It's in alpha, The fallback excuse

[allmhuran]

Well, we've now had a whole lot of info from Ted and Rowsdower, so that will hopefully put some minds at ease.

I think threads like this can be a bit deceptive, it all seems very negative. But people only tend to really complain about something they're invested in - someone who picks up a game, plays it for 5 minutes and doesn't like it is unlikely to bother heading to the official forum and start making complaints about what might be wrong with it. They'll just move on to the next game.

For those in this thread and elsewhere on the forum who do seem to be persistently negative, I get it. We all want the game to be perfect, game of the decade material. Everyone has a vision for what something could possibly be.

But it might be worth sitting back in the chair for a moment and reflecting on the fact that the game that you've apparently spent a lot of time playing - because you think it's fun - is the result of some people working pretty damn hard, and if you only share the negative side of your opinion with the forum it might be a bit depressing for those people.

One can only hope that Squad keeps in mind the fact that the most vehement complaints are probably coming from people who thoroughly enjoy the game, as revealed by their passion.

[Mandelbrot]

you really think this or just copy/paste the official self-defense text?

I've bought a game which had a promise I'd like to see. Sadly it's exactly the same as a year ago. same bugs, same performance problems same content...

This is just untrue. The KSP forum population is well aware of what has been added in the last year: New KSC, Astronaut Complex, Career Mode (thus far wholly incomplete, soon to change), craters on Mun, tweakables, asteroids, lots of new parts, way better performance. For me, every update in the last year has given me slightly better performance. 23.5 was a huge leap, literally doubling my frame rates for large rockets. On top of that, they have been doing a lot of work in the background that has been leading up to a more complete career mode. You may feel betrayed by the path development has taken, but you just can't claim with a straight face that it has stopped.

[Lheim]

You may feel betrayed by the path development has taken, but you just can't claim with a straight face that it has stopped.

I agree. You lose all credibility by claiming that nothing has been updated. Performance tweaks, career mode, science, new moon, new ksc models, new parts, new asteroids, c'mon. It's at this point I have to say - close this thread, devs. There's nothing here but the kind of shiftless, irresponsibly slanted rhetoric that comes out of politician's mouths.

[GMoney]

I really see one glaring issue with the premise of this thread. The OP's objective seems not to get a finished product for the sake of having a fully-furnished game, but rather solely to be able to judge this game against others; to be able to put Squad next to the likes of EA and Firaxis and Valve, etc, and say that they're definitively better or worse.

If you ask me, the fact that this is still considered an "alpha" allows for greater community access, not less. Instead of pointing out bugs in hopes that someday a patch comes out, we can point out bugs and know that there is a real possibility those bugs are going to get fixed down the road. It is the opportunity to offer real-time feedback to an invested core of developers, not a complaint that will fall on some faceless marketing/moderation crew of a big development company who has already moved onto another game. The fact that Squad has not thus far turned and said, "hey, we made enough money with this, we're going to call the next update the final and then move to develop some new game for a different market," should be enough to qualm the concerns laid forth in OP. Calling this game "alpha" is not an excuse, but rather a chance to enhance understanding and to let people know that, when the right channels of communication are used, bug notifications do not go unnoticed.

Also, IIRC there were some complaints that new versions break some mods; this is no worse than other fully-furnished games that do end up releasing patches, as many of those tend to create a need to update mods.

I purchased this game last August, just before 0.21 came out. While I've been slightly disappointed with the slower pace of updates now (0.21-0.22-0.23 was a rather quick progression), I'm content with the product I have now, and I consider it completely worth the price I paid. There are plenty of other games I cannot say the same about.

[Mr. Boncrete]

OP clearly is NOT familiar with development of any type as he so claims to be. I suspect you've never written even a moderately complex piece of code, let alone contributed to a legitimate software development project. You are impatient - go try to learn some physics, computer science, and graphics concepts. I have a feeling you'll have a greater appreciation of what your money purchased and be less inclined to whine about the state of the game because you "want it now!"...

smh

[ansaman]

That's the nature of early access though, and there's a reason Squad can't provide a date for completion, they don't have one.

Development is following a board plan that has no set dates, and that plan is occasionally modified when the Squad staff decide they want to expand on an avenue of the game.

It's not and never was a rigid road map, and is subject to change, this is not a bad thing as it means we can get features that were never even considered when KSP was first started, for example did you know that KSP was originally going to be a 2D side view game?

I am a sort of a senior gamer in regards to space games as I wrote one in 1977 in BASIC on a TTY that was saved to paper tape. It was very simple, but I spent so many hours tweaking the algorithms that they threw me out of the computer lab.

Having said that, with all the PC and console games I have bought and played to exhaustion, I have never been so pleased as I have been with KSP (with the possible exception of KOEI's Romance of the Three Kingdoms which I must note was re-released almost annually with changes in game play, graphics, and philosophy.)

Sure, I am eager for 24.0, but I can wait as I have total confidence in what has been done so far as well as the amazing performance of the modding community.

[Vanamonde]

A number of posts about the relative appeal of various sports and sundry other off-topic stuff have been removed from this thread. Please keep the discussion on-topic, guys. Also, while tempers are running high in this thread, we can not allow our members to insult each other. Do not let things get nasty, or we will have to issue infractions.

