About KSP2 on Steam (split from another thread)

[boriz]

 

[PDCWolf]

26 minutes ago, boriz said:

 

Sheesh do I agree with that thumbnail. T2 really did bank on Steam's loose openness about Early Access, so much so that if Steam delisted and refunded they'd probably not even be affected now. As for the rest, I applaud the consistency of the community and people outside it to come in, see a building that fell down because it was built crooked, on lousy foundations, and years over its delivery date, and go "Hmm, it must be those penny pinching misers not giving the poor builders levels and plumbs."

[Lisias]

5 hours ago, boriz said:

 

I disagree with the delisting due the reasons that follows:

1. Private Division was sold to an (at this time) undisclosed buyer. Delisting the game would just harm the buyer, not TTWO that did the mess.
2. People are modding this game. It's not up to us do decide what other people do with their money and time
3. NO ONE can be fooled about this matter anymore. There's NO WAY someone would buy KSP2 without noticing the huge amount of bad reviews.
   1. And there's still that time window for refunding it.
4. It would do nothing for the people that were, indeed, hurt by this disaster: early adopters that bought the game and regretted doing it.
5. It would just save face from people that don't deserve such privilege.

I see this kind of evangelism, at this point, with some distrust. Too little, too late - and, as I said, does absolutely nothing for the early adopters that were the real victims of this tragedy.

Edited December 27, 2024 by Lisias
÷,

[Fizzlebop Smith]

@Lisias

I have to fundamentally disagree with 3-5

#3

There are still people coming to this forum after prolonged absence  .. like WTH happened guys?

While some think this requires a great of isolation... the algorithms feed us what we want. Those of us consuming KSP related headlines are all at least moderately informed simply due to search history

Terms like No one, Never, Always are often difficult to wield. Though I agree that no informed, responsible adult should purchase the game, inevitably someone will.

#4

Nothing? Again, I feel differently. I feel it would let us know that steam is aware of flagrant abuse of policies or lack there of. We would receive a message ... oh yeah EA stamp and no developer disclosed at all? Clearly not EA.

#5

I think this disagreement stems from confusion. 

Delisting would save face of who and whom would it be saved from?

I think it a chance for the distributer to save face. There are a number of other Early Access games that have not had active development in years. 

These games either rubber stamp or skate by on the goodwill of their community. Some are harsh and critical but others will talk about the developers like sick family.

They had to take break due to stress or whatever other (legitimate) excuse they feel pardons deviation from the agreed intent when steam work documents were signed.

I have had to leave jobs due to mental strain. More than I could emotionally handle. That is OK and part of the harsh industry I work in. 

What would not be OK for me to charge a retainer for services In perpetuity because of my distress.

 

My position often has me looking for a more easy to achieve middle ground between status quo and what needs to improve.

Ideally, I think it would be better for Steam to imbed a little language that allowed them to exert pressure in certain situations.

Steamworks language makes it pretty clear what *should* be done if developement ceases. Steam should have the latitude to remove the EA tag or place some kind of stamp that conveys (development uncertain) or (we cannot contact developers of this project)

 

There is enough dominoes falling to suggest corporate malfeasance. At minimum, blatant Dishonesty in several places 

I may agree with delisting being the wrong course. However, if it is the only course available due to what ever legal ease was in print... well then I say use the options available to establish a precedent for others that seeks to create Triple I companies from thin air and deliver a AAA poo sandwhich.

 

 

Edited December 27, 2024 by Fizzlebop Smith

[boriz]

I don't think anyone in their right mind would be happy with what they get for £45. Modders might make it playable in the future but, what you get right now, as Fizzlebop quite rightly pointed out, is a AAA poo sandwich and no guarantees, and no customer service, and no updates etc. It wouldn't even qualify as a decent free demo, and they're charging £45? And likely as not, that money is going to someone directly involved with wrecking KSP2 and all our hopes.

I think listing it and not making all that very clear is why it should be delisted. Unless Steam's intention is to deceive, exploit and maltreat gamers, which honestly, I'm not sure it isn't.

Edited December 27, 2024 by boriz

[Lisias]

58 minutes ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

#3

There are still people coming to this forum after prolonged absence  .. like WTH happened guys?

While some think this requires a great of isolation... the algorithms feed us what we want. Those of us consuming KSP related headlines are all at least moderately informed simply due to search history

Terms like No one, Never, Always are often difficult to wield. Though I agree that no informed, responsible adult should purchase the game, inevitably someone will.

With all the due respect, there's no chance anyone would buy the game without noticing the bad reviews:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/954850/Kerbal_Space_Program_2/

And Steam will refund the game for sure if you regret buying it:

And, weird enough, there're still people playing it:

https://steamcharts.com/app/954850#1m

So I really don't see a need to delist it to prevent people from buying it. People have the right to sell bad products, and people have the right to buy them if this is what they want.

But I agree that the description should be updated.

 

58 minutes ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

#4

Nothing? Again, I feel differently. I feel it would let us know that steam is aware of flagrant abuse of policies or lack there of. We would receive a message ... oh yeah EA stamp and no developer disclosed at all? Clearly not EA.

Who will receive the message? Game Studios are closing or being sold everywhere - do you know that Ubisoft may be headed to bankruptcy?

The ones that did the mess are not the ones that would be being punished by this measure. Private Division has a new owner, anything we do now will not hurt TTWO anymore, it will hurt whoever had bought P.D. and, frankly, I'm starting to think that this can be the real intention from whoever is seeding this campaign. This just don't make any sense by now.

It's time to put our egos to rest and start to think rationally: there's absolutely no point on punishing the very few ones still willing to foot some money on this industry to salvage whatever they can. If you are not going to hurt the guys that are really responsible for the problem, your message is being sent to the wrong destination.

 

58 minutes ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

#5

I think this disagreement stems from confusion. 

Delisting would save face of who and whom would it be saved from?

It will remove from the public eyes the bad reviews that right now are still available to anyone to see.

The KSP2 Steam page is somethiing that I want to be shown by the recruiter on any and every job interview from anyone that was involved on this mess: "please explain your role on this debacle, and why you think we should hire you besides that".

 

58 minutes ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

These games either rubber stamp or skate by on the goodwill of their community. Some are harsh and critical but others will talk about the developers like sick family.

While agreeing with you about how gullible people are is in most part the responsible for this incredible mess, I disagree that censoring them will make any good. They will still be gullible - it will only happen somewhere else.

Gullible people need to learn. Preventing them from exercising their gullibility and then take the heat for their actions will only perpetuate their condition.

In fact, a huge amount of people that were gullible last year had learnt to be pretty suspicious and even cynical about the Game Industry: they are wiser nowadays.

I propose that we don't remove the opportunity to become wiser from people that didn't reached wisdom yet.

That said...

 

58 minutes ago, Fizzlebop Smith said:

My position often has me looking for a more easy to achieve middle ground between status quo and what needs to improve.

Ideally, I think it would be better for Steam to imbed a little language that allowed them to exert pressure in certain situations.

Under no circumstances I'm disagreeing from what you intend to do. I have reserves about how, but not about what.

 

42 minutes ago, boriz said:

I don't think anyone in their right mind would be happy with what they get for £45.

Agreed. I'm waiting to a sale before trying my luck on the thing. Please don't force my hand by delisting the thing before that, I don't want to spend more money than the minimally necessary.

 

42 minutes ago, boriz said:

Modders might make it playable in the future but, what you get right now, as Fizzlebop quite rightly pointed out, is a AAA poo sandwich and no guarantees, and no customer service, and no updates etc.

Like more than half the games I'm buying nowadays. Some of them are somewhat crappy nowadays, but they have something I link and, so, I still play them. Heck, bought a steam key from Humble Store for Planet Nomads just to have access to the Workshop and older versions (via depots) after the Studio closed shop and delisted the game from Steam. The game is buggy and pretty outdated, but I still enjoy building things on that thing on some lazy holidays, and the only regret I have is not buying that thing (again, I have it on GoG) on Steam on the last sale they did before closing shop, I would had saved some bucks.

People have the right to like crappy games. As long no one is being scammed, it's fair play.

 

42 minutes ago, boriz said:

And likely as not, that money is going to someone directly involved with wrecking KSP2 and all our hopes.

Uh, nope... AFAIK the money will go to whoever owns Private Division right now. Exactly the dudes we expect to fix (at least partially) this mess.

I would agree on delisting the game last year, before the patches and fixes, forcing P.D. to reimburse all the buyers, and then later relaunching the game properly.

Without full reimbursement to any early adopter that regretted buying the game at that state, trying to delist it IMHO is just a P/R stunt trying to promote someone or something else, or to cause prejudice to the new owner.

 

42 minutes ago, boriz said:

I think listing it and not making all that very clear is why it should be delisted. Unless Steam's intention is to deceive, exploit and maltreat gamers, which honestly, I'm not sure it isn't.

Unless the good is illegal, it's not up to the Store to prevent people from buying bad products.

People have the right to buy bad games, if this is what they want. Preventing people from doing what they have a right to do is, well, censorship.

As long Steam fulfills the promise to refund the game if the user regrets buying it, I'm good - and I don't see neither a legal, neither an ethical reason to delist it.

Edited December 27, 2024 by Lisias
Entertaining grammars made slightely less entertaining...

[Fizzlebop Smith]

14 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Unless the good is illegal, it's not up to the Store to prevent people from buying bad products.

That is pretty much the point. 

The anonymity of the current "developement" *as it stands* is selling a *service* that does not meet the criteria established by the mode of sale.

 

14 minutes ago, Lisias said:

have reserves about how,

I alas cannot do anything so the *you* there falls short.

I do write regular emails and a couple hand written letters when I find games that have not had any updates in 14 months or so.

*Big Rubber Stamp* over the EA tag that says 'denied'

This would be sufficient to satisfy my qualms. 

14 minutes ago, Lisias said:

In fact, a huge amount of people that were gullible last year are learnt to be pretty suspicious and even cynical about the Game Industry: they are wiser nowadays.

 

14 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Unless the good is illegal, it's not up to the Store

 

14 minutes ago, Lisias said:

People have the right to buy bad games,

Yes, but they do not have the right to purchase something unethical or illegal.

