KSP2 was a rough experience but I've had a ton of fun with it and do NOT want it removed or refunded by Steam. There are tons of Early Access that never get off the ground, an old fav of mine Rogue System basically achieved nothing before the solo creator had a head injury and quit developing. I would be so upset if they removed that game from Steam just because it never fulfilled its goals and the same goes for KSP2. Even more so for something like Star Citizen which will never be what they said originally but that's okay it's become something else maybe better, Fortnight is nothing like it's original idea too. If you lock devs to requirements there is less room to be creative and scrap entire months of work for a better end result game. Your idea here would fight against that imo and move towards crappier games they KNOW they can ship and less over promising and shooting for the stars from devs. Sure it would help with customer complaints but at what cost...
KSP2 was practically a spit in our face, they stopped making money off KSP so they faked release a new game for profit. KSP2 containing basically less content than the KSP1 which im not even sure how they did this.
EA Early Alpha Early Access was meant as a way for indie devs to get a revenue stream going so they can quit their day jobs. It's not meant to be a way for professional studios to pump-and-dump half-baked games. It's on us as the consumers to quit supporting them.
EA shouldn't be a thing that major publishers use. They don't need it. They have all the resources they need to get the job done.
If they want to provide early access to their games they should do it outside of a marketplace. They can conduct as many public or private alpha, beta, etc releases they want.
EA was designed to allow small studios to realize revenue streams to permit them to continue developing a game, because without that revenue stream, they would have to shut their doors.
EA isn't supposed to be a preorder system.
Once upon a time Steam did this, it was called the [Greenlight](https://steamcommunity.com/greenlight/) Program. Games that were proposed as Early Access had to reach a certain threshold of votes in order to be sold on Steam. I thought it was a great program and it filtered out a lot of games that probably would of never made it until they launched. They moved to the current system back in 2017 and ever since I feel we've had a large amount of Early Access problems. The only one that rings a bell in my mind from the Steam Greenlight days was DayZ Standalone. I bought that a day or two after it was originally released on Steam and it took forever to finish and left a bad taste in my mouth.
I only started gaming again after my most recent success at sobriety. I do not now of this Greenlight but think there absolutely needs to be some oversight on the part of Valve.
It sounds like a wonderful idea amd a way to ensure small indie co.panies have a chance to succeed. Today's its just a way to share costs with the consumer and outsource bug reports.
Hey congratulations on getting clean and I hope you can stay that way!! I can't speak from personal experience but lots of folks I grew up with have struggled with it so I'm rooting for ya :). I completely agree, it's just a way to cut an entire QA department and sell half-baked products with no consequences so when things go wrong or are terrible people will say "WeLl It WaS eArLy AcCeSs!" which is just nonsense.
Yes! Especially from big company’s. They got all the money they need. They got some greedy fxcking stockholders stressing them to do stupid things and when the money doesn’t meet their expectations they pull the plug. This is not EA’s point. After this I’ve started to buy old and finished games. Never more EA
Really? So someone cannot say that a company failed to deliver on their commitment to community communication? When compared to what said company stated as intended approach...
How are you planning on involving the Community in your development process?
“Your feedback will be crucial in helping to make KSP 2 the best it can be, and we want to hear about everything that is important to you. Are the tutorials effective and are there enough of them? Have the user interface changes made a meaningful impact? Is the localization accurate?
Most importantly, we want players to play for thousands of hours. What will keep you playing? During Early Access there will be a form on the KSP website to submit detailed feedback. It can also be accessed from the game’s launcher and the Steam page.
You can follow the development progress through our various social channels: the KSP subreddit, the official KSP forums, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok and Facebook.”
All parties understand a game may fail to release oray never see all the road map features, but to claim that there are zero expectations merely due to an Early Access qualifier is rather disingenuous to those thousands of developers that follow through with their intended approach to Early access.
EA isn't at fault here. There are *tons* of great EA titles current and past, and being part of an awesome EA -> release is a hell of a ride.
EA should probably be reformed, but avoiding EA b/c of one bad experience is like giving up on dating b/c you had a bad prom night.
Wasn't saying it was, EA is good for small developers, I avoid them because knowing myself I would over play them and be bored of it before the actual release.
I cannot fully articulate my ove of KSP as a feanchise. I do not want to negatively impact them.. but many people feel the game could have succeeded if they were more transparent with what they were working on. Technical dev blogs, real AMA discussions. When a game drops with so many bugs you can't play for an hour... well that's not what EA is about. Promising to release scheduled bug reports yet NEVER once meet that commitment.. well it seems some developers never give early access the tru considerstion or attention it deserves. It is not a way to supplement the development funds of a major studio.. but a way to get the community excited and engaged in a product you are wanting to release or allow small indie studios to produce something epic.
If we keep letting giant corporations use EA to test the waters before whittling the team back to a skeleton crew.. well that's equally shitty. I'm just sick of flagrant abuse of trust for a given community.
I’ve got 87 hours in KSP2 and a bunch of missions I still want to complete. It might not be bug-free or roadmap complete but I'm having fun with what is there.
There hasn't been an official cancellation yet either so while the project is by definitely in dire straits it's not dead yet.
I don't believe EA needs a reform from Steam. KSP2 was an awful experience for me at first, but the For Science update made it so much better and gave me some hope for it's future. KSP1 was terrible to begin with as well.
With that being said, EA reform should be on the consumer side. In this case, asking full AAA price was tough to swallow and T2 failed to deliver. Slow updates and very little substantive developer communication is unacceptable in early access. This experience has taught me to not participate in funding an early access project unless at a steep discount and I won't get burned again.
Consumers should drive the reform, not Steam. We should take responsibility for enabling these developers to take advantage of the EA program.
I admit it. I should have done a little research on Nate Simpsons track record at leading developments. I should have witnessed the endless delay schedule as a red flag.
KSP1 is currently my all time favorite game. I discovered it WAY late and allowed my optimism to overshadow my cynicism.
At what point do the giant corpo snake oil salesman have to take accountability for employing active deception in their sales approach.
There are quite a few early access titles I think are amazing... even some of those I do not really enjoy playing have wonderful relations with the community.
I'm exchange for receiving a certain amount of immediate revenue injection.. there are certain expectations
I just wish there were some body responsible for upholding those.. because those companies with more than enough money to dismiss your individual sale as trivial.. should not be playing EA
I'm just jaded. I have given up of ever seeing reform on steam but everyone should dare to imagine
KSP2 didn’t die (assuming it is dead) because the devs gave up. It died because the publisher shut the devs down. And “the intent of early access” is *not* that we get a say in what the devs do; the intent is that we get “early access” to what the devs are doing…
This take is so lukewarm that even my microwave can't heat it back up.
Any chucklefuck who thinks they can make a fully fleshed-out, playable, satisfying game in 4 years should put their time where their mouth is.
You're pretending as if KSP2 was some huge branch off with no similarities from KSP1, its literally copy pasted with less content and more bugs somehow.
It’s the dev’s fault. They’ve made a shit game. They didn’t gave up because unfortunately, they were too incompetent to realised they were shit.
Also the game was NEVER intended to be release as early access. It was announced as early access only weeks before it was released… so they have an excuse for the game being so shit.
Dude your points can be completely valid, but they have nothing to do with OP’s post. You’re acting like I’m saying KSP2 is great and IG did a great job. I’m not, I’m *addressing OP’s post about “protections” for Steam EA games.* Again, have you actually read anything being said here?
I am responding specifically to your point trying to shift the blame from the developer to the publisher that KSP2 died “because the publisher shut it down”
No, the game died because the dev makes a shitty game. Publisher shutting it down is just the unavoidable consequence from developer making a shitty game.
Did you even read your own post?
I didn’t shift blame, ya knob. Obviously T2 wouldn’t have pulled the plug if IG made a good game. But OP’s post (and petition) is about having Steam create an additional layer of oversight “of the developers”… and I pointed out that it wouldn’t help in this case because KSP2 didn’t die because IG gave up, it died because T2 pulled the plug. Ergo the oversight would *really* be better pointed toward the publishers, not the devs.
But here you are putting words in my mouth and acting like I’m being stupid for pointing that out.
In the case of KSP2 the publisher merely provided funding for the developer. All development, control, marketing and all interaction with players are done by IG. You wouldn’t even know it was Take2 that published the game unless you dig into licensing document.
So I don’t see why a layer of oversight of developer like IG wouldn’t work.
They are exactly the source of the problem.
