bugs be damned.  Heck, the game itself be damned, so long as the art and marketing departments were happy.

I think this actually boils down to "How much of the code itself is salvageable, and how much has to be tossed and redone".  And depending upon your personal preference for how much code you think it takes to make the game salvageable, it could go either way.  I guess that, without knowing what the code itself looks like, and only looking at what the game is today...:shrug:?

I have no words.

Hard agree.  Because I'm a software person myself (automation jockey mostly, but I dabble), I've actually downloaded and fired up Unreal.  Followed a small tutorial, and I've got a planet rotating in space near a star!  Hey, that's big news for me!  Anyhow, from what I understand Unreal is far better equipped to handle some of the physics than Unity is.  I just wonder how much of developers avoiding Unreal has to do with it being from Epic?

That was probably the most eye-opening thing I learned from this video.  I've seen my fair share of management imposing stupid rules on their teams in the name of business, but to be told you can't even talk to the former developers?  Don't look at the previous code and learn from their mistakes?  That alone should invoke firing of the entire board.

Again, I question LGG's full view of the code base in the first place and yes I will bite that bullet and die on that hill.

[dlrk]

2 minutes ago, K^2 said:

Take Two. And I'm sure there are specific people within that org that we could put a blame on, but I don't know who they are, nor do I particularly care.

A publisher ensures that a) the project has resources to meet the scope and b) the people involved in development have competence to keep the project within the scope.

It was clear that one of these things did not happen, we just didn't know which. Now we have learned that the correct answer was both.

This is 100% on T2.

I don't understand how Take 2 can be at fault for not ensuring the developers were competent, but the developers are not at fault for lacking competence.

[Lisias]

30 minutes ago, dlrk said:

So, who do you put the blame on? Who should feel bad and sad?

Frankly? I blame people that trusted too much and paid in advance in hope of having the game.

You see, someone is paying for this party, and we are the ones funding such person - every single cent of the money that were (ab)used on this tragicomic drama called KSP2 came from our own pockets. Me included.

This is Capitalism - you get what you pays for. You are the only one responsible by for how you spend your money.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me thrice, fool.

22 minutes ago, dlrk said:

I don't understand how Take 2 can be at fault for not ensuring the developers were competent, but the developers are not at fault for lacking competence.

Well, see my paragraph above: you are the only one responsible by how you spend your money.

If you are the one deciding to hire people not competent enough to do the job, why blame the people that believed they could do it?

Edited May 24 by Lisias
Entertaining grammars made slightely less entertaining...

[dprostock]

4 minutes ago, dlrk said:

I don't understand how Take 2 can be at fault for not ensuring the developers were competent, but the developers are not at fault for lacking competence.

Yep. The issue is who put the monkey in charge of doing whatever they wanted. 

 

4 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Frankly? I blame people that trusted too much and paid in advance in hope of having the game.

You see, someone is paying for this party, and we are the ones funding such person - every single cent of the money that were (ab)used on this tragicomic drama called KSP2 came from our own pockets. Me included.

This is Capitalism - you get what you pays for. You are the only one responsible by how you spend your money.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me thrice, fool.

Well, see my paragraph above: you are the only one responsible by how you spend your money.

If you are the one deciding to hire people not competent enough to do the job, why blame the people that believed they could do it?

If you don't have the slightest idea what the product is about or how it works... How can you feel qualified to hire people to develop it? 

I still think that the difference between an engineer and an "artist" is that the engineer puts his prestige and future at stake and the "artist" only lives on dreams.

[dlrk]

6 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Frankly? I blame people that trusted too much and paid in advance in hope of having the game.

You see, someone is paying for this party, and we are the ones funding such person - every single cent of the money that were (ab)used on this tragicomic drama called KSP2 came from our own pockets. Me included.

This is Capitalism - you get what you pays for. You are the only one responsible by how you spend your money.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me thrice, fool.

Well, see my paragraph above: you are the only one responsible by how you spend your money.

If you are the one deciding to hire people not competent enough to do the job, why blame the people that believed they could do it?

Not wrong

[J.Random]

There is something that I don't actually understand from this video: salaries. It seems like @ShadowZone (or whoever he was speaking to) tries to argue - at the same time - that KSP2 developers were all juniors with no experience AND at the same time that they should have been paid above the market. idk, maybe Seattle is some sort of CA corner in WA, but 150k/yr sounds like A LOT for a junior coder, especially considering that it looks like it's after the tax (later on, there are estimations of 200k/employee).

[K^2]

16 minutes ago, dlrk said:

I don't understand how Take 2 can be at fault for not ensuring the developers were competent, but the developers are not at fault for lacking competence.

For most of KSP2's development, the game did not have engineering leadership. That sounds absurd, but that's the timeline that ShadoZone presented, and I find it believable. So the empty space that should have been doing technical leadership was incompetent, yes. That's hardly a statement I can contest.

I would also argue that the technical leadership the game has had has been inadequate. I don't think Paul Furio did what was necessary for KSP2 to work, and while I still don't think it's worth calling him names over it, or even to be certain that he's bad at his job in general, this is one example where a fraction of blame can probably be placed fairly. Again, with caveat that KSP2 was a special project that needed special technical leadership, and Paul Furio was not it. The bulk of the blame is still on T2 for refusing to hire people with proper announcement in the req of what they're trying to hire for, or ensuring the pay range is adequate to meet these requirements. Neither of these things happened.

I know I wouldn't work on KSP2 for $150k/yr even back when I was a Senior Engineer. You can't hire competent tech people with that cap. It's impossible.

 

2 minutes ago, J.Random said:

There is something that I don't actually understand from this video: salaries. It seems like @ShadowZone (or whoever he was speaking to) tries to argue - at the same time - that KSP2 developers were all juniors with no experience AND at the same time that they should have been paid above the market. idk, maybe Seattle is some sort of CA corner in WA, but 150k/yr sounds like A LOT for a junior coder, especially considering that it looks like it's after the tax (later on, there are estimations of 200k/employee).

They only hired juniors because that was the salary cap. Even people who were hired later into higher level roles clearly lacked the experience, because nobody with experience would work for that salary.

Edited May 24 by K^2

[coyotesfrontier]

Honestly, while Nate had no responsibility for the actual disastrous game development of KSP2, he certainly was responsible for lying and misleading the public about the state of KSP2's development, convincing myself and many others into paying $50 for a product that was all unplayable. Of course, that was his entire job as a PR man, and he did that very well. But even though he was technically doing his job 100% correctly and legally, he still is not immune to blame because his actions as said PR man were dishonest and immoral by nature. So while I believe the people who believe that Nate was responsible for the state of KSP2 and its development to be completely incorrect, he certainly misled and lied to countless people about KSP2's state and development, convincing many of us to spend $50 on a product that he knew was not anything close to how he was advertising and promoting it, and indeed barely functioned at all.

[dlrk]

2 minutes ago, coyotesfrontier said:

Honestly, while Nate had no responsibility for the actual disastrous game development of KSP2, he certainly was responsible for lying and misleading the public about the state of KSP2's development, convincing myself and many others into paying $50 for a product that was all unplayable.

Exactly.

[K^2]

2 minutes ago, coyotesfrontier said:

he certainly was responsible for lying and misleading the public about the state of KSP2's development, convincing myself and many others into paying $50 for a product that was all unplayable

T2 did marketing for KSP2 EA. If you watched the video, it's clear that communication about KSP2 progress was filtered through T2 and significantly throttled.

Nate was allowed to share his vision and enthusiasm with us. I don't know if he'd be able to share the hurdles of the project even if he were fully aware and able to communicate them. Which, again, should have been up to production and technical leadership.

So please, go through and point at where Nate has been lying.

[Stevie_D]

@ShadowZone I tried to help the algorithm by leaving a comment on your channel, but ill say it again here. 
Thank you very much for the time, effort, dedication, impartiality, and integrity you gave to making that video. It is, without doubt (and very sadly), the best video I've ever watched for KSP2, including gameplay videos.
You gave a very professional and reasoned account and it must've been hard to do, considering how much love and passion we hold for this game and how bitterly disappointed we all are with how it's turned out. 
I always love watching your videos and I subscribed years ago.  So thanks again for your content, it really is top quality stuff.

[Bej Kerman]

33 minutes ago, dlrk said:

So, who do you put the blame on? Who should feel bad and sad?

I'm real sure that'll bring KSP 2 back. This question is mind-bogglingly pointless.

Edited May 24 by Bej Kerman