Alarming article from Polygon (let's be good to our devs, okay?)

[boolybooly]

I'd like to play the game to relax.

I don't hate Squad... I just wish they'd fix established stock features before moving forward.

... despite how much it annoys me to play at times, there are times I enjoy it... I think the direction game development has been starting to go toward is hurting itself.

I have edited the quote to show imho salient points hope you dont mind TouhouTorpedo.

I agree we should be kind to devs. I want to consider the OP and come full circle to the topic.

I have a personal hunch that players tend to transfer their emotions from the game environment onto their communications with devs and other players and ultimately all activity on the internet. Some become conditioned to treat all online activity as though it is just a game environment so they dont consider the severity of injurious statements seriously. Whereas they are sometimes received by people who do take them seriously and the mismatch between degrees of seriousness is a problem. What some see as vile and violent attacks, is to others just playful self expression, a verbal reenactment of a scene from Bioshock, Batman Arkham Asylum or GTA.

The game environment of many games permits acts of make believe violence, its part of how the game entertains, how players find diversion and is how some devs make a living, but the game environment can end up leaking into reality and influencing developer-player relations. This is partly because people cannot help it as play is learning behaviour, but some devs and communities exploit this weakness very deliberately to generate hype and excitement about digital products. People who say that leaking doesnt or shouldnt happen are simply idealists in denial of reality.

IMHO Harv's policy of not weaponising or hyping KSP is part of the reason we have a relatively civil community. KSP is quite a cerebral game, even though its also a lot of fun. IMHO The nature of the game shapes the community. But that does have a knock on effect which is where the game is frustrating to play it can cause tempers to get frayed in the online community as well, since people bring the game experience to the BB and feel a desire to express it. Though frustration is caused by obstacles in the way of desires. That people feel enough desire to get frustrated is in a way a good sign for the game.

That does not excuse incivility or DOS attacks but I think it may be true that when gameplay annoys people in all honesty this increases the likelihood of bad tempered behaviour. I think there is no choice here, standards have to be maintained by moderators to ensure that the community stays within the bounds of good humour. But if you set boundaries based on good humour you can only truely maintain them good humouredly!

Personally I am very cautious about reporting problems with the gameplay as I dont want my game experience to reflect too directly in bug reports. Where I experience problems I dont want to be too emotional, critical or bring the devs down, on the other hand they do need to know and it should be possible to have a calm and rational discussion with devs about the game and players hopes for its future. The law of nature though is there is always one (at least) who will abuse a situation of trust (its not an evolutionary stable strategy) so one has to back openness with security.

To be honest I have held off saying that they should fix existing systems because I am aware that development is not linear and for example the VAB and other systems will receive upgrades once other modules are in place. The problem which arises for Squad in developing alpha code in a playable state so they can fund development is how much effort they should spend on making it playable and how much on reaching the finished functionality, to save effort and time until the point where final passes which fix all outstanding bugs are worth doing. I think its would help if we tried to understand this as a community.

Edited August 22, 2013 by boolybooly

[SpaceHole]

The car salesman told us the car could bugged for a while and that he had no idea how the final car would look and guaranteed us nothing.

In this case, the car has exceeded my expectations and I am a happy customer and by far got my $23 worth of fun and then some! I dont know how anyone feels entitled to anything more at this point?

You cant proof your point by making things up.

Might you read the Steam-Description.

Also he guaranteed you something - the final car. There are lots of posts by developers that point out features they want to add to the game and where they want to go. Which is what people pay for - the idea they believe in.

So with this reasoning anythign is okay as long as the other party either doesnt know better or is easy to please?

Im sorry to have to break it to you but law heavly regulates what will be part of a contract. Many people seem to take this way to lightly which is why it is only a matter of time for the first big problems with things like crowd-sourcing etc.

Edited August 22, 2013 by SpaceHole

[TouhouTorpedo]

I have edited the quote to show imho salient points hope you dont mind TouhouTorpedo.

Nah thats fine. I did have to google salient though, never heard that before. Glad you agree though, anyway.

[Tiron]

You cant proof your point by making things up.

Might you read the Steam-Description.

Also he guaranteed you something - the final car. There are lots of posts by developers that point out features they want to add to the game and where they want to go. Which is what people pay for - the idea they believe in.

So with this reasoning anythign is okay as long as the other party either doesnt know better or is easy to please?

Im sorry to have to break it to you but law heavly regulates what will be part of a contract. Many people seem to take this way to lightly which is why it is only a matter of time for the first big problems with things like crowd-sourcing etc.

And games shouldn't have contracts involved in the first place. Seriously, large sections of most EULAs consists of attempts to abrogate various consumer protection laws and legal conventions in an attempt to prevent the consumer having any reasonable method of recourse. It works both ways: If you're going to claim protection because there's a contract involved, they get their assertion that it's okay to have it be a contract instead of a sale reaffirmed. It's not worth the damage.

And so far as I'm aware, in KSP's case, the promises are pretty much limited to 'You'll get the later versions for free as they come out'.

[spikeyhat09]

you can't please everybody. on the internet, people express their ideas freely, perhaps a little too freely. its bound to happen. its inevitable.

[jeti140973]

I think a lot of people ought to reread the terms of service for this product (available HERE).

Terms of Service

By purchasing Kerbal Space Program, you are entitled to the following:

- Access to the software in its current state.

- Access to all updates for the software.

By 'updates' we mean software updates including content, features and bugfixes, released as a new version for the same title, before or after the official ("1.0") release of the software.

If you've purchased KSP before May 1st, 2013, you are entitled to the above, plus any Expansion Packs released for KSP.

By 'Expansion Packs' we mean software released as a separate title, but that requires and ties into the original KSP software to expand the game by adding content, features and bugfixes.

Regardless of purchase date, your purchase of KSP does not entitle you to the following:

Other "Kerbal" titles, such as sequels, prequels or any other works based on KSP or any subset of the KSP IP, even those that integrate with the original KSP (but do not require it).

Other titles released by Squad.

Other goods and services offered as complements to any Squad title, such as Merchandise (t-shirts, mugs, mousepads, etc.), 3D printing, etc.

Please keep in mind:

Squad is not under any obligation to release any updates, expansions or titles at any time. Each release may very well be the last one.

Squad is under no obligation to implement any given set of features prior to the final release for KSP or any future title. All posted lists of planned features are unofficial and do not imply a promise by Squad to deliver anything listed in them.

Squad reserves the right to add, remove and modify content on any of its software at their own discretion, without prior notice.

Squad is under no obligation to maintain any level of communication with the player community, choosing to do so at their own discretion.

The minimum hardware specifications are posted for reference purposes only. KSP is a work-in-progress, and as such, may not perform as expected under any given hardware configuration.

The Software is made available as-is, and may contain bugs and/or manifest undesirable behaviour. Squad does not guarantee any level of stability or performance for the Software, and takes no responsibility in the event of data loss or damage ocurred as a direct or indirect result of using the software. Use at your own risk.

I find it pretty clear what you buy, and what you can expect - and cannot expect. Again, it is sad that this level of clarity and such disclaimers are required in this day and age, as most of this should be common sense (and decency) when purchasing a product under development. There are of course risks involved. If any of the above conditions sound remotely unfair to you as a buying customer you should instead wait for the finished product. It ought to be pretty simple.

[Tiron]

you can't please everybody. on the internet, people express their ideas freely, perhaps a little too freely. its bound to happen. its inevitable.

There is a line, though, and crossing it should not be tolerated. At all. Threats of violence in particular should result in immediate, total removal from whatever community they're made in with no appeal or chance of revocation, in addition to the normal consequences of making such statements by other means (IE: Going to Jail.)

[SpaceHole]

I think a lot of people ought to reread the terms of service for this product (available HERE).

I find it pretty clear what you buy, and what you can expect - and cannot expect. Again, it is sad that this level of clarity and such disclaimers are required in this day and age, as most of this should be common sense (and decency) when purchasing a product under development. There are of course risks involved. If any of the above conditions sound remotely unfair to you as a buying customer you should instead wait for the finished product. It ought to be pretty simple.

Terms of service are a nice thing but wont necessarily work out the way you think.

First Problem:

- Marketing of the game - you simply cant promie features on the one hand and exclude them on the other hand

- Terms of service - are limited by consumer law in most countries

- Terms of service - probably wont be a part of the contract in the case of KSP at least on steam i have no idea how buying works on their site (at least in most countries i know since the terms of contract have to be at least hinted when you buy the game - in the case of KSP there is no indicator for those limitations at all at Steam)

Also yes there are risks involved but nott hings like this:

"Squad is not under any obligation to release any updates, expansions or titles at any time. Each release may very well be the last one."

If they would do that they would get sued pretty easily or people could probably just demand their money back.

Most of the time law will protect the consumers - for a good reason.

Also i dont understand your point of view - if you pay for something you also aquire certain rights - why would you opose this pretty usefull and essencial idea? Just think about warranties for example.

Just as an example for your world-view:

Developer A creates a game - releases it in an alpha stage - sells it like KSP - decides that hes borded and got enough money stops developing and leaves a buggy game behind while still having made lots of money.

Would this be a result you agree with?

Edited August 23, 2013 by SpaceHole

[Bothersome]

Don't give no rat's ass about no Terms of Service. I didn't have to sign one to buy it from Steam so no contract (that I certainly haven't signed) is gonna hold any threats over me.

If it wasn't stated on Steams sale page,.. tough **** is all I got to say.

[Bothersome]

What the developers say:

“KSP is still under development. This means the game will be improved on a regular basis, through updates that add new features, content and bug fixes, so make sure to check back for new versions.

That's what I saw on Steam when I bought it. Says it will be improved. So TOS cannot all of a sudden take away that obligation to improve the product as far as I'm concerned.

[jeti140973]

*snip*

Would this be a result you agree with?

True, consumers are pretty well protected generally, at least where I come from. Except perhaps in the case of software, which is still a gray area to some extent. And that is quite understandable, I think, because it is by no means a simple matter. By comparing it to a car sale you are simplifying the problem. Or ignoring it.

Some of your points are true and valid. But software is by itself an intangible product, and buying software still under development only makes it even worse. This is something a buyer should be well aware of. Consumer protection should never relieve buyers from taking responsibility for their own decisions and actions. Afterall, it is also in everyone's interest to protect software startups from malicious lawsuits and unreasonable claims.

In most judicial systems you look for 'malicious intent' when you try to determine wrongdoings. I don't think anyone can reasonably accuse Squad of that. They have a vision for a future product, and they are investing in a project to realize that vision. They have presented the vision as clearly as they can, and everyone is free to support it - or watch from the sideline. As a buyer it is an investment like any other. A high-risk investment (buying early) provides better returns, but no promises. If you want promises and guarantees you should opt for the low-risk investment - which is waiting for the finished product, complete featurelists and external reviews before you buy. The latter option being of course more expensive. Are you interested in the journey or the destination? You get what you pay for either way.

Also, the vision Squad have for the game may not at all resemble the buyers vision. In many cases it is probably not even discussed or properly thought out yet. Or, it may very well change underway. That is also quite understandable in an ongoing development project. Again, this is something the buyers should be well aware of. As for marketing... well, I learned that a looong time ago. Always do your own research.

The point here, and the topic of the thread, is to stay reasonable. Of course, con artists should not be allowed to swindle money from gullible buyers, and of course, con artists should also not be allowed to swindle money from naïve software startups. It never hurts to try to see things from the other point of view.

As for your example. If Squad stopped development on KSP tomorrow it would still leave me with a very fun and entertaining product. Same can be said for Prison Architect, and a bunch of other titles. I am, of course, rather careful in which titles I choose to purchase and why, and I don't expect to be protected from myself in that regard.

[jeti140973]

That's what I saw on Steam when I bought it. Says it will be improved. So TOS cannot all of a sudden take away that obligation to improve the product as far as I'm concerned.

No, this is what you saw on Steam when you bought it:

THIS SOFTWARE IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN ALPHA STATE, AND MAY CONTAIN BUGS. SQUAD AND SQUAD STAFF TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGE OR LOSS OF DATA THAT MAY OCCUR AS A DIRECT OR INDIRECT RESULT OF USING THIS SOFTWARE, AND CANNOT GUARANTEE ANY DEGREE OF PERFORMANCE OR STABILITY, OR EVEN THAT THE SOFTWARE WILL BE USABLE AT ALL. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

And this:

What should I look for?

First of all, look for games that are interesting, exciting, and that you want to play. Then, there are a couple things you might want to consider before making your purchase:

What is the game like to play right now?

When you buy an Early Access game, you should consider what the game is like to play right now. Look at the screenshots and videos to see what the game looks like in its current state. There are a lot of ways a game can go as it develops over time, so if you aren't excited to play the game in its current state, then hold off and wait until the next update--it shouldn't be far off.

How often is this game getting updated?

Take a look at the recent update announcements from the developer (shown on the store page for that game) to get a sense of how active the developer is. Does it look like that game is getting updated a lot? Are they valuable and interesting updates?

Pricing of individual games may change over time

Some developers will start by offering a discount for buying early while others will charge a premium, depending on their goals and the level of commitment and feedback they desire from Early Access customers.

I must say, based on your attitude, that it sounds like Early Access Games is not very well suited for you. Or at least maybe you should consider waiting until the product is further along in development. No offense intended.

[KOCOUR]

Well i bought this game for 18 bucks or something like that sometime last year, and even if sqad stops the development right now, it would be still worth that 18 bucks i spent on it, or even more.

I played lots of games over last 5 years, and what i can tell is, that KSP in ALPHA stage, feels lot more complete and bugfree than half of the "finnished" games i played.

I offcourse will rant about some details of the game or what i dont like about the game, or what i want in the game, when i will be in grumpy mood, but that doesnt change the fact that overall, iam more than happy with my purchase of KSP.

[Bothersome]

I saw what I quoted above. Who are you to tell me what I saw, nobody that's who.

And you are also nobody to be telling me what best for me. I bought the game knowing it was alpha. And since there is no way to get the money back, Squad is not getting off the hook cause they want to hide some TOS somewhere else out there that has to be dug up. It wasn't on the sale page and that's what I'm holding them to.

[Aphox]

Is this a thread discussing an online article or an argument about the TOS?

Get back on topic, people. And keep it civil-- no need for name-calling and personal attacks.

[Diche Bach]

I really just cannot believe that anyone of a reasonable and friendly mindset would have anything to sincerely complain about this game at this point. I call BS. Some people just like to troll, esp. if everybody else going over the bridge is a nice guy/gal.

[NovaSilisko]

I often wonder if I enjoy working on games enough to deal with the backlash from doing basically anything at all. Not just games, any creative endeavor tbh. Not made any big splash in the music world (yet, hopefully) so I'm not sure how fierce that can get for small time musicians...

[Bothersome]

I guess it kind of depends if you want some money or not. If so, you might have to put up with the other party wanting what they paid for.

[jwenting]

No, it's definitely about what you say. I agree with the rest of your post, but I don't think that's a good way to summarize it. A death threat, outright insult, putting people down etc, is definitely not just a shade of how people voice their concerns; it is quite different.

sadly, it's far worse than the (relatively small) number of death threats and other threats of physical violence against devs and their loved ones and corporate assets.

It's the constant flood of hate mongering posts, usually just rants filled with lies, disinformation, and gross exaggerations that cause devs to become disillusioned, potential customers to start doubting the quality of a good product and fail to buy it for all the wrong reasons, and the user community to become polarised.

We see it to a (luckily relatively small, but KSP has a small userbase) degree here. It's far worse at places that have millions of users, like the Blizzard support forums, those of Second Life, and anything related to Microsoft.

There, the extremely vocal minority hell bend on destroying the product and community are large enough to actually overload the forums with negativity (especially as a lot of people seem to blindly hit "like" or otherwise reply "me 2!!!" to anything negative without ever thinking about what they're claiming to agree with). Add to that active sabotage by competitors (which AFAIK KSP does not suffer from, being a niche product with to the best of my knowledge no competitors in active development at this time (yes, this hits even freeware teams being trolled like this by other freeware teams and their fans)), and you have a situation where there's real economic damage caused by users ranting uncontrolled. Worse still, start doing something about it and blocking/banning those trolls and things get worse as they now move to channels you don't control and wreak havoc there, adding "fascist tactics to silence genuine complaints" to the bag of lies (in fact that one's used even when no such measures are in place).

[jwenting]

I really just cannot believe that anyone of a reasonable and friendly mindset would have anything to sincerely complain about this game at this point. I call BS. Some people just like to troll, esp. if everybody else going over the bridge is a nice guy/gal.