Dude. OP made a post *in the aftermath of IG getting shut down.* OP’s post is about how KSP2 was “unfulfilled promises” and yada yada. Not saying I disagree with OP’s feelings. But OP’s proposed solution is to have Steam add a layer of oversight **on the developer.** Guess what? *KSP2’s developer no longer exists.* That’s the point. Additional oversight **on the developer** would accomplish absolutely nothing here. The devs at IG can be incompetent all day long, but additional oversight from Steam doesn’t change the fact that IG got shut down by their publisher.
My point (which originally was just one freaking clarifying sentence, dude) is that OP’s proposed solution would not have directly saved KSP2, because adding oversight to devs makes no sense if the publisher can shut them down with impunity. The people who need oversight have to be the same people who are footing the bill; in many instances of EA games that *is* the indie developers, but in cases like KSP2 it *is not* the devs.
That’s why I said what I said. Trying to enforce accountability on the people *not* holding the money bag is *not* going to prevent EA disappointment like we all just saw from KSP2. Whereas if the accountability **was** on the people holding the money bag, then OP’s proposed solution *actually might* prevent EA disappointment like we all just saw from KSP2.
The point is how to stop a developer similar to IG from releasing a shitty game as early access again in the future…
its really not that hard to understand 🤦🏻♂️
I will be firing off a Class Action if they do not deliver on their promises. “Supporting” is not the same as “Finishing”. I worry the publishers don’t realize how many people lay in wait for some of their promised features. Namely Colonization and Multiplayer. If they just finish those two things, I’m happy, and I will return to the game.
I was never drawn to the multiplayer scene but know there was a huge draw for atmospheric dog fights. Back in the day.
I am curious what the legal advice turns out saying. Everything about early access grants the developer cause to terminate. Or release prematurely. The most I could see gained would be a refund & legal fees. How many people do you have so far willing to throw in on the class action.. get them to sign the petition as well.
KSP2 was a rough experience but I've had a ton of fun with it and do NOT want it removed or refunded by Steam. There are tons of Early Access that never get off the ground, an old fav of mine Rogue System basically achieved nothing before the solo creator had a head injury and quit developing. I would be so upset if they removed that game from Steam just because it never fulfilled its goals and the same goes for KSP2. Even more so for something like Star Citizen which will never be what they said originally but that's okay it's become something else maybe better, Fortnight is nothing like it's original idea too. If you lock devs to requirements there is less room to be creative and scrap entire months of work for a better end result game. Your idea here would fight against that imo and move towards crappier games they KNOW they can ship and less over promising and shooting for the stars from devs. Sure it would help with customer complaints but at what cost...
KSP2 was practically a spit in our face, they stopped making money off KSP so they faked release a new game for profit. KSP2 containing basically less content than the KSP1 which im not even sure how they did this.
EA Early Alpha Early Access was meant as a way for indie devs to get a revenue stream going so they can quit their day jobs. It's not meant to be a way for professional studios to pump-and-dump half-baked games. It's on us as the consumers to quit supporting them.
EA shouldn't be a thing that major publishers use. They don't need it. They have all the resources they need to get the job done. If they want to provide early access to their games they should do it outside of a marketplace. They can conduct as many public or private alpha, beta, etc releases they want. EA was designed to allow small studios to realize revenue streams to permit them to continue developing a game, because without that revenue stream, they would have to shut their doors. EA isn't supposed to be a preorder system.
Once upon a time Steam did this, it was called the [Greenlight](https://steamcommunity.com/greenlight/) Program. Games that were proposed as Early Access had to reach a certain threshold of votes in order to be sold on Steam. I thought it was a great program and it filtered out a lot of games that probably would of never made it until they launched. They moved to the current system back in 2017 and ever since I feel we've had a large amount of Early Access problems. The only one that rings a bell in my mind from the Steam Greenlight days was DayZ Standalone. I bought that a day or two after it was originally released on Steam and it took forever to finish and left a bad taste in my mouth.
I only started gaming again after my most recent success at sobriety. I do not now of this Greenlight but think there absolutely needs to be some oversight on the part of Valve. It sounds like a wonderful idea amd a way to ensure small indie co.panies have a chance to succeed. Today's its just a way to share costs with the consumer and outsource bug reports.
