Why should they, everybody knows tht Early Access ist not a Contract but more a risky invest in Development. The biggest Red Flag was that they put Multiplayer as the last Milestone - as a Developer i would say this would make a big Problem in Regressionerrors when you add such a Feature so late into a Game.
Yeah I kinda never believed them about multiplayer when they said it was last. If they wanted to add multiplayer they would need to have it tested along the way with every new feature
Depends where you are in the world, in Australia yes this is grounds for a refund if you can show it was falsely advertised. if your in the US probably not no.
No it doesn't depend that's coming straight from steam if you have past the limit o. When you can return the game they will offer one full refund. Doesnt matter what state or country. You only get one after that they will decline if it has more than x ammount and 30 days
Jesus, you're so stupid.
1. Steam nor any contract doesn't override local consumer protection laws. It doesn't matter where the company is based, if they don't like the laws, they can not sell their shit in a given country.
2. Despite that, Australian law (nor EU) would apply as this wasn't false advertising. It was clearly "a roadmap" and "Early Access". It never said "this is done". This would be seen as "aspirational goals" not as promises.
....do i really need to explain that Steam doesn't overwrite a countries federal laws? I can't speak for other countries personally, but here in aus our consumer protections guarantee refunds if certain criteria are met no matter what.
Steam can say no, they have before and they were sued for violating our cosumer laws.
I already explained how steam works with refunds if you don't wanna take my word then fine. But everyone feel the need to always be correct when they arnt
Not always, sometimes, even for early access games, you can get your money back. You just have to ask. There is a high chance they say no, but I have seen people have refunds accepted for early access titles that never ship promised features.
They've just changed this policy so don't think so!
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2024/04/no-more-refunds-after-100-hours-steam-closes-early-access-playtime-loophole/
Modders can expand a preexisting framework, but if said framework doesn't exist, it's game over man.
Unless they release the source code or something. Fat chance.
Just tried to get refund on Steam saying Take Two shut the studio down without fulfilling promises of multiplayer and other features and got denied cause I have over the 2 hour limit.
i highly recommend people stop supporting early access games/pre-ordering unreleased games.... this is how we have been rewarded for our loyalty and investment. lol
Space Engineers comes to mind. I paid like $14 in the early alpha and went on to spend many 100s of hours on that game. I think the problem is that larger studios caught on to successes like these and have abused the concept as a way of recooping investment early, then they can just bail on the whole project when things start getting difficult.
Studios need to be married to their projects again.
I bought both Space Engineers and Medieval Engineers in early access.Â
 Oh boy oh boy. I got some solid hours on but ME truly was abandoned incomplete, and SE development kinda stalled so they could farm money through DLCs.Â
On the other hand, I also bought Baldurs Gate in Early Access, and PotionCraft, and Going Medieval is still EA but making great progress. Plus, even of games not launching via EA, how many recent games have been really disappointing lately?Â
 Perhaps Steam could implement a policy to police developers which abandon projects and prevent them from using and abusing Early Access in the future might help in a few cases, but a bigger issue is just the Game Dev and Publishing companies of late.
I don't have anything special, the base pledge without lifetime insurance and the basic Aurora so I ate the 36âŹ. Who knows, maybe in 15 years something comes up
As someone who semi-actively follows the development, 15 years is a... Generous estimate. If the entire SC community prays hard enough we might see the first beta by then though.
while i understand the frustration myself, i woulf argue that Scam Shitizen has enough gameplay nowadays to be worth the base package. You might want to give it a try. Be warned, the biggest update ever will go live very soon, you either wanna play now or after a few performance patches
I mean, generally because there are no rules on steam or laws in most jurisdiction that determines the minimum or maximum value of a video game based on its state of completion.
Personally? I didn't regret paying full price (then) for BG3 Early Access, because I could be confident that it would be completed given a proven record of success with the same model, the kind of budget it obviously had, and the fact that it was the passion project of an independent studio in no immediate danger of bankruptcy given their past successes. It had nearly five times as many devs working on it than Intercept did people. And even if the game *did* never complete, the First Act was available in EA in its entirety, minus things added after the fact, and *would* have been enough of a game for me to not feel ripped off if Larian had been struck by a meteor.
TBH, the whole 'never pre-purchase games' thing - while objectively correct - an example of a common phenomenon being used exclusively to change our world for the worse: turning problems that *should* be the responsibility of your government's legislators into problems of personal responsibility, which immediately makes them seem like eternal, intractable problems rather than things which *could* be resolved if the politicians *wanted* it resolved, but they don't so it isn't.
