quickmind2020 Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Ok so .9 comes out and on it says that it is a Free Update.... me and my freinds are a little concerned about this.... Does this mean that soon we will have to pay like a monthy fee to play KSP.... i hope not.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diomedea Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Well, nice idea, the monthly fee, why Squad didn't think of that?No, really, KSP updates are free for anybody who is a legitimate owner of a KSP license. Not only about 0.90 (that isn't 0.9) but any other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linear Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Yup, you will get all updates for free forever.However in the terms and conditions, there was a cut off date for 'all future updates', i only heard of this in passing conversation maybe someone could shine some light on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richy teh space man Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 afaik every update for the basic KSP game will be free.Future DLCs, if they're made, may be chargeable for those who bought the game after April last year if i remember right.Not 100% on the exact cut off date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klgraham1013 Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Everything that comes after the game is finished, you will have to pay for. Whether that be KSP2 or KSP DLC.I've seen this before. Minecraft entitlement. Mojang should update Minecraft forever and ever because I paid for it once upon a time. Let's not be those people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alshain Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 I don't think that they will ever go through with paid DLCs. It's really just a gut feeling, but giving it to those who found the game prior to last April seems a bit tacky. Most of us have gone through helping Squad 'test' their concept in Early Access, even if some of us came a month after that cutoff, I can't honestly believe they would divide the community that way. If they were to do it, it would make more sense to just extend that to anyone who bought prior to release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klgraham1013 Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 I would much rather Squad move onto KSP2 than DLC. I actually wouldn't even mind if the business model was more traditional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
temporalExile Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Actually, 0.9 is completely free! You don't even have to own the game to get it. You can download it here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickmind2020 Posted December 19, 2014 Author Share Posted December 19, 2014 Could some one tell me what this means? "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."So that means "or"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonoRig Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Basically, iirc, there was an incident a while back between squad and some vocal elements in the community where squad suggested the idea of paid dlc (cant remember which dev or livestream it was) and it brought uproar as people through "free future updates" meant anything made by squad from when they paid until eternity would be free, and as there was no fine print to say otherwise, and too many irate individuals making lots of fuss, squad said anyone who bought up until then would get everything to do with KSP1 for free, and changed their T&C's so something similar wouldnt happen again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwhip Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Could some one tell me what this means? "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."So that means "or"...0.90.0, NOT 0.9!! Jeez, people! It is a bit of a volatile topic, and I'm not sure what would happen to the community if only those who bought before the aforementioned date got free updates. There would be flaming boosters on both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrD Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I can't believe how cheap people are. I paid $17 for a game I've played for over 200 hours and I suspect many of you have played far more and some complain about maybe having to pay a bit more? I went to a 2 hour movie with my son and with snacks I spent $40. Do people really think developers should slave away for free? They have to eat you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quickmind2020 Posted December 19, 2014 Author Share Posted December 19, 2014 hum thank you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantab Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 First up, KSP is a single-player game with no online connectivity and no DRM. Squad cannot stop you from playing the KSP you have.Now, the KSP site won't load so I can't check the EULA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kar Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) I would much rather Squad move onto KSP2 than DLC. I actually wouldn't even mind if the business model was more traditional.I agree. I think the selling of DLC's in any game is totally rip off of greed blood sucker companies that do not care anything about the player fan base of a game.It reminds me when Xcom was released. I was waiting to buy the game on Steam but it was too expensive when came out, so I waited, then when the game drop a bit in price they started to release 1 DLC, then another, then another almost at half the price of the game. I though, F*** off, this is BS and a totally rip off, then they released a "expansion" to the game that I bet it was already planned and should be implemented in the first game, so I got the game from "other sources" until Steam made a crazy sale of $10 buck for everything, and I bought it. So screw all the companies that squeeze money people like that. Then they wonder why there are so many pirated games out there.... some companies deserve it.....cough cough ea hum? Edited December 19, 2014 by Kar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Temeter Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Free update sound indeed a bit weird. It's not like 9.00 is