HarvesteR has some news...and some hope

[Superfluous J]

5 hours ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

Holy smokes. Clearly communicated intentions.. Wonder what that would feel like.

Anger and vitriol when those intentions - which are taken as promises - don't pan out.

At least that's my experience.

[PDCWolf]

1 hour ago, Superfluous J said:

Anger and vitriol when those intentions - which are taken as promises - don't pan out.

At least that's my experience.

They haven't posted a roadmap and 4 years worth of trailers and feature episodes about how great the game is yet. Talk to you when they do.

[Superfluous J]

2 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

They haven't posted a roadmap and 4 years worth of trailers and feature episodes about how great the game is yet. Talk to you when they do.

They also haven't said something along the lines of "We're going to try to do X" and then months later be called out because X isn't there.

I'll talk to you then as well.

[Skorj]

4 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

Anger and vitriol when those intentions - which are taken as promises - don't pan out.

At least that's my experience.

 

48 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

They also haven't said something along the lines of "We're going to try to do X" and then months later be called out because X isn't there.

I'll talk to you then as well.

While gamers do have a bad habit of taking a wishlist as a commitment, IG went beyond that.  Maybe this was your point, but they crossed the line IMO (Nate especially) with over-selling what they already had working.  The store page on Steam, where the wording should matter, is rather bad about this.

Quote

Major upgrades during Early Access: Get a front-row seat as major new systems come online, including the addition of new star systems, interstellar travel technologies, colonies , multiplayer, and more . Become part of the development process by contributing feedback throughout the Early Access period and be the first to play exciting updates the moment they are released.

The roadmap shouldn't be on the store page at all (that arguably violates Steam rules), but they really messed up IMO by stating this as "stuff you're buying" and not "stuff we hope we can one day maybe do, but no promises".  This just reads as a description of the product you're paying $50 for, to be delivered over time.  I've bought quite a few EA games, and can only think of one other game that made this mistake, and ran into the same vitriol when he couldn't deliver.  But that was a one-dev team with volunteers, and when he found a decent publisher, the publisher deleted all the roadmap stuff from the store page right away.

Other big "hype wavestate collapse" games made the same mistake of over-selling stuff they hoped to have as stuff you would definitely be getting.  There's still a lot of hate for Randy Pitchford and Sean Murray over games that might have been well received had communication been handled differently (and initial bugs been fixed quickly and apologetically).  It's really a surprising mistake from veteran publishers, who really should know better.

Edit to add: In particular I think HarvesteR knows better, and wouldn't make the same mistakes.  I really liked his pitch of making a working colonies game with minimal rocket sim elements, then adding to the physics over time.  That way you start with a new kind of game at release.

Edited July 11 by Skorj

[HebaruSan]

23 minutes ago, Skorj said:

Maybe this was your point, but they crossed the line IMO (Nate especially) with over-selling what they already had working.  The store page on Steam, where the wording should matter, is rather bad about this.

The roadmap shouldn't be on the store page at all (that arguably violates Steam rules), but they really messed up IMO by stating this as "stuff you're buying" and not "stuff we hope we can one day maybe do, but no promises".  This just reads as a description of the product you're paying $50 for, to be delivered over time.

At the same time, there wasn't anything on the roadmap that they hadn't already teased in 2019. A store page devoid of new features after making such a memorable splash with their previous marketing efforts would have been... interesting.

[Izny]

 

2 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

They also haven't said something along the lines of "We're going to try to do X" and then months later be called out because X isn't there.

I'll talk to you then as well.

this not be steam forums. stop fishing for jester points

[Superfluous J]

2 hours ago, Skorj said:

While gamers do have a bad habit of taking a wishlist as a commitment, IG went beyond that

I agree. I'm not talking about that though. I'm talking about what will inevitably happen to HarvesteR if he dares not now produce a complete KSP clone better than the original that will run on a phone.

"But HARVESTER you PROMISED!"

Just wait. It'll happen.

[Bej Kerman]

22 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

What the "new space sim/game" will probably be: like KSP 1 but with more focus on the spaceplanes!

[PDCWolf]

16 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

I agree. I'm not talking about that though. I'm talking about what will inevitably happen to HarvesteR if he dares not now produce a complete KSP clone better than the original that will run on a phone.

"But HARVESTER you PROMISED!"

Just wait. It'll happen.

I know hyperbole is the only way left to bite back at some posts given the current state of affairs, as every other argument has collapsed with KSP2 and the complete franchise, but really, he hasn't promised anything yet. [snip]

Edited July 12 by Vanamonde

[Vanamonde]

The forum moderators are not the subject of this thread. Please return to it. 

[Skorj]

13 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

I agree. I'm not talking about that though. I'm talking about what will inevitably happen to HarvesteR if he dares not now produce a complete KSP clone better than the original that will run on a phone.

"But HARVESTER you PROMISED!"

Just wait. It'll happen.

Well, there's always one in any crowd, but at least around here posters tend to be a bit more mature than e.g. the Steam forums.  IMO the important thing for communication around a new KSP-like would be to be clear about what the point of the new game would be, and focus on that narrowly rather than promising a list of features.  Sharing the abstract like "we want this to be a game with a real progression system, not a rocket sandbox like KSP1" or "this one will be a story-driven game, and while we'll try to keep the physics sim accurate, it won't be the focus of the game so don't expect KSP1-like play" or whatever the vision of the game might be.

Not to give away one of the superpower secrets of senior engineers, but it's best to promise future delivery of stuff you already have working, and keep silent about details till the testing is going well.  But now I've revealed too much.

[calabus2]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

I mean... Dakota had to be reached more than once about mods posting hyperbole bait and ghost-quoting people to punch down on those who'd get banned if they dared answer. Most of the reason I miss Dakota really, he was really good at being the very needed editorial/punitive head of moderation. He goes away a single week and there's already mods closing other mods' threads.

Now, to not dabble in anymore off-topic, I want to remind everyone of this gem from almost a year ago:

Dean Hall had a pitch for KSP2 and apparently got rejected over even more amateur work by PD. So it's pretty clear to me (and by adding other posts like him getting on to recruit right after IG started to combust) that with talent and HarvesteR onboard... they can probably pull a more proper sequel.

So there was work behind whatever they were doing already, this is not something that's just started. Of course it remains to be seen if HarvesteR is on board, or how much power is he gonna have over it, or if he's gonna break up and do his own thing again... TL;DR: There's much better things to be hopeful about than whatever smoldering pile of garbage KSP2 is.

I seem to recall a post....I believe on YouTube very soon after T2 illuded to IG shutting down. He said he already had orbital mechanics worked out and it was just math...and very easy. I asked him to show a demo of these mechanics...nothing. I've read other statements and replies from him on reddit that just oozed arrogance to a degree and a touch of used car salesmen much like Nick. I simply don't trust the guy.  The fact that he swooped in on reddit to try and poach IG devs just hours after the layoffs were announced is just another sign of his character. 

Edited July 11 by calabus2

[PDCWolf]

1 hour ago, calabus2 said:

I seem to recall a post....I believe on YouTube very soon after T2 illuded to IG shutting down. He said he already had orbital mechanics worked out and it was just math...and very easy. I asked him to show a demo of these mechanics...nothing. I've read other statements and replies from him on reddit that just oozed arrogance to a degree and a touch of used car salesmen much like Nick. I simply don't trust the guy.  The fact that he swooped in on reddit to try and poach IG devs just hours after the layoffs were announced is just another sign of his character. 

Honestly, he's 100% right that orbital mechanics are "just math". Now, we could endlessly speculate about integrators for n-body, patched conics, anthropocentric planetarium models and whatever other tech he has available to pic from, but really, the meat of KSP1/2's complexity is not orbital mechanics (even if both had a big trouble with floating point stuff at the beginning and KSP2 never managed to fix it other than to copypaste KSP1s fix.) the real complexity is building real-time simulated mechanics that play well with timewarp, and with the possibility of non-sequential play (many missions going on at once) that happen to be deep and meaty rather than the shallow point-and-click we've got in both KSPs. HarvesteR already's got a leg up with KitHack by figuring out how to be able to support an arbitrarily big amount of parts, much bigger than KSP1 and obviously 2.

Now, I do also agree that I don't like Icarus nor Stationeers (owned both, managed to refund Icarus, though this was literally years ago.) and that Dean has his quirks.

[Vanamonde]

Comments not about HarvesteR's pontential project have been removed. 

[Fizzlebop Smith]

I wasn't able to experience the game during the early days with HarvestR, but KitHack has what I consider to a well done Early Access Development.

I like the game, but building a custom suspension part by part or  fiddle with linkage from a transmission to the drive motor not my thing... but the development is looking good.

I mainly DL craft and crash them

Communications to the players contain relevant information about ongoing development.. a little on the front end & a little about the back end.

He's willing to discuss features thay get dropped amd why. There are always instances of things done in a manner that one individual or another disagrees with...

But a nice open dialogue along the way is instrumental in a game like KSP . The community wants to be part of the feedback and wants real information about what's going on with the game.

I think for myself, if this transparent appro to Early Access were to be adopted Early on.. I'd get behind the project.

Oh.. and assuming it was (NOT) 70$ out the gate.

Edited July 20 by Fizzlebop Smith

[kerbiloid]

10 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

What the "new space sim/game" will probably be: like KSP 1 but with more focus on the spaceplanes!

Kerbalsa Space Program

[kicka55]

On 7/9/2024 at 10:08 PM, calabus2 said:

They own everything that is KSP. If someone were to put out a similar type game with characters that even remotely resemble kerbals T2 would sue their pants off. Doesn't matter if T2 was wrong, a small developer would buckle under the legal costs to defend themselves. It would be a stupid move to even try such a project. 

They "own" trademarks they registered and they own copyright of KSP. You can't copy files in KSP2 and use it for a new game. You can create a new game that plays exactly like KSP because that gameplay is neither covered by copyright nor protected by trademarks. Trademarks protect others from using your brand like "Kerbal" or registered logos. 

SO yes, anyone could develop a carbon copy of KSP and get away with it. Don't believe me? Check TemTem or Coromon on Steam. If there is one company that has the fastest lawsuit trigger finger it's Nintendo. 

[PDCWolf]

27 minutes ago, kicka55 said:

They "own" trademarks they registered and they own copyright of KSP. You can't copy files in KSP2 and use it for a new game. You can create a new game that plays exactly like KSP because that gameplay is neither covered by copyright nor protected by trademarks. Trademarks protect others from using your brand like "Kerbal" or registered logos. 

SO yes, anyone could develop a carbon copy of KSP and get away with it. Don't believe me? Check TemTem or Coromon on Steam. If there is one company that has the fastest lawsuit trigger finger it's Nintendo. 

Fall guys vs stumble guys is my favorite, specially because people flocked to the later when the former went through the epic process of ensh-tification.

Edited July 26 by PDCWolf

[Lisias]

4 hours ago, kicka55 said:

Trademarks protect others from using your brand like "Kerbal" or registered logos.

I'm trying to explain that for some "authors" around here for months, but all I get are mocking and disdain.

Trademarks are a thing. Some people here are going to learn this the hard way.