[Dingbat1967]

I've been playing this game since 0.18 and the improvements have been very good over the intervening years(?). I've literally spent well over 1000 hours on the game and am still as addicted to it today that I was back then and frankly, the 30$ I spent on it (or thereabout) is money well spent. I've never had as much mileage out of a game in my life I did this one. Considering I'm (a) an amateur astronomer and ( into High-Power Rocketry and am generally a space geek with a lot of math background, this game hits all the right nerves. It's the game I wanted to write when I was a kid starting out programming but the machine back then just didn't have the capability.

Furthermore, so far Squad has not charged one penny for upgrades and packs. All I would say is this Squad: Take my money.

For those guys that are making baseless complaints when it's clear a lot has been added to the game since 0.18 (Career mode comes to mind, the NASA Pack, better support for Mods, and the collaborative work done with mod writers for instance) ... well you're more than welcome to write your own space game / simulator to compete with Squad in a grand old capitalist fashion. In other words, put your money where your mouth is.

-- Dingbat.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Dingbat1967

[FleetAdmiralJ]

you really think this or just copy/paste the official self-defense text?

I've bought a game which had a promise I'd like to see. Sadly it's exactly the same as a year ago. same bugs, same performance problems same content...

This is indisputably incorrect. As of July 7, 2013 based on the version history, KSP was in version 20.2: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Version_history

Since then we've gotten:

1) a new space center

2) ability to recruit kerbals

3) the entirety of career mode. In fact, a year ago career mode wasn't even a selectable option. the entirety of the science implementation has been done in the last year.

And soon we're going to get contracts and budgets. I don't see how you can possibly get away with claiming what you just did, sorry.

And to wade into the original discussion, which I probably shouldn't do...

I kinda see "alpha" (or whatever you want to call it) as a reason to put up (for now) some of the bugs I see in the game (then again, this game doesn't seem to have many more bugs than other supposedly "complete" games I play). I've complained about things before, but I do it with the mind that the game is under development, and while the issue I'm having will probably eventually be addressed, it may be later rather than sooner b/c there are other things they are working on.

The other part of it is this: some issues have just been beaten to absolute death already, and so I think "it's in alpha" just becomes a response from forum people who are just tired about talking about the same bug yet again. I know that isn't really fair to the person creating the post because they may not know, but there are times even I will see a post from someone which is like "X isn't working right" and I just kind of think "yes, everyone already knows this is an issue..."

Edited July 8, 2014 by FleetAdmiralJ

[AlamoVampire]

This is indisputably incorrect. As of July 7, 2013 based on the version history, KSP was in version 20.2: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Version_history

Since then we've gotten:

1) a new space center

which is quite nice

2) ability to recruit kerbals

fun

3) the entirety of career mode. In fact, a year ago career mode wasn't even a selectable option. the entirety of the science implementation has been done in the last year.

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Career mode is NOT complete. Science is NOT complete. Proof? Why you give it a line later:

And soon we're going to get contracts and budgets. I don't see how you can possibly get away with claiming what you just did, sorry.

More to career mode and science yet await us, seeing as contracts/budgets are coming.

This game is in development and until such a time as SQUAD says it isnt: it isnt. Look, is this taking a slow walk to the finish? yes and no. Some games are in development for YEARS by big houses. Right now, for example, with Assassin's Creed Unity coming out later this year, they are already working on the next years release, the year AFTER and the next one AFTER THAT. Be patient, enjoy what we have, and be patient!

[cpast]

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Career mode is NOT complete. Science is NOT complete. Proof? Why you give it a line later:

His point is that everything in career mode thus far has happened in the past year; I don't read it as saying that career mode is done. He's replying to someone saying *nothing* changed, not someone saying the game's too far from completion.

[FleetAdmiralJ]

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Career mode is NOT complete. Science is NOT complete

I meant the entirety of career mode as it's been implemented. Eg: career mode literally did not exist in the game at this point a year ago.

[Wooks]

Alright, stopped in page 3 and just came here to ask: When is this thread going to be locked by the mods? There is nothing of value here, the question was already answered by moderators with valid points and OP just brush them off.

(also not coming back to this toxic corner, so don't even bother)

[AlamoVampire]

I meant the entirety of career mode as it's been implemented. Eg: career mode literally did not exist in the game at this point a year ago.

you did say this:

3) the entirety of career mode. In fact, a year ago career mode wasn't even a selectable option. the entirety of the science implementation has been done in the last year.

which when read at face value, as you typed it, with one word: entirety, which implies its complete.

NOW, I will give you, that, yes, 1 year ago, we did not have career mode or science, but, as with your statement of ENTIRETY, I must object and state it is not complete.

Nitpicking aside, lets all sit back, and enjoy the ride and watch Jeb, Bill and Bob blow stuff up

[Lheim]

Entirety means everything that's there. That's just.. what I think is the stronger interpretation of the phrasing .

He didn't say 'career mode was put in', or 'completed'.

If I hired a contractor to start my house last month, and so far there's a wooden frame standing on a concrete foundation, I could say that the entirety of the work that's been done has been done in the last month. Ya?

In other words, as he said, 'the entirety of the science implementation', not 'the entirety of science'.

But this is being SO lawyer-y. Ugh

[Rowsdower]

17 pages in a little over a day. Not too shabby. I think the thread's run its course, though. Bottom line is that for better or worse, KSP is an early access game that is still under active development. We're fortunate to have released a game that plays to a level of completeness and that many feel is a bit "above" the alpha moniker. However, it must be remembered that as long as there are still changes and implementations to be made on the way to scope complete, we remain in the same early access status.

Closed.