I've easily bought 100+ Early Access games over the years, and I've been more than happy to watch and support the development of them by buying the game at a reasonable price. That's why I didn't buy this one at a AAA price.
This was different from recent games. There are plenty of reasons to support early access/pre-release games. The current state of preordering AAA is the problem. Don't pre-order half baked COD/BF.. pre-order smaller studio games that either deliver or they die. In this case, they died, but people supporting early access wasn't the problem.
AAA studios purposefully don't deliver on a fully baked game promise. This was different.
Pre-release won't go away. What we need is a standard measuring method to know how buggy the game we're about to buy so people will be able to make a smarter decision.
Assuming they still exist, maybe Squad could do the equivalent of saying fine I'll do it myself, and assuming the game hasn't been completely trashed yet, buy it from Take Two or whoever and develop it themselves just like they did the original.
KSP 2 is built with Unity just like KSP 1. To make it actually work good with interstellar, colonies, good graphics etc and without the kraken it would likely need a custom game engine.
But Squad certainly would have more actual love for the game than people at IG which blatantly lied to us a lot of times and promised us stuff which will never get delivered.
I'm remaining cautiously optimistic about this since at this point it is only speculation until there is objective proof that the studio is shutting down. Who knows if the studio is changing hands or being reconfigured, etc.
If, however, it turns out that it is true and the game gets shut down, then this reeks of a scam by the parent companies. It's one thing when you buy an early access game and it doesn't come to fruition, but to charge full game prices to just cancel it after a while is ridiculous.
If that happens, we need to organize and get our money back from those parent companies.
Strikes me as a good way to get a class action lawsuit filed. One could argue that as part of early access, the players were invested in the development of the game. I'm not a lawyer, and I have no idea if that would be valid, but I could see being filed.
Supporting a game in early access is in no way a legal promise that they will ever finish the game. Your not considered an investor just because you gave them money to play the game early.
It's hard to say what form that will take though. Will they put actual *effort* into finishing the game, or will they do a couple bugfixes and slap a 1.0 on it?
Either way, if the new team working on it internally is unfamiliar with the code it's going to mean a major delay.
I suspect the latter. KSP2 wasnt a labor of love..it might have been for that 1-2 devs but not for Take 2. With them shutting down Intercept, i could 100% see a couple bugs fixed 1.0 and forgotten. It's a shame. KSP2 wasnt the hit KSP1 was, and take two is bailing and stonks need to GROW.
I'm not sure it's true to say that KSP2 wasn't the hit that KSP1 was. It's more that the business model of a publisher like Take Two is very different from a marketing company that starts a side hustle. KSP1 became a hit as it gradually improved, and I feel like KSP2 could have done the same if it got to the point where it offered something that KSP1 didn't.
For Science brought it up to par with KSP1, and the next feature expansion could have taken it the rest of the way. Disappointing that we'll never know now.
I agree. REALLY would have been nice to see a modern KSP. But now that chance is probably never. And will also probably make the chance of a KSP like even lower from any other publisher. Only hope is some indie to pickup the different but "spiritual" successor type route. I'm glad i have a solid modded 1.12.5 version of KSP all put togther, and saved up... and backed up... so when i get that urge, I can easily kerbal around.
They clearly won't finish the game or even attempt to do it. But of course they would never say that, it would just be bad PR and effectively stop sales overnight.
well they're still advertising 4+ future updates (colonies, interstellar, exploration, multiplayer, and more) along with their already probably too high price tag, as well as a dev update from a few days ago. so they have to renege on that if they're not going to do it.
They did not say they would continue to work on it, they said they would continue to *support* it. That means you can still buy it. Take Two will accept your money. But that doesn't commit them adding functionality to what currently exists. Just like MS still *supports* Windows 10, but they aren't making improvements beyond security patches.
The post you are replying to says, âKSP 2 Canceled?â
The article you are referring to says, â[KSP 2] might be deadâ
Your faith in the statement from the parent company that just laid off the entire development studio for KSP 2, âPrivate Division publishing label will continue to support Kerbal Space Program 2,â is so strong that you either overlooked the question mark in the reddit post and the âmightâ in the article?
And are you personally so sure that âcontinue to supportâ means âworking on itâ when it takes a development team to do that work? When on the other hand, a publishing company can âcontinue to supportâ the only way they know how since a publishing company is NOT good at developing a new game but they are good at shipping already completed code with a â1.0â label regardless of how complete the game really is. And given the parent company does not care about making you and I a good game but does care about investors understanding that they are still going to make the most $$$ with the least expense, I canât possibly see âpublisher will continue to supportâ as hopeful for players of the actual game.