There's people, sadly a lot of people, with a massively inflated sense of entitlement. Such people tend to respond with incredible violence and negativity to anything that doesn't go exactly as they had intended.

So they have this machine that doesn't match the posted minimum specs, buy (or pirate more likely) KSP, then come on the forums and launch into repeated tirades about how KSP is unplayable because Squad "suck and don't care about customers with low spec systems".

[czokletmuss]

"It's important to listen to fans about what's important to them, but it's equally important to listen to people who are not currently gamers about why they aren't playing. Hardcore gamers want a product that is made specifically for them and is actively unfriendly to anyone new. They will beg and bully to get this product and then praise and wax nostalgic over any game that lives up to their standards even if the company that made it went bankrupt. They don't care about keeping companies in business or artists employed. Their only job as fans is to say what pleases them, and it would be foolish to expect them to think beyond that. But to cater to those desires without thinking about how to bring new audiences in and make them comfortable will ultimately result in a stagnant and money-losing industry.

Sadly that's true. KSP forum is quite civilized however - maybe because rocket science even in a game demands some basic level of intelligence which often goes in pair with personal culture? However there is also quite a lot of pressure on some of the most popular modders and some people think that spending 20 bucks means they purchased slaves making stuff for them as they demand it. I hope that with growing popularity KSP forum will stay more or less the same - place when you can show your work, ask questions and get answers to them, talk about physics and space, download incredible mods and just have fun.

[AntonioAJC]

I really hate these people that make idiotic threats to the dev teams, thinking that they will do anything if they tell him that they will kill his children.

How old are these people anyways? These threats can make the law enforcement arrest you! Sites like 4Chan are hell, literally. And you know, I've seen worse forums. The PlanetSide 2 forums are hateful of their great developer team. Most of the time, they refer Sony Online Entertainment as $OE and such. I don't know if it's because they're mad at the nerf of a favorite weapon or vehicle that was really overpowered. Or the depot that you can purchase cosmetics and weapons using real world cash. But that doesn't matter because the game is FREE, yes, free and they don't appreciate that.

I don't know what is it that people just get mad at the developers. I really had no problem with the new SAS. I thought it was great.

Edited August 23, 2013 by AntonioAJC

[Apollo13]

Times have changed, the money in programming has dried up and you have to be an uber gawd to make a higher salary in software development. I still do it making small apps for a corporate intranet mostly, but found more money in selling ads on my privately owned WordPress site. With WordPress and its community, who needs to write code any more?

As a software developer in IT for over 40 years (we used to be called computer programmers in ADP), I hear that!!! Until Y2K remediation, I was doing very well pushing code. Then, Y2K got pushed overseas to India and Pakistan, and the jobs never returned. For about 10 years now, when some kid asks me about being a professional developer, I STRONGLY discourage him/her. I need to talk to you about that Wordpress thing.

[dr_jt]

I have a personal hunch that players tend to transfer their emotions from the game environment onto their communications with devs and other players and ultimately all activity on the internet.

I think it has a lot to do with not being face to face with someone. You can easily tell off and insult somebody to the extreme because they don't know who you are and it would be unlikely that they can find out. People are really uncivil hiding behind a fake name and not revealing where they live. There are few if any repercussions for being an a-hole on the internet.

[dr_jt]

As a software developer in IT for over 40 years (we used to be called computer programmers in ADP), I hear that!!! Until Y2K remediation, I was doing very well pushing code. Then, Y2K got pushed overseas to India and Pakistan, and the jobs never returned. For about 10 years now, when some kid asks me about being a professional developer, I STRONGLY discourage him/her. I need to talk to you about that Wordpress thing.

Been there and doing that for 35 years. Heck, I use to code COBOL. I was a very well to do software designer and manager right up until I lost my job because the company got bought out and they canned all higher level positions. Just try to get a job in a bad market at the age of 55. I ran through my savings and retirement and finally got a job after 4 years as a low to mid level level C# programmer with pretty much no chance of advancement and now I find people want a 60 old even less then they want a 55 year old. Heck, I only got hired because my boss is married to an Mech Engineer that lost his job at 58 and never got another one. I think she felt bad for me. The down side is I'll most likely die at my desk as a 70 year old low level C# programmer because unless I win the lotto I'll never build up enough to retire.