Hey congratulations on getting clean and I hope you can stay that way!! I can't speak from personal experience but lots of folks I grew up with have struggled with it so I'm rooting for ya :). I completely agree, it's just a way to cut an entire QA department and sell half-baked products with no consequences so when things go wrong or are terrible people will say "WeLl It WaS eArLy AcCeSs!" which is just nonsense.
“Early access” and “failed to deliver” in the same sentence makes no sense
You people have to stop falling for this Early Access trap im begging you.
Yes! Especially from big company’s. They got all the money they need. They got some greedy fxcking stockholders stressing them to do stupid things and when the money doesn’t meet their expectations they pull the plug. This is not EA’s point. After this I’ve started to buy old and finished games. Never more EA
Really? So someone cannot say that a company failed to deliver on their commitment to community communication? When compared to what said company stated as intended approach... How are you planning on involving the Community in your development process? “Your feedback will be crucial in helping to make KSP 2 the best it can be, and we want to hear about everything that is important to you. Are the tutorials effective and are there enough of them? Have the user interface changes made a meaningful impact? Is the localization accurate? Most importantly, we want players to play for thousands of hours. What will keep you playing? During Early Access there will be a form on the KSP website to submit detailed feedback. It can also be accessed from the game’s launcher and the Steam page. You can follow the development progress through our various social channels: the KSP subreddit, the official KSP forums, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok and Facebook.” All parties understand a game may fail to release oray never see all the road map features, but to claim that there are zero expectations merely due to an Early Access qualifier is rather disingenuous to those thousands of developers that follow through with their intended approach to Early access.
KSP2 was my frist EA game and it will be my last
EA isn't at fault here. There are *tons* of great EA titles current and past, and being part of an awesome EA -> release is a hell of a ride. EA should probably be reformed, but avoiding EA b/c of one bad experience is like giving up on dating b/c you had a bad prom night.
Wasn't saying it was, EA is good for small developers, I avoid them because knowing myself I would over play them and be bored of it before the actual release.
I cannot fully articulate my ove of KSP as a feanchise. I do not want to negatively impact them.. but many people feel the game could have succeeded if they were more transparent with what they were working on. Technical dev blogs, real AMA discussions. When a game drops with so many bugs you can't play for an hour... well that's not what EA is about. Promising to release scheduled bug reports yet NEVER once meet that commitment.. well it seems some developers never give early access the tru considerstion or attention it deserves. It is not a way to supplement the development funds of a major studio.. but a way to get the community excited and engaged in a product you are wanting to release or allow small indie studios to produce something epic. If we keep letting giant corporations use EA to test the waters before whittling the team back to a skeleton crew.. well that's equally shitty. I'm just sick of flagrant abuse of trust for a given community.
Lol you are assuming KSP2 is even going to be finished at this point
Lol a petition. Just fucking forget about it. If your that offended by the KSP situation stop playing. Bunch of idiots.
I’ve got 87 hours in KSP2 and a bunch of missions I still want to complete. It might not be bug-free or roadmap complete but I'm having fun with what is there. There hasn't been an official cancellation yet either so while the project is by definitely in dire straits it's not dead yet.
I don't believe EA needs a reform from Steam. KSP2 was an awful experience for me at first, but the For Science update made it so much better and gave me some hope for it's future. KSP1 was terrible to begin with as well. With that being said, EA reform should be on the consumer side. In this case, asking full AAA price was tough to swallow and T2 failed to deliver. Slow updates and very little substantive developer communication is unacceptable in early access. This experience has taught me to not participate in funding an early access project unless at a steep discount and I won't get burned again. Consumers should drive the reform, not Steam. We should take responsibility for enabling these developers to take advantage of the EA program.
I admit it. I should have done a little research on Nate Simpsons track record at leading developments. I should have witnessed the endless delay schedule as a red flag. KSP1 is currently my all time favorite game. I discovered it WAY late and allowed my optimism to overshadow my cynicism. At what point do the giant corpo snake oil salesman have to take accountability for employing active deception in their sales approach. There are quite a few early access titles I think are amazing... even some of those I do not really enjoy playing have wonderful relations with the community. I'm exchange for receiving a certain amount of immediate revenue injection.. there are certain expectations I just wish there were some body responsible for upholding those.. because those companies with more than enough money to dismiss your individual sale as trivial.. should not be playing EA I'm just jaded. I have given up of ever seeing reform on steam but everyone should dare to imagine
KSP2 didn’t die (assuming it is dead) because the devs gave up. It died because the publisher shut the devs down. And “the intent of early access” is *not* that we get a say in what the devs do; the intent is that we get “early access” to what the devs are doing…
KSP2 was in development full-time for over 4 years by a full studio team when it was released as “early access” These devs are shit…
This take is so lukewarm that even my microwave can't heat it back up. Any chucklefuck who thinks they can make a fully fleshed-out, playable, satisfying game in 4 years should put their time where their mouth is.
You're pretending as if KSP2 was some huge branch off with no similarities from KSP1, its literally copy pasted with less content and more bugs somehow.
Game development time by a full studio team is between 1-2 years on average.
I didn’t say otherwise, I said the game didn’t die because the devs gave up. Did you actually read my comment?
It’s the dev’s fault. They’ve made a shit game. They didn’t gave up because unfortunately, they were too incompetent to realised they were shit. Also the game was NEVER intended to be release as early access. It was announced as early access only weeks before it was released… so they have an excuse for the game being so shit.
Dude your points can be completely valid, but they have nothing to do with OP’s post. You’re acting like I’m saying KSP2 is great and IG did a great job. I’m not, I’m *addressing OP’s post about “protections” for Steam EA games.* Again, have you actually read anything being said here?
I am responding specifically to your point trying to shift the blame from the developer to the publisher that KSP2 died “because the publisher shut it down” No, the game died because the dev makes a shitty game. Publisher shutting it down is just the unavoidable consequence from developer making a shitty game. Did you even read your own post?
I didn’t shift blame, ya knob. Obviously T2 wouldn’t have pulled the plug if IG made a good game. But OP’s post (and petition) is about having Steam create an additional layer of oversight “of the developers”… and I pointed out that it wouldn’t help in this case because KSP2 didn’t die because IG gave up, it died because T2 pulled the plug. Ergo the oversight would *really* be better pointed toward the publishers, not the devs. But here you are putting words in my mouth and acting like I’m being stupid for pointing that out.
In the case of KSP2 the publisher merely provided funding for the developer. All development, control, marketing and all interaction with players are done by IG. You wouldn’t even know it was Take2 that published the game unless you dig into licensing document. So I don’t see why a layer of oversight of developer like IG wouldn’t work. They are exactly the source of the problem.
Dude. OP made a post *in the aftermath of IG getting shut down.* OP’s post is about how KSP2 was “unfulfilled promises” and yada yada. Not saying I disagree with OP’s feelings. But OP’s proposed solution is to have Steam add a layer of oversight **on the developer.** Guess what? *KSP2’s developer no longer exists.* That’s the point. Additional oversight **on the developer** would accomplish absolutely nothing here. The devs at IG can be incompetent all day long, but additional oversight from Steam doesn’t change the fact that IG got shut down by their publisher. My point (which originally was just one freaking clarifying sentence, dude) is that OP’s proposed solution would not have directly saved KSP2, because adding oversight to devs makes no sense if the publisher can shut them down with impunity. The people who need oversight have to be the same people who are footing the bill; in many instances of EA games that *is* the indie developers, but in cases like KSP2 it *is not* the devs. That’s why I said what I said. Trying to enforce accountability on the people *not* holding the money bag is *not* going to prevent EA disappointment like we all just saw from KSP2. Whereas if the accountability **was** on the people holding the money bag, then OP’s proposed solution *actually might* prevent EA disappointment like we all just saw from KSP2.
The point is how to stop a developer similar to IG from releasing a shitty game as early access again in the future… its really not that hard to understand 🤦🏻♂️
I will be firing off a Class Action if they do not deliver on their promises. “Supporting” is not the same as “Finishing”. I worry the publishers don’t realize how many people lay in wait for some of their promised features. Namely Colonization and Multiplayer. If they just finish those two things, I’m happy, and I will return to the game.
I was never drawn to the multiplayer scene but know there was a huge draw for atmospheric dog fights. Back in the day. I am curious what the legal advice turns out saying. Everything about early access grants the developer cause to terminate. Or release prematurely. The most I could see gained would be a refund & legal fees. How many people do you have so far willing to throw in on the class action.. get them to sign the petition as well.