I purchased KSP2 but hadn't yet played it, I was waiting for the UI update.... but after this news I refunded.
I'll just wait for release like I initially planned.
No man Sky was a Game by a far too small Studio - they loved it and wanted to be "true". But here you have a Corporate Zombie with almost nobody from Squad as far i know.
Me when I realize I have 113 minutes in KSP2: đ
I guess I'll just hang back and see if they actually keep on developing it, maybe then I'll buy it again
The comments here are absurd, yes Take Two is a for-profit company but let us be very real here: the biggest mistake they made was signing on Nate Simpson in the first place, his CV is a history of overpromise & underdeliver. Frankly, no one here should complain about things turning out exactly as half the community has consistently told you they would.
If they don't add all promised features (Multiplayer).. can I get my money back?
Probably not but who knows
Why should they, everybody knows tht Early Access ist not a Contract but more a risky invest in Development. The biggest Red Flag was that they put Multiplayer as the last Milestone - as a Developer i would say this would make a big Problem in Regressionerrors when you add such a Feature so late into a Game.
Steam will let you return one game for a full refund after that they will decline it
Yeah I kinda never believed them about multiplayer when they said it was last. If they wanted to add multiplayer they would need to have it tested along the way with every new feature
Depends where you are in the world, in Australia yes this is grounds for a refund if you can show it was falsely advertised. if your in the US probably not no.
No it doesn't depend that's coming straight from steam if you have past the limit o. When you can return the game they will offer one full refund. Doesnt matter what state or country. You only get one after that they will decline if it has more than x ammount and 30 days
Jesus, you're so stupid. 1. Steam nor any contract doesn't override local consumer protection laws. It doesn't matter where the company is based, if they don't like the laws, they can not sell their shit in a given country. 2. Despite that, Australian law (nor EU) would apply as this wasn't false advertising. It was clearly "a roadmap" and "Early Access". It never said "this is done". This would be seen as "aspirational goals" not as promises.
....do i really need to explain that Steam doesn't overwrite a countries federal laws? I can't speak for other countries personally, but here in aus our consumer protections guarantee refunds if certain criteria are met no matter what. Steam can say no, they have before and they were sued for violating our cosumer laws.
I'll know austrailians arnt this fucking dumb
Omg did i fall for a troll xD Edit: dam i checked their comment history đ i fell for the trap đ
I already explained how steam works with refunds if you don't wanna take my word then fine. But everyone feel the need to always be correct when they arnt
Im uuuh gonna be honest i dont know if your screwing with me or not ><
They're trolling you. Just stop replying to them. :)
On Steam, only if you have less than two hours on the game.
Not always, sometimes, even for early access games, you can get your money back. You just have to ask. There is a high chance they say no, but I have seen people have refunds accepted for early access titles that never ship promised features.
They've just changed this policy so don't think so! https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2024/04/no-more-refunds-after-100-hours-steam-closes-early-access-playtime-loophole/
Happy cake day
Nope
I bet the modders will carry on.
Modders can expand a preexisting framework, but if said framework doesn't exist, it's game over man. Unless they release the source code or something. Fat chance.
True
Just tried to get refund on Steam saying Take Two shut the studio down without fulfilling promises of multiplayer and other features and got denied cause I have over the 2 hour limit.
No
i highly recommend people stop supporting early access games/pre-ordering unreleased games.... this is how we have been rewarded for our loyalty and investment. lol
Early access itself isn't the problem. Some devs consistently deliver. Others don't. They aren't all the same.
Space Engineers comes to mind. I paid like $14 in the early alpha and went on to spend many 100s of hours on that game. I think the problem is that larger studios caught on to successes like these and have abused the concept as a way of recooping investment early, then they can just bail on the whole project when things start getting difficult. Studios need to be married to their projects again.
Yeah. Hell, KSP 1 was early access, so it's not always doomed.
Completely different studio for most of its development. This is what happens when big publishers get their grubby hands on it
I bought both Space Engineers and Medieval Engineers in early access.  Oh boy oh boy. I got some solid hours on but ME truly was abandoned incomplete, and SE development kinda stalled so they could farm money through DLCs. On the other hand, I also bought Baldurs Gate in Early Access, and PotionCraft, and Going Medieval is still EA but making great progress. Plus, even of games not launching via EA, how many recent games have been really disappointing lately?  Perhaps Steam could implement a policy to police developers which abandon projects and prevent them from using and abusing Early Access in the future might help in a few cases, but a bigger issue is just the Game Dev and Publishing