DLC, but just the nex phase of an unfinished game. Although Squad's 'unfinished' stuff is better off than a lot of 'finished' Tripple-A junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klgraham1013 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 There nothing wrong with DLC if done correctly. Take X-Com for example. Though I enjoyed Enemy Unknown, Enemy Within launched it into my top 10 of all time. I think it really added and improved on the original. What about Brood War for the original Starcraft? I could name a number of examples of great expansion packs. What about Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare?I see nothing wrong with a developer continuing to work on a game post release. I do have a problem if the content was developed in tandem with the base game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linear Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I can't believe how cheap people are. I paid $17 for a game I've played for over 200 hours and I suspect many of you have played far more and some complain about maybe having to pay a bit more? I went to a 2 hour movie with my son and with snacks I spent $40. Do people really think developers should slave away for free? They have to eat you know.Considering the way the business is set up and how many copies have sold, i doubt there's any worry of them being poor. They're probably pulling some great pay checks.Sure, they work hard - but everyone does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oafman Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Squad will be able to get a fortune out of me if they come up with a few decent expansion packs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blizzy78 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Considering the way the business is set up and how many copies have sold, i doubt there's any worry of them being poor. They're probably pulling some great pay checks.Even *IF* that was the case - does that mean customers need to be cheap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juanfro Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) I think they say it's a free update just because it is not unusual to see games that charge users for bits of new content added or even cut content that was planned to be in the base game.In April 2013 there was a dev dev-stream when Harvester said that the development of the game had deviated from was it was supposed to be and that the focus would go back to the main features that were originally planned. Then after the game was finished they may start working on more advanced stuff that would come as a separate optional expansion targeted to advanced players. And because the internet can transform a group of intelligent human beings into a mod of angry mindless badgers some people who got really pissed because they thought that 18$ made them owners of every line of code writen by Squad even for unplanned features that wouldn't be done in several years.Since then they promised that everyone who bought the game before a specific date would get everything KSP-related for free, including hipothetic expansions and have been very carefull when talking about the future of the game. Edited December 19, 2014 by Juanfro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undercoveryankee Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 There nothing wrong with DLC if done correctly. Take X-Com for example. Though I enjoyed Enemy Unknown, Enemy Within launched it into my top 10 of all time. I think it really added and improved on the original. What about Brood War for the original Starcraft? I could name a number of examples of great expansion packs. What about Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare?I see nothing wrong with a developer continuing to work on a game post release. I do have a problem if the content was developed in tandem with the base game."In tandem" is a slippery concept. If the writers and artists who are done with the base game start designing the next installment while the programmers and QA teams are still working on the base game, that's not taking anything away from the base game.I don't even mind if some optional bits are developed in tandem with the base game. If I would think the base game was good enough to buy at the release price if the DLC didn't exist, that base game doesn't become less fun just because more stuff is offered for it. If I think the base game is too short or lacks variety and I'd be happier waiting until it goes on sale, I would probably do the same thing if the DLC didn't exist.I do think preorder bonuses and retailer promotional items should become free to anyone who's still playing the game after six months or a year, because if I'm still interested in the game after the marketing has blown over, the reviews are in, and it's not new and exciting any more, that means I genuinely like it and I'm the kind of customer you should care about keeping.I'm not even sure what would be in a paid expansion for KSP. Maybe alternative solar systems or contract packs that would add a "story mode" on top of career. Things that are just parts/new functionality/new physics would have a hard time competing against the mods that we already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantab Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Well I think what's more refereed to is if the developers make a game and everything would be ready for release, but then they decide to only sell half of it as the main game and the rest comes out a month later at an extra charge.More generally, substantial expansions released a reasonable length of time after the original do tend to be well received. They're often practically a sequel, apart from needing the original to play. But in the case of KSP I'd rather see a real sequel, since the game engine has so many issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanamonde Posted December 20, 2014 Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) The question was, what does the phrase "free update" mean? That question has been answered, so let's please not take off on a tangent about the speculation subject of DLC. Squad has no plans for DLC. Edited December 20, 2014 by Vanamonde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts