This game is suffering from the star citizen syndrome

[Odricar]

And by that I don't mean a blurry development path with no real dates, what I mean is that there was a lot of development time used on the wrong things. Gameplay is always paramount on Early Access games in my opinion, because if the game is so frustrating to try people wont test it and it will die.

There was a lot of time used on video animations, voice acting, tutorials, a completely unnecessary launcher interface, etc. This adds very little to the experience at this time, because if the game runs so poorly that people refund it, those tutorials and animations are not being watched.

[LordZarmack]

Yup + we have space engineers, there is no need to play kerbal 2, kerbal 1 was good for it's time but we can scratch that itch elsewhere these days.

[Robfez29]

I have to agree, after seeing all the official media looking a little low on fps I was worried but held up hope.
The specs released and I still help a little bit of hope.

After trying to game and seeing the issues in performance I don't see this attracting new players at all.

The team blame physics calculations for performance but in my opinion its nothing of the sort, space 70fps, get close to a planet 50fps, now look at that plannet and 6fps.
Clearly nothing to do with orbital maths.
I just can't understand how they could expect a release where 3% of steam users don't experience lag could go well haha.

I love the game and the work that has been done but it's not playable currently and there are simple bugs pointed out on the 16th by the content creators that haven't been addressed for this release.

This all just gets me wondering where all the development time has gone and indeed if it was spent wisely.

[Flydo]

Originally posted by Robfez29:

I have to agree, after seeing all the official media looking a little low on fps I was worried but held up hope.
The specs released and I still help a little bit of hope.

After trying to game and seeing the issues in performance I don't see this attracting new players at all.

The team blame physics calculations for performance but in my opinion its nothing of the sort, space 70fps, get close to a planet 50fps, now look at that plannet and 6fps.
Clearly nothing to do with orbital maths.
I just can't understand how they could expect a release where 3% of steam users don't experience lag could go well haha.

I love the game and the work that has been done but it's not playable currently and there are simple bugs pointed out on the 16th by the content creators that haven't been addressed for this release.

This all just gets me wondering where all the development time has gone and indeed if it was spent wisely.

I agree

Done a lot of early access, price? i don't care. Bug? i don't care, it's the real meaning of the early access. Lack of content? Yeah and? it's an early (i remember oxygen not included on day one and god they re so little at the beggining)

But here i can even launch a campaign ffs

[Mr.Wolf [GER]]

I´m not going to defend the dev´s. This game (and many more) is suffering because of blind & overhyped people... that´s a fact. EA is not an opinion.

[[BLK] Telu]

There was a lot of time used on video animations, voice acting, tutorials, a completely unnecessary launcher interface, etc. This adds very little to the experience at this time, because if the game runs so poorly that people refund it, those tutorials and animations are not being watched.

I'm not agree, all those tutorial and video are good for beginner. It's a necessary feature. A feature who was missing in KSP1. But you should have also "basic things", like career and science, to be rewarded from your progress. It help beginner to have goals to follow. (Like they did in KSP1)

I also don't understand why you are in a simulator. Would have been better to make it in the game. At least, you can take your old rocket coming from the tutorial to use them and improve them in your actual career into the sandbox game.

[TeeSquar]

Originally posted by Odricar:

And by that I don't mean a blurry development path with no real dates, what I mean is that there was a lot of development time used on the wrong things. Gameplay is always paramount on Early Access games in my opinion, because if the game is so frustrating to try people wont test it and it will die.

There was a lot of time used on video animations, voice acting, tutorials, a completely unnecessary launcher interface, etc. This adds very little to the experience at this time, because if the game runs so poorly that people refund it, those tutorials and animations are not being watched.

Was getting ready to post how Chris Roberts provided a path for future game devs to pry $ from their fans.

[Odricar]

Originally posted by BLK Telu:

There was a lot of time used on video animations, voice acting, tutorials, a completely unnecessary launcher interface, etc. This adds very little to the experience at this time, because if the game runs so poorly that people refund it, those tutorials and animations are not being watched.

I'm not agree, all those tutorial and video are good for beginner. It's a necessary feature. A feature who was missing in KSP1. But you should have also "basic things", like career and science, to be rewarded from your progress. It help beginner to have goals to follow. (Like they did in KSP1)

I could be mistaken, but I feel the primary user influx this game will receive, are fans of the original game that are already familiar with it, which are also the people that will try to stick around in hopes the gameplay improves with patches.

New users will likely be turned off by the performance and bugs independently of the tutorial quality.

[[BLK] Telu]

KSP mentality was always about learning Rocket Science to uninitiated people. (Even if it's not the same studio who dev this game)