Focus on the delisting is the wrong angle and would set a nasty precedent. I agree it should have been delisted when still In PD hands.

As it stands now it there are Violations. The entire store page of an EA game is the proposed method a developer proposes to deal with the consumer. 

Not only that I outlines the commitment to the steamworx BS that has some nice language for such situation as occurred. 

Unfortunately, this is not enforced language and resides primarily I'm the FAQ with verbiage of should in key areas.

Firstly, updating this to SHALL and including the FAQ as a sub-section of the document would grant the consumer a great deal more latitude in pursuing recourse in this situation.

(I'm sure steam has something with much more rigorous language actual in place for developers.. I would hope so)

I do that delisting is poor form. My hang up is on the unethical to do so. Largely I believe there is a breech of contract with steam not the consumer. 

That contract is garbage and outside specific locale law, the only shield the buyer has against *gullibility*, hope, or mis placed trust.

I think Steam should instead seek a policy revision which require a little bit of internal paperwork and some signatures.

Delisting would be a *s* show.

Edited December 27, 2024 by Fizzlebop Smith

[Scarecrow71]

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

Private Division was sold to an (at this time) undisclosed buyer. Delisting the game would just harm the buyer, not TTWO that did the mess.

And how does delisting the game that the current buyer didn't developer hurt them?  If they had nothing to do with it, how is not having it available hurt them?

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

People are modding this game. It's not up to us do decide what other people do with their money and time

How is the current mod scene even related to the game being listed on Steam?  People don't generally.buy games just so they can play whatever mods are available.  In fact, games should be able to stand on their own before you add mods, and not need mods to be playable.

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

NO ONE can be fooled about this matter anymore. There's NO WAY someone would buy KSP2 without noticing the huge amount of bad reviews.

1. And there's still that time window for refunding it.

And yet, the question about whether or not to buy it comes up on Reddit weekly.  People either don't read the reviews or they don't know about them.  So to say that there is no way people aren't aware of this mess is patently false.  If you don't believe me, go hit up the subreddit.

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

It would do nothing for the people that were, indeed, hurt by this disaster: early adopters that bought the game and regretted doing it.

This is immaterial.  Nothing is going to help those of us that bought the game at this point 

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

It would just save face from people that don't deserve such privilege.

Not sure how this is, tbh.  So the game is no longer seen...but thay doesn't remove the forum threads, reddit topics, and news articles.

[Lisias]

On 12/27/2024 at 8:22 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

And how does delisting the game that the current buyer didn't developer hurt them?  If they had nothing to do with it, how is not having it available hurt them?

Preventing any residual sales from happening! You know, there are still people playing it, and now and then someone on Reddit talks about buying it. Now and then someone bite the bullet and buy the thing besides most people advising against.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 8:22 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

How is the current mod scene even related to the game being listed on Steam? 

Workshop and the Steam Discussions are very compelling reasons. If we lose Forum, steam users will gather there. At very least, they will survive Forum and SpaceDock for sure.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 8:22 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

People don't generally.buy games just so they can play whatever mods are available.  In fact, games should be able to stand on their own before you add mods, and not need mods to be playable.

This is Kerbal Space Program.

Check Reddit, having mods is the a key selling point for Kerbal. And apparently it includes KSP2.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 8:22 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

And yet, the question about whether or not to buy it comes up on Reddit weekly.  People either don't read the reviews or they don't know about them.  So to say that there is no way people aren't aware of this mess is patently false.  If you don't believe me, go hit up the subreddit.

Or people are double checking the reviews, as it's known that they can be rigged.

In a way or another, you answered the question yourself: people can go to Reddit asking for advice.

And since we are talking about KSP2, check this search:

https://www.reddit.com/search/?q=ksp2&cId=27545df1-d945-4a66-9bd6-4b10df00455d&iId=a16be8c2-798a-4f79-b6f5-1848be313ef2&sort=new

Right now you will see a few posts about people playing KSP2, one or two talking how they discovered KSP¹ after KSP2, granted, I found one asking if they can still try a refund.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 8:22 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

This is immaterial.  Nothing is going to help those of us that bought the game at this point

So what's the point of delisting KSP2? It will not help who needs help, neither will punish who deserves the punishment...

 

On 12/27/2024 at 8:22 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

Not sure how this is, tbh.  So the game is no longer seen...but thay doesn't remove the forum threads, reddit topics, and news articles.

And what you think will happen next?

Forum is apparently being hindered by under-funding, SpaceDock is not in better shape. I need to check Kerbal-X, but at least this one is still working fine.

Reddit is better than nothing, but you will not get there the same information density you get here.

The less money the new owner gets from KSP (no matter which), the less they will spend on keeping Forum (and SpaceDock?  Kerbal-X? Who funds them?).

Without Forum, all you will have to service you will be Reddit and the myriad of Discord Channels, one for each add'on author - you will waste more time trying to get help on Discord than playing the damn game.

SpaceDock is still the most comprehensive collection of add'ons, some of them only available there. Without it, CKAN and github are all what remains, but let me tell you: are you inspecting the new add'ons being published on github? No? You should - some of them can't be published on Forum because they don't minimally satisfy Forum publishing guidelines - it's a matter of time until someone gets infected by something from there.

It's about money. It's always about the money. Someone needs to pay for this party, and right now people are campaigning to reduce the incoming the new owner can get from the Franchise and, so, there will be yet less money to keep things running around here.

Now, bear with me: who will gain something with the KSP2 being delisted? Who is going to lose something (if not all)?

Why campaigning for delisting KSP2 after some poor stand-up guy had foot some serious money buying Private Division? Why this was not advertised early this year when the real responsible for the mess would be hurt, instead of the one that is buying the mess trying to salvage something?

How do you think this will affect the whole Franchise?

How this will help Forum to be better funded so we can use it without that pesky 502 Bad Gateways messages all the time?

Who do you expect to pay for this party, once we deny the new owner part of the money they want to keep things running around here?

 

Edited December 29, 2024 by Lisias
Entertaining grammars made slightely less entertaining...

[Fizzlebop Smith]

I agree with you in spirit, but there is a precedent established by what happened.

Other companies that are hemorrhaging funds. Someone high up in the company may view earlier access as a means of recuperating sunk development cost and then ditching the project once the revenue plateaus.

That is not what happened with KSP2 (as far as we know) bit it may very well be seen as viable by the suits that ultimately make these decisions.

MA y AAA studios are going to go through even leaner times with some of the flops going around. Hopefully consumer outrage will result in less AAA sales and behaviors will change...

As it stand there is an ethical obligation to maximize profit for shareholders and therefore minimize risk. This a no-brainer for upper management that sees the game department being canned down the road. 

This wasn't forecast 3 years ago when we started but shareholders are screaming at the door. Let's get a quick 30% of 100 mil In sales and then write off the entire department as a loss.

While we're at it let's transfer snorkel from the 3rd floor over there before the fiscal year is up.

 

There is no doubt that EA was never intended to outlast the development studio and continuing to sell it (regardless of sales) when you do not KNOW there is anyone behind it .. is dishonest.

Something should be done to discourage further behavior. You say this would not hurt PD or discourage behavior bc it doesn't hurt PD.

It would allow the new buyer a legal avenue to recoup cost. 

It would be so.ething thay happened and people may not purchase flaming IPs in the future?

Heck I don't really know. But I'm up for whatever works. Sweeping reform.

Everyone start writing letter with me. I can't really justify boycotting steam over this. But it doesn't take many straws before rage off to some other provider.

(And ten kids replace me)

It really is kinda hopeless

 

Edited December 28, 2024 by Fizzlebop Smith

[Scarecrow71]

18 minutes ago, Lisias said:

The less money the new owner gets from KSP (no matter which), the less they will spend on keeping Forum (and SpaceDock?  Kerbal-X?

Prove it.  Prove that the new owner doesn't already have funds, or their own forum.  You can't.  You have no clue what the new owner does or does not have, and therefore cannot make a claim about what they may or may not do.

I cannot speak to the state of Spacedock or Kerbal-X; I am under the impression that neither of those is official and/or part of the forum here.  And if that is the case, you can't lump them in with this forum or money earned from selling the game.

You also seem to forget that KSP1 is still listed and available, and that people recommend buying that instead of KSP2.  So do the new owners not get money from those sales?

21 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Now, bear with me: who will gain something with the KSP2 being delisted? Who is going to lose something (if not all)?

Nobody gains or loses anything with the delisting of KSP2.  However, Steam gets held accountable for not having this piece of garbage available, and then finally.gets held to their own EA standard.

I don't understand how you think the new owner gets hurt by not having a game they didn't develop and isn't feature complete not listed for sale.  Do you think the odd $50 here and there are going to matter to their plans in the long run?

My theory is that they don't care.  They knew what they bought, and whether or not the game is listed doesn't mean anything to them.  Everyone who has it or who bought it is their current core audience, and we k ow all about it.

[Bej Kerman]

11 hours ago, boriz said:

 

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

This channel looks like a slop farm. Can't even get "Intercept Games" right.

[Scarecrow71]

28 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

This channel looks like a slop farm. Can't even get "Intercept Games" right.

I couldn't even finish watching the first video.  I heard "The Intercept" twice and vomited.  Like, get your entities right.

[PDCWolf]

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

And Steam will refund the game for sure if you regret buying it:

First off, on the recent side of the graph you can see an uptick for christmas. People bought the game, sadly, anywhere from 2000 to 8000 purchases just estimating from new reviews, however those new reviews have a very bad conversion rate (0% positive inside the refund window, 8% positive outside) so it's very probably most of those people refunded the game.

However, all of that does nothing for people who got stuck with an abandoned game, and that's both a problem on Steam's policies side, and on whoever now owns PD. You should simply not be able to soft-drop an early access project without at least having the stones to call it 1.0, after all spitting on your clients is something you've already done, might as well complete the formalities. Sadly having any sort of control of EA titles is something steam is very limp about and devs/publishers have driven the popularity of the system to the ground by abusing it.

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Check Reddit, having mods is the key selling point for Kerbal. And apparently it includes KSP2.

This is selection bias. Most people get the game and never bother with the communities, easily visible by the most popular place to discuss the game (the subreddit) "only" being followed by 1.5 million people, about 25% of the purchase base, and every other site under that is a magnitude less (<230k in this very forum, the only official channel for discussion before ksp2 discord). So even by doing a very bad sampling and directly converting the biggest community userbase directly to mod users (and even then on the subreddit a lot of people do not use mods) you get that <25% of people mod the game or participate in modding discussions.

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Now, bear with me: who will gain something with the KSP2 being delisted? Who is going to lose something (if not all)?

By delisting an Early Access, Steam is supposed to treat that as a cancellation, making the game not available for purchase and automatically offer refunds of the money to every owner that wants it. People who want to keep the game can choose to do so.

Every user wins, as they get their wish to keep the game or get the money back. As for which company or studio wins or loses, it's something I find increasingly difficult to care about considering the CEO lying to my face followed by 6 months of sustained silence.

 

[RandomKid]

Something tells me this drama will lead to a class action lawsuit...

[Scarecrow71]

36 minutes ago, RandomKid said:

Something tells me this drama will lead to a class action lawsuit...

This has been debated to death on the forum.  And the TL;DR is that the community has neither the money nor legal power to do this and win.

Edited December 28, 2024 by Scarecrow71

[boriz]

9 hours ago, Lisias said:

Gullible people need to learn.

Isn't that exactly what education is for?

 

[boriz]

11 hours ago, Lisias said:

there's no chance anyone would buy the game without noticing the bad reviews:

Are you sure?

[Lisias]

On 12/28/2024 at 5:28 AM, boriz said:

Are you sure?

Are you?

 

On 12/27/2024 at 11:59 PM, RandomKid said:

Something tells me this drama will lead to a class action lawsuit...

As state above, there's little to no hope for success on USA - but it could happen on Europe, I think.

This is something that I would support - the current game description should be updated to depict the current state of the game, and this is already under the new owner's shoulders.

 

On 12/28/2024 at 4:54 AM, boriz said:

Isn't that exactly what education is for?

And what do you understand as education? Some enlightened authority telling people what's good and what's bad?

Imposing the delisting of the game just because it's "bad" is censorship. You are sending the wrong message to the wrong audience - you are, in essence, creating a worse problem trying to fix one that it's not fixable anymore. This ship has sailed already, there's no chance of doing anything that would have a resemblance of Justice by now.

So, if this is not about Justice, what else is it about?

 

On 12/27/2024 at 11:01 PM, PDCWolf said:

By delisting an Early Access, Steam is supposed to treat that as a cancellation, making the game not available for purchase and automatically offer refunds of the money to every owner that wants it. People who want to keep the game can choose to do so.

Nope, delisting a game from EA is not handled as cancellation. You are ill informed. Delist is jut ceasing the sales and removing if from the front store.

The only consequence of delisting a game is people willing to buy it not being able to do so.

And, again, why doing it just now? Why people are willing to "punish" the new P.D, owner instead of TTWO, that were in fact the responsible for the mess?

And you are ignoring that you don't need to delist the game to refund it.

Had this happened before the buyout, I would understand. Right now, it's just a low blow on the new owner and I'm getting increasingly interested on knowing if there's someone behind the scenes pulling some strings on this -and who they are.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 11:01 PM, PDCWolf said:

This is selection bias. Most people get the game and never bother with the communities, easily visible by the most popular place to discuss the game (the subreddit) "only" being followed by 1.5 million people, about 25% of the purchase base, and every other site under that is a magnitude less (<230k in this very forum, the only official channel for discussion before ksp2 discord).

No. I want to quote me:

On 12/27/2024 at 9:00 PM, Lisias said:

This is Kerbal Space Program.

Check Reddit, having mods is the a key selling point for Kerbal. And apparently it includes KSP2.

[edit: i made a pretty stupid mistake on using "the" instead of "a". This screwed the argument, putting me on the faulty party. Fixing it.]

Modding is a key selling point, and I pinpointed Reddit as one source, not the only one. We are talking about KSP, not about any other game.

Heck, the KSP¹ API is still available. How in hell you claim that modding is not a KSP selling point?

https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/ksp/api/index.html

Please be attentive about your own biases - THIS IS KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM, known for a decade for being modding friendly. [edit: and I should be more attentive on word choosing]

 

On 12/27/2024 at 11:01 PM, PDCWolf said:

Most people get the game and never bother with the communities, easily visible by the most popular place to discuss the game (the subreddit) "only" being followed by 1.5 million people, about 25% of the purchase base, and every other site under that is a magnitude less (<230k in this very forum, the only official channel for discussion before ksp2 discord).

On the other hand, 25% of the user base modding a game is way above the normal curve... I found "1%" as the most common estimation... So I will end up insisting on this:

On 12/27/2024 at 9:00 PM, Lisias said:

This is Kerbal Space Program.

Check Reddit, having mods is the a key selling point for Kerbal. And apparently it includes KSP2.

[edit: i made a pretty stupid mistake on using "the" instead of "a". This screwed the argument, putting me on the faulty party. Fixing it.]

On 12/27/2024 at 10:53 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

I couldn't even finish watching the first video.  I heard "The Intercept" twice and vomited.  Like, get your entities right.

Agreed. But still, couldn't resist using a video from the same source to counter-argument the delisting claim.

But, yet, after cleaning up the vomit, you are here discussing the subject so we need to give credit where credit is due, this dude managed to get what he wanted. 

 

On 12/27/2024 at 9:08 PM, Fizzlebop Smith said:

I agree with you in spirit, but there is a precedent established by what happened.

That's the whole problem - we would create yet a new precedent, where entire franchises would just die because no one would be willing to risk buying them because it will be common use to punish the new owners after the buyout, instead of punishing the real responsibles, the old owners while they are still owners of the unwanted son.

Not to mention the simple workaround I mentioned above: promote whatever you have as 1.0, and then delist it.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 9:25 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

Nobody gains or loses anything with the delisting of KSP2. 

Prove it.

 

On 12/27/2024 at 9:25 PM, Scarecrow71 said:

My theory is that they don't care.  They knew what they bought, and whether or not the game is listed doesn't mean anything to them.  Everyone who has it or who bought it is their current core audience, and we k ow all about it.

Forum is still alive and funded. So they care at least a very little bit.

KSP2 at this point is what they call "residual incoming". All the investment is already made, it costs little to nothing to keep the game on the stores and if they get 10 sales a month, it's essentially free money at this point.

At 50 bucks a sale, 10 sales a month would be 500USD/month. VALVe gets 30%, so they keep 350USD on their wallets.

Let's assume that 2 users ask for refunds, so it the net balance would be 250USD/month (refunds are refunded in full, right? I'm assuming VALVe keep their share).

The Forum's software license costs 500USD up front (already paid in the past), and 200USD/year renewal, I don't know about how much Forum is costing on hosting and networking, but it should be something near 100 to 200 USD/month given the current level of QoS we have now. So we are talking about 200/12=17 (provisioning for the next renewal) and 200, let's round to 220USD/Month.

That meager 10 sales a month is enough to keep Forum running. You remove it from the Stores, the choice will be to take money from KSP¹ sales to fund Forum, or just shut this thing down and call it a day ("they don't care", after all!)

It's about the money. It's always about the money. Ask Ubisoft about.

 

Edited December 30, 2024 by Lisias
necessary editings. "the" vs "a"

[boriz]

20 minutes ago, Lisias said:

It's about the money. It's always about the money.

Yep.

[Scarecrow71]

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

But, yet, after cleaning up the vomit, you are here discussing the subject so we need to give credit where credit is due, this dude managed to get what he wanted. 

Wrong.  I was here talking about this before the video showed up.  The video didn't influence one way or the other.

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

Forum is still alive and funded. So they care at least a very little bit.

This forum was funded by Take Two, and that license runs out somewhere around March.  If the new owners of the IP cared so much about it and/or us, they'd not only let us know who they are, but they'd either fund the forum OR let us know where we should be.  The fact that they haven't done any of that to this point shows me that they don't care about us at all.

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

KSP2 at this point is what they call "residual incoming". All the investment is already made, it costs little to nothing to keep the game on the stores and if they get 10 sales a month, it's essentially free money at this point.

Money that's being made on a lie.  The game isn't being developed, and there won't be any development on it at all as far as we all know.  And if they care about those 10 sales a month and are really that greedy, then they aren't any better than Take Two.

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

Let's assume that 2 users ask for refunds, so it would be 250USD/month (refunds are refunded in full, right? I'm assuming VALVe keep their share).

The Forum's software license costs 500USD up front (already paid in the past), and 200USD/year renewal, I don't know about how much Forum is costing on hosting and networking, but it should be something near 100 to 200 USD/month given the current level of QoS we have now. So we are talking about 200/12=17 (provisioning for the next renewal) and 200, let's round to 220USD/Month.

That meager 10 sales a month is enough to keep Forum running. You remove it from the Stores, the choice will be to take money from KSP¹ sales to fund Forum, or just shut this thing down and call it a day ("they don't care", after all!)

It's about the money. It's always about the money. Ask Ubisoft about.

Your math is so far off.  The game is $50 a pop.  2 users refunding is $100, not $250.  So the first part of your argument here is gone right out the window.

Secondly, we still have no idea if the forum was part of the sale of the studio.  Nor do we know who even bought it.  The forum was stated as being funded for 6 months back in September, which means the current license runs out somewhere in March.  And for all the asking that's been done both here and on Discord, nobody - NOBODY - can state with any certainty what is going to happen with the forum when that license runs out.  Which, as I stated above, tells me that the new owner doesn't care any more about us or this place than Take Two does.

As far as money to keep the forum up and running?  If it means keeping the forum and the years of data around, I'll pay for the license myself.  The bigger problem is the backend - database and server hosting.  When Take Two decides to shut that off is when we are really screwed.  And while I'd pay for the license cost (which would then get into a whole discussion about me becoming an administrator of the site, which nobody wants), I'd need someone else to pick up the backend tab.  You gonna front that cost?  Or are you going to continue making up numbers and sales figures to justify the new owner - who, again, we don't know - wanting Steam to keep the game listed even though it's dead?

[PDCWolf]

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

Nope, delisting a game from EA is not handled as cancellation. You are ill informed. Delist is jut ceasing the sales and removing if from the front store.

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/earlyaccess

Quote

Q: What happens if I don't complete my Early Access game?

A: Sometimes things don't work out as you planned, and you may need to discontinue development of your Early Access game before you are ready for a V1.0 release. If this happens, you can contact Valve to figure out the next steps. There are two options:

If your Early Access game is playable and well received, but you're unable to develop it to the point where you feel it warrants a full V1.0 release, then we can keep your game on the Store, but otherwise remove it from Early Access. This will remove the Early Access tag and Early Access Q&A displayed on your game’s Store Page, but not start the launch visibility that comes with definitively releasing your game out of Early Access. This would be a permanent change; we aren’t able to reenable Early Access again later, so please consider this option carefully before contacting us with the details. In this case, you should let your community know about your decision to leave Early Access via a forum post or news event.

Alternatively, we can remove your Early Access game from Steam. Before reaching out, you should read about the process of removing a game from Steam and take a moment to carefully consider whether or not pulling your game down is actually the right choice. Are you acting based on an emotional response to negative feedback, or is retiring your game the appropriate next step? We take our relationship with customers seriously, so if you choose to cancel development of a game and retire it from the store, we will not republish it again later and we may offer refunds to any users who purchased it. Treating customers fairly is the most important thing to us.

This is very clear: Either push into 1.0 as is to remove the EA status, or get it delisted allowing every owner to file for refund.

3 hours ago, Lisias said:

Modding is a key selling point, and I pinpointed Reddit as one source, not the only one. We are talking about KSP, not about any other game.

Heck, the KSP¹ API is still available. How in hell you claim that modding is not a KSP selling point?

https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/ksp/api/index.html

Please be attentive about your own biases - THIS IS KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM, known for a decade for being modding friendly.

 

On the other hand, 25% of the user base modding a game is way above the normal curve... I found "1%" as the most common estimation... So I will end up insisting on this:

 

You're not better than a very basic statistics analysis. I gave it to you that anyone ever registered to the subreddit and the forum is someone who mods (which is not the case, it's a bias to your side of the argument). And even then that's <25% of the purchaser base.

>75% of players have not interacted with mods in a public manner, be it registering here or the subreddit. And again, that's giving you the first 25% for free, which is also not the case because there's clear stock purists here and on the subreddit.

That <25% being more than the "normal" (another assumption we'd have to prove from a good sample of moddable games) does not mean "the selling point of KSP1 is modding", that'd still only be true for <25% of the purchaser base

[Lisias]

9 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/earlyaccess

This is very clear: Either push into 1.0 as is to remove the EA status, or get it delisted allowing every owner to file for refund.

Dude, please...

Quote

• Alternatively, we can remove your Early Access game from Steam. Before reaching out, you should read about the process of removing a game from Steam and take a moment to carefully consider whether or not pulling your game down is actually the right choice. Are you acting based on an emotional response to negative feedback, or is retiring your game the appropriate next step? We take our relationship with customers seriously, so if you choose to cancel development of a game and retire it from the store, we will not republish it again later and we may offer refunds to any users who purchased it. Treating customers fairly is the most important thing to us.

Emphasis are mine.

They MAY offer refunds. MAY.

Not to mention that they WILL NOT unilaterally remove the game from Steam, this is something that the publisher should do!! Please read the linked document about Retirement.

Quote

If you need to stop selling your product for some reason, Valve can help you make the necessary changes. This documentation will be helpful if you are cancelling or retiring a game, or if you have lost distribution rights and need to stop selling a title. Our biggest priority is making sure customers are treated fairly, so please follow the steps outlined below.

Please note that if Steam unilaterally decide to Cancel the game, they will be in charge of the refunds and then sue Private Division to recover the costs - and, obviously, the current P.D. owner will fight back.

Things are not easy as you are implying.

 

[snip]

 

9 hours ago, PDCWolf said:

And even then that's <25% of the purchaser base.

25% of the purchase base is 1 each 4 buyers. Perhaps in some other World, but on this one, 25% IS A HELL of group in your user base, big enough to drive some requirements.

And, in time:

Quote

Multiplayer/Modding: The technological developments made to the foundations of Kerbal Space Program 2 will build on the beloved modding capabilities of the original game, as well as deliver on the long-requested addition of multiplayer. Soon players will be able to share the challenges of deep space exploration. More details on these features will be revealed at a later time.

https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/games-kerbal-space-program-2

Quote

Modding: We expect modders to dig into KSP2 on day one. We recognize that the modding community has played a big role in the longevity of KSP, and we continue to be impressed by the mods that are released.

https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/news/ksp-2-launches-in-early-access

And I rest my case. Modding was a key selling point for KSP2 (too). It's on their freaking official site.

There's no point on keep arguing about this with you.

 

10 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Wrong.  I was here talking about this before the video showed up.  The video didn't influence one way or the other.

Prove it.

 

10 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

This forum was funded by Take Two, and that license runs out somewhere around March.  If the new owners of the IP cared so much about it and/or us, they'd not only let us know who they are, but they'd either fund the forum OR let us know where we should be.  The fact that they haven't done any of that to this point shows me that they don't care about us at all.

If they didn't cared at all, no one would had fixed Forum neither and would had already pulled the plug.

One can only speculate about the reasons the new owner choose not do show themself yet - you can't affirm what they care or not. Except for money, we can surely affirm, without the slightest shadow of doubt, that they care about money.

 

10 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Your math is so far off.  The game is $50 a pop.  2 users refunding is $100, not $250.  So the first part of your argument here is gone right out the window.

I think your apparent <self-snipped> annoyance about this subject may be hindering your <self-sniped>.

I will quote myself (it's becoming an habit ), before my editing in a (probably futile) attempt to clarify:

13 hours ago, Lisias said:

At 50 bucks a sale, 10 sales a month would be 500USD/month. VALVe gets 30%, so they keep 350USD on their wallets.

Let's assume that 2 users ask for refunds, so it would be 250USD/month (refunds are refunded in full, right? I'm assuming VALVe keep their share).

If we had 500USD and give 30% to Steam, we have 350USD in our pockets now. If 2 people ask for refund, at 50USD each, we will end with 250USD in our wallet (I'm assuming VALVe will keep their share on the sales).

It's so blatantly obvious that I'm reticent on keep engaging with you from this point.

 

Edited December 28, 2024 by Vanamonde
Self snipping some parts that may be less then ideal on a civilized argument.

[PDCWolf]

8 minutes ago, Lisias said:

25% of the purchase base is 1 each 4 buyers. Perhaps in some other World, but on this one, 25% IS A HELL of group in your user base, big enough to drive some requirements.

If 3 people out of 4 don't mod (and again, it's actually less than that implied 25%) , then the game isn't selling its numbers because people buy it to mod it. The game could not be moddable and >75% of current buyers would've bought it anyway.

I don't know what kind of line in the sand you must be drawing to somehow reach the conclusion that a minority of buyers decide the key selling point of the game. That's just not how it works, period.

10 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Dude, please...

Emphasis are mine.

They MAY offer refunds. MAY.

Not to mention that they WILL NOT unilaterally remove the game from Steam, this is something that the publisher should do!! Please read the linked document about Retirement.

Please note that if Steam unilaterally decide to Cancel the game, they will be in charge of the refunds and then sue Private Division to recover the costs - and, obviously, the current P.D. owner will fight back.

Things are not easy as you are implying.

 

Steam has delisted games on their own (Hatred, StarForge, Devotion), and special to our case is The Day Before, deleted after being blown out as a massive scam (and no, not delisted because the developer asked). Steam has the power to delist games at will, it's just something they choose to leave as an absolutely last resort because it obviously also nukes relationships with prospective scam artists developers. And no, they don't sue, as was the case with The Day Before and StarForge, they just eat up the losses or do not offer refunds if it's been too long.

 

[Lisias]

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

If 3 people out of 4 don't mod (and again, it's actually less than that implied 25%) , then the game isn't selling its numbers because people buy it to mod it. The game could not be moddable and >75% of current buyers would've bought it anyway.

I don't know what kind of line in the sand you must be drawing to somehow reach the conclusion that a minority of buyers decide the key selling point of the game. That's just not how it works, period.

It is exactly how it works: 1 each 4 buyers wants modding. 3 each 4 don't care. So it's a key selling point because not adding it will cause a 25% potential loss in revenue, while adding will literally have no penalty involved (other than technical, of course).

People that don't care about a feature will not leave you if you add it, but people that rejects it surely will.

You are blatantly failing to see that 75% of the current buyers would had bought the game no matter it having modding support or not, making just simply obvious that adding modding would be the single most lucrative feature to be added to backlog, as it would increase the revenue by 25% just by itself.

The key word is REJECTION. It's REJECTION the main drive force when building your feature list - and the game industry (as well politics, unfortunately) are virtually littered with a myriad of examples on how this is real!

This is Product Management 101.

 

1 hour ago, PDCWolf said:

<...>Steam has the power to delist games at will,<...>

Oh, dear... here we go again.

• The Day Before
  • The Day Before developer Fntastic made the shock announcement that it was closing down. Soon after, Fntastic removed the purchase button on the game's Steam page and wiped its presence from the internet. All this just four days after The Day Before launched in Early Access.
  • https://www.ign.com/articles/under-fire-developer-of-disastrous-steam-flop-the-day-before-insists-it-really-is-closing-down
• Devotion
  • Devotion was delisted from Steam on February 25th, 2019. The game’s removal was allegedly caused by a jab at <...removed due political issues...>
  • https://delistedgames.com/devotion/
• StarForge
  • On January 27, 2017, the game was pulled from the Steam store and a DRM free copy of the game was uploaded to the developer's website. The developers also announced that they had no plans for further development of the game.
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarForge#Removal_from_Steam
• Hatred
  • Hatred was only temporarily removed during the Greenlight process, which was a long time ago.
  • https://steamcommunity.com/app/341940/discussions/0/133258593381997667/

NONE of your examples support your thesis, and were quickly debunked (about 3 minutes each). The only one that VALVe did it unilateraly was due overwhelmingly external powers that forced their hand.

Sir, I strongly encourage you to double check your sources.

 

Edited December 28, 2024 by Lisias
Oh, yeah... Tyops...