I will be refusing to support Take Two Interactive further unless KSP2 is revived.

[Skorj]

1 hour ago, Meecrob said:

Boycott Rockstar and Take Two until they prove themselves worthy of your money.

I mean, that's not even a boycott, that's just "don't buy a product unless you know it's good".  Gamers seem to struggle with this idea for some reason, which is why pre-orders exist.  I haven't seen anything I liked out of T2 for many years.  My initial hype for KSP2 came from not knowing that T2 had meddled with the dev process.

[KerikBalm]

1 hour ago, Skorj said:

My initial hype for KSP2 came from not knowing that T2 had meddled with the dev process.

I am still blaming Nate, the guy clearly mismanaged his resources, focusing too much on looks and neglecting the game engine.

It's his fault that the code is an unsalvageable mess.

I can't blame T2 for cutting their losses after what he did.

[Scarecrow71]

2 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

It's his fault that the code is an unsalvageable mess.

He isn't a coder, so no, it isn't his fault that the code is a mess.  That lies with the coders.

Nate's responsibility is in the design document and giving in to scope creep.  

Edited September 8 by Scarecrow71

[NexusHelium]

2 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

He isn't a coder, so no, it isn't his fault that the code is a mess.  That lies with the coders.

The code also isn’t a mess. It’s actually really clean and easy to move around in. According to one of my fellow modders it’s really clean “Web dev code”

The real issue is all the math and stuff going on at the same time (which said modder is also working on fixing)

Most people that I’ve seen that have decided to mod KSP2 have actually said it’s easier than KSP1 due to how much less spaghetti the code is.

 

[Lisias]

3 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

The code also isn’t a mess. It’s actually really clean and easy to move around in. According to one of my fellow modders it’s really clean “Web dev code”

The real issue is all the math and stuff going on at the same time (which said modder is also working on fixing)

Most people that I’ve seen that have decided to mod KSP2 have actually said it’s easier than KSP1 due to how much less spaghetti the code is.

I'm afraid the "quality" of the code didn't reflected on the product as it should.

Spoiler

"web code" are not know for its efficiency and performance - at least on the development circles I attend to.

Granted, pure OOP isn't neither.

 

Edited September 9 by Lisias
Entertaining grammars made slightely less entertaining...

[RileyHef]

2 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

The code also isn’t a mess. It’s actually really clean and easy to move around in. According to one of my fellow modders it’s really clean “Web dev code”

The real issue is all the math and stuff going on at the same time (which said modder is also working on fixing)

I'm providing Foonix' s full quote that you used for more context:

Spoiler

"Sloppy isn't the right word.

It looks to me like it was designed by web developers using coding standards recommended for web/library developers. It's actually relatively "clean code".

But in a webdev context you can run multiple threads and horizontally scale your way out of most performance problems.. in a game context that's not an option. 

In unity main thread time is at a premium, you don't get to pick the CPU, memory bandwidth/fetch latency are a serious problem, and you don't get to 'just buy more hardware because developer time is expensive.'

Those kind of code standards are not really calibrated for game dev."

So yeah, clean code? Sure. But it's the wrong code for the job! This is even worse than "messy" code imo because it is so deeply foundational.

The comment above helps explain the game's terrible efficiency problem. KSP2 can not scale to meet the promises it sold us on. It renders physics for all parts at all times, making long-term careers impossible. How can I have probes orbiting every planet, multiple colonies, and interstellar crafts of 250+ parts with such inefficient code? Based on my testing it just doesn't work (unless I'm cool with running the game at less than 10 FPS). KSP2 has a hard performance ceiling similar to what KSP struggled with... it's just for different reasons.

So yeah, web-based code seems like a major mistake made by the developers... color me shocked. I know people are working on performance fixes, but to conquer an issue that is so deeply baked into the game like this seems like a gargantuan task. An entire studio of paid professionals couldn't do it after 5+ years of full time work, so I have very little faith that any other efforts by modders and/or another developer will turn the pipedream KSP2 promised into a reality.

IMO, it seems KSP2 is hard-stuck as a small scale game. That would be fine if the game were meant to be a single mission simulator like Juno, but an interstellar space program able to collect and distribute resources between multiple colonies for hundreds of Kerbals (in a multiplayer environment)? They never had the tools to make it happen.

[NexusHelium]

7 hours ago, RileyHef said:

IMO, it seems KSP2 is hard-stuck as a small scale game. That would be fine if the game were meant to be a single mission simulator like Juno, but an interstellar space program able to collect and distribute resources between multiple colonies for hundreds of Kerbals (in a multiplayer environment)? They never had the tools to make it happen.

Guess only time will tell at this point.

The problems and issues aren’t impossible to fix it’s just a matter of finding them and actually fixing them, which can only really be solved by time and work. They’re really deep rooted and the source code certainly doesn’t make it particularly easy for optimization without the tools the devs had but once you fix them a whole new area opens up that you can then work on fixing. It’s just a matter of how much time and work you’re willing to put into it.

It’ll be a while but I’m sure we can do some good work with it. We got most of the skills and a heck of a lot of passion and determination, which can get you a surprisingly long way.

Not to mention of course, once we get tools and documentation working and pretty decently fortified there’s no reason to believe this game couldn’t be what it wanted to, especially with a semi decent understanding of how the game actually flows and functions and the ability for new modders to come to the scene.

But again, that’s for time to tell. I personally won’t be giving up any time soon but who knows how far our work will take us before we can’t go any further.
 

This game has an infamous amount of potential.

Edited September 9 by NexusHelium

[para 9]

why not just design your own game in Unity?

have you ever released a mod for KSP?

[Scarecrow71]

4 hours ago, para 9 said:

why not just design your own game in Unity?

That's really not as easy as some people seem to think it is.  Even if one has the requisite knowledge needed (Unity, art, modeling, animation, etc.), it still boils down to 100s - if not 1000s - of hours to create said game.  Heck, I'm trying to learn Unreal right now, and I barely have time to run through the tutorial.  Granted, the tutorial is like 14 hours long and covers a lot of the basics in multiple situations (terrain generation, movement, collecting resources, etc.).  But I'm not even 3 hours in and I've been at it for weeks.  Just don't have the time to dedicate that I'd like to.  So it's possible that, while someone may have the requisite knowledge, they may not have the time.  And if they need to learn some/any/all of it?  It's a bit daunting.

4 hours ago, para 9 said:

have you ever released a mod for KSP?

@NexusHelium can speak for himself, but...

It isn't released, but it's not like he's sitting around talking about stuff without at least trying it all himself.

[Meecrob]

On 9/8/2024 at 1:37 PM, Skorj said:

I mean, that's not even a boycott, that's just "don't buy a product unless you know it's good".  Gamers seem to struggle with this idea for some reason, which is why pre-orders exist.  I haven't seen anything I liked out of T2 for many years.  My initial hype for KSP2 came from not knowing that T2 had meddled with the dev process.

I see where you are coming from, but I am operating under the assumption their products will not live up to their previous standards. And don't get me started on the pre-order crock of excrements!

Additionally, I have seen a few people saying they are going to boycott Take Two except for a particular game (I don't want to point fingers). My post was mostly aimed at any potential Take Two employees reading this board.

Have a good one, everyone!

20 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

He isn't a coder, so no, it isn't his fault that the code is a mess.  That lies with the coders.

Nate's responsibility is in the design document and giving in to scope creep.  

Nate's job was to steer the ship. Still his fault in my books.

[NexusHelium]

16 hours ago, Lisias said:

I'm afraid the "quality" of the code didn't reflected on the product as it should.

Hey at least it looked like he enjoyed himself 

Edited September 9 by NexusHelium

[Meecrob]

14 hours ago, RileyHef said:

IMO, it seems KSP2 is hard-stuck as a small scale game

Dollars to donuts says Nate plays it one mission a ta time because he isn't that experienced and knows the problems with the game. Just cheats himself the science kinda thing. I believe he said he had about 2000 hours in KSP 1, so lets give him an extra 1000 hours over KSP2. Now for all you players in the thread, 3000 hours is a huge amount, good on you guys, but its pitiful to be in charge of the game.

7 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

 

Hows it going Nexus Hopium?

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

100s - if not 1000s - of hours

I'd ballpark it at high 5 figgaz.

Nice new avatar, Scarecrow, mi man!

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

5 hours ago, para 9 said:

have you ever released a mod for KSP?

@NexusHelium can speak for himself, but...

Lol

[RileyHef]

7 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

The problems and issues aren’t impossible to fix it’s just a matter of finding them and actually fixing them, which can only really be solved by time and work. They’re really deep rooted and the source code certainly doesn’t make it particularly easy for optimization without the tools the devs had but once you fix them a whole new area opens up that you can then work on fixing. It’s just a matter of how much time and work you’re willing to put into it.

7 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

Not to mention of course, once we get tools and documentation working and pretty decently fortified there’s no reason to believe this game couldn’t be what it wanted to, especially with a semi decent understanding of how the game actually flows and functions and the ability for new modders to come to the scene.

My #1 question is this: Is it possible for the game to properly scale in such a way to run complex gameplay features (colonies, interstellar, multiplayer, resource collection, automated deliveries, etc) simultaneously in a performant manner without access to the source code? I am skeptical that it is possible with publicly available resources. The game that IG left us with at 0.2.2 was not built for it. It seems most likely that KSP2 modders will hit the same technical limitations that KSP had (if not more as the game is still far from ideally optimized + demands more resources that KSP). So, I do not think it is a matter of time but rather an inability to expand this game beyond its own technical limits. It's a valid question to ask whether it is worth it to build off of a flawed game like KSP2 or start from scratch.

7 hours ago, NexusHelium said:

I personally won’t be giving up any time soon but who knows how far our work will take us before we can’t go any further.

This game has an infamous amount of potential.

I just want to say that I like following the work of KSP2 modders and I do not make these points to discourage anyone from continuing their work. However, I think it is important to come to terms with the scope that this game can reasonably provide vs what we + IG dream it could be. Yes, KSP2 is infamous because it only provided potential and nothing of substance in return. A great idea is one thing, but implementing that idea using the technology available is an entirely different story. I appreciate the vision of all those who want a better KSP game but I hope we don't all become our own Nate Simpson's by confusing  feasible "potential" with imaginative dreams.

Edited September 9 by RileyHef

[Scarecrow71]

42 minutes ago, Meecrob said:

Nice new avatar, Scarecrow, mi man!

Thanks!  I finally got around to creating a custom flag for KSP, and I decided to turn that into my avatar.

42 minutes ago, Meecrob said:

I'd ballpark it at high 5 figgaz.

Yeah, it is going to take all kinds of time that people just don't have if they do this in their spare time.

49 minutes ago, Meecrob said:

Nate's job was to steer the ship. Still his fault in my books.

I didn't say it wasn't his fault.  I'm just saying he isn't a coder, so the actual code being bad isn't his fault.

[Meecrob]

7 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

I didn't say it wasn't his fault.  I'm just saying he isn't a coder, so the actual code being bad isn't his fault.

I gotcha, everyone is entitled to their own opinion!

[Scarecrow71]

32 minutes ago, Meecrob said:

I gotcha, everyone is entitled to their own opinion!

That's not an opinion.  It's fact.  Nate didn't write one line of code, so the code being bad isn't his fault.  He is responsible for not sticking to the original vision or scope document, and he is absolutely responsible for promising things that couldn't be delivered.  But the code?  Not his fault.

[Lisias]

36 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

I didn't say it wasn't his fault.  I'm just saying he isn't a coder, so the actual code being bad isn't his fault.

Colloquial conversation usually doesn't differentiate Responsibility from "Guilt".

There're a lot of things in which Nate is in "fault", because he was responsible for that outcome. And there are others because he actively made the decision that leaded to the problem and, so, he was "guilty" for them.

Calling Nate "guilty" of things he was only responsible servers only to mask the real guilty party for some problems. Blame Nate for his own mistakes, and let other people be responsibility by the ones they did themselves.

 

34 minutes ago, Meecrob said:

I gotcha, everyone is entitled to their own opinion!

Nate is/was responsible for a lot of decisions on game design that revealed themselves problematic as features were being piling up, but definitively he wasn't responsible for the technical decisions made on code. This is the Technical leadership responsibility - not rarely, also the Software Architect's too.

Being entitled to an opinion doesn't means such opinion is right - or even just. There're a lot of unjust opinions around.

You are still entitled of such opinion, no doubt. But you are also responsible for the impact of such opinion on other's people reputation too.

If you are going to openly formulate a strong opinion, it's your best interest to have them backed up with some facts - or, at least, some good evidences to support it.

(Trying to give you an advise the most friendly I'm able using a non native language for me - please don't take it as harsh criticism, it's really a friendly advice that aims to help you better uphold your opinions)

 

4 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

That's not an opinion.  It's fact.  Nate didn't write one line of code, so the code being bad isn't his fault.  He is responsible for not sticking to the original vision or scope document, and he is absolutely responsible for promising things that couldn't be delivered.  But the code?  Not his fault.

Agreed.

The difference between an Opinion and a Fact is called evidence.

Nate could be responsible for the code if by any reason he had some final saying about how things should be done there. It's the difference being telling someone "I think this is the best way, try it and see what happens" (the responsibility belongs to whom accepted the suggestion) and "I know better. Do as I say" (the responsibility lies on whom gave the order).

As far as I know, there's no evidence on any of them on Nate about code.

[NexusHelium]

2 hours ago, RileyHef said:

However, I think it is important to come to terms with the scope that this game can reasonably provide vs what we + IG dream it could be

I’m fully aware that it’s very possible this challenge isn’t the most probable or likely but I’m still gonna try anyway. I will gladly accept defeat in the face of overwhelming odds but I (nor anyone else) has found that yet in terms of massive technical challenges to my knowledge.

 

2 hours ago, RileyHef said:

Is it possible for the game to properly scale in such a way to run complex gameplay features (colonies, interstellar, multiplayer, resource collection, automated deliveries, etc) simultaneously in a performant manner without access to the source code?

Yup. The code required for this shouldn’t reasonably take up that amount of space but it’s an ongoing process. Nothing can be said about what can and can’t be done yet due to the vastly undocumented resources this game has. We as of yet literally don’t have limits  (not saying there isn’t any of course. There’s obviously limits)

Edited September 9 by NexusHelium

[Stephensan]

19 hours ago, Lisias said:

I'm afraid the "quality" of the code didn't reflected on the product as it should.

  Hide contents

"web code" are not know for its efficiency and performance - at least on the development circles I attend to.

Granted, pure OOP isn't neither.

 

i just don't expect a a310 ARC Gpu to run well on "anything" its intel gpu and like an extremely low end one at that.

Virtually what the gtx 750 ti was when the rtx 2000 series came out..  wrong place wrong fight..

if you watch GPU is at 99% most of the time while the CPU is at like 2-8% its sitting, this is the part that kills ksp 2, the CPU part.

If we want put in terms of GPU power that is understandable its around the gtx 1050ti Laptop or like a r9 290 ... just simply wasn't a good showing for ksp 2 no matter what with that GPU.

So low tier and gpu from 2013, and a budget GPU laptop in 2016~ without the crypto craze cost. so the a310 is just simply not a good task in 2024.

 

Doesn't mean I'm giving it a right to have t2 stop production where they did or its absolutely stellar performance, just pointing out the fact that the GPU is just horrible performance wise and rating wise and will never allow the CPU to stretch beyond "existing"

[Lisias]

8 minutes ago, Stephensan said:

i just don't expect a a310 ARC Gpu to run well on "anything" its intel gpu and like an extremely low end one at that.

Agreed. But consumers do expect that. And since they are the ones with the guns money, I suggest to pay attention to them.

You see, KSP2 was the only game tested that they considered unplayable at Low settings. See the whole video.

How Low is Low enough? Clearly, KSP2 missed that sweet spot - by a mile.

On the bright side...

Did anyone noticed that Linus, besides never had played KSP before, could built a simple rocket and launch it? Did anyone noticed how they were laughing and having fun?

I choose to publish that video on purpose. They show both some of the most miserable failures on KSP2, but also where it excelled!!

Stop covering your arses and start learning from your mistakes. Life can be simple like that sometimes.

[Stephensan]

4 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Agreed. But consumers do expect that. And since they are the ones with the guns money, I suggest to pay attention to them.

You see, KSP2 was the only game tested that they considered unplayable at Low settings. See the whole video.

How Low is Low enough? Clearly, KSP2 missed that sweet spot - by a mile.

On the bright side...

Did anyone noticed that Linus, besides never had played KSP before, could built a simple rocket and launch it? Did anyone noticed how they were laughing and having fun?

I choose to publish that video on purpose. They show both some of the most miserable failures on KSP2, but also where it excelled!!

Stop covering your arses and start learning from your mistakes. Life can be simple like that sometimes.

3 games tested, ksp 2 known that it will be the worse offender, the other one is tf2, and helldivers ll, 

• TF-2 due to botting, nothing about its performance or a company stopping production
• KSP-2 due to t2 stopping production being no where near finished nor in good performance. directly about game being stopped in production and the performance is poor.
• HD-2 Sony wanted everyone to use PS accounts to play. nothing about its performance or a company stopping production

"miserable failures of ksp2"

completely fair comparison eh? nah, don't wanna here a statement about a a310 GPU is just not a good GPU.

 

anyway. illogical to pursue further.

 

[Lisias]

9 minutes ago, Stephensan said:

completely fair comparison eh? nah, don't wanna here a statement about a a310 GPU is just not a good GPU.

Yes, it is. Because it's exactly how consumers will compare them. A310 is a crappy GPU - but yet the other 2 games performed relatively well on it.

Welcome to the Desert of the Real.

 

10 minutes ago, Stephensan said:

anyway. illogical to pursue further.

We finally reached an agreement. There's no point on arguing with illogical people.

Obviously, one of us is failing to cope with reality. Let's give time to time and see who.

[Stephensan]

27 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Yes, it is. Because it's exactly how consumers will compare them. A310 is a crappy GPU - but yet the other 2 games performed relatively well on it.

Welcome to the Desert of the Real.

 

We finally reached an agreement. There's no point on arguing with illogical people.

Obviously, one of us is failing to cope with reality. Let's give time to time and see who.

huh? is there a disconnect here? i gotta see where. i am intrigued, please explain further

Edited September 9 by Stephensan

[Lisias]

1 hour ago, Stephensan said:

huh? is there a disconnect here?

Yes.

 

1 hour ago, Stephensan said:

i gotta see where. i am intrigued, please explain further

I would recommend to exercise some intellectual honesty and reread the posts - I'm not a Psychiatrist, I'm forbidden by Law to do such advises.

[Stephensan]

26 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Yes.

 

I would recommend to exercise some intellectual honesty and reread the posts - I'm not a Psychiatrist, I'm forbidden by Law to do such advises.

i don't need a psychiatrist to attempt to break this down to hopefully see with words, and perhaps directly by other users reading it. :3 (thankfully)

See's a post about LTT doing the worse rated parts, and had ksp 2 in it.. Due to experience of building computers, i have some input in this with the parts regardless of what the video is about.

I join in talking purely about how the parts are not suitable for the situation for ksp 2 due to the lack of GPU performance. Then  talk in more detail about where it stands with more "common" GPU's that are easier to understand due to the intel dedicated GPU scene is new and there is tons of users not understanding where it sits, (just like saying "i have a 4090", people understand better when it is compared to other things they might be familiar with) and thought it would have been beneficial for users to have this context. In this context i talk about how the gpu isn't allowing the real struggle of the game which is CPU intensive to actually show the game, simply due to the gpu not performing well due to its lack of power. Saying the power you get is simply not up for the task for 2024.

Then i end off saying t2 shouldn't have ended it with production, and wasn't happy with the performance it ended in. to then finally end this statement off with stating the GPU was horrible.

Thats perfectly understandable. 

 

You then state stuff about consumers are expecting the a310 to do stuff it simply will not do in ksp 2 due to the well known issues ksp 2 has.

Then you remark that out of the three games ksp2 was the only game tested that was considered unplayable. (see the whole video)

then you talk about linus never played it yet enjoyed it.

And then a remark towards someone in this conversation this could be stated as the entire party in this topic however, 

There is no one else in this comment you sent only as users you and me.This however makes it harder to  say "its in general" due to being only user remarked or replied, using "your", so the concept of saying "everyone in general" cannot be applied here. This is directed at someone in this convo in this direct comment when this was stated.. Stating about gpu specs to "learn my mistake" life can be more simple. simply by trying add an "s" to the next word beside it doesn't make it a party when there is only two participants in this as we concluded a few sentences up.

 

I then state that the section was about worse review bombed games, and stated the reasons why the three games had there reasonings of being worse, with knowledge that ksp 2 will be the worse, and then requoted a statement to show that the review bombings are not due to performance, and it isn't a fair comparison with all three games, then finally remarked about talking the a310 or in statements that it is just not a good gpu.

 

Then end off its illogical to pursue further, due to i strictly wanted talk about the gpu but this kept getting dragged on.

 

Then you reply within your statement, with another inflammatory statement in the mutilible replies to a single user that there is one person in this convo that is being illogical and is failing to cope with reality, however not stating who it is that this comment is being told to.

 

i asked if there is a disconnect about what we are talking about, and asked to explain further.

 

And finally,

you agreed there is a disconnect but decided instead of commenting on what was wrong, you attempt to misdirect the user by attempting to start something with this statement:

Quote

I would recommend to exercise some intellectual honesty and reread the posts - I'm not a Psychiatrist, I'm forbidden by Law to do such advises.

 

Now that i have professionally mastered this convo without needing to exercise either intellectual honesty, on talking about computer parts performance nor needing to get a bare minimum of doctorate degree in a profession that isn't needed for this,

 

I shall now ask how there is a disconnect and what it is about? i see we talked about both, computer parts and where the gpu stands, and aswell that ksp 2 performs poorly and out of the 3 games ksp 2 didn't do well and was the only one that failed to work well.

Now I'm not frustrated, not angry, not mad nothing, i will like to see where you are trying to gather to formulate this conversation, due to trying to understand where you sit with information that was given by me about gpus, and about ksp 2 being poor and didn't show ksp 2 in good light.. i will be enlightened about where you think the faults of this convo stands due to stating in total

 

• Stop covering your arses and start learning from your mistakes. Life can be simple like that sometimes.

• We finally reached an agreement. There's no point on arguing with illogical people. Obviously, one of us is failing to cope with reality. Let's give time to time and see who.

• I would recommend to exercise some intellectual honesty and reread the posts - I'm not a Psychiatrist, I'm forbidden by Law to do such advises.

 

With your wording users can and will attempt to try get frustrated with passive aggressive talking and would attempt to outlash, I'm just honestly curious where you sit with this convo due to one party is missing a larger key that the other user is using. And with this user that is missing the larger key asks about what is missing, only to get aggressive comments that can only be directed at two users instead of a direct the answer to a question.

i shall go to sleep to see what i am missing in the morning in this conversation so i am better able to understand where the connection is lost about talking about gpu part performance, where the a310 stands, where the game stands within a video, and how poor the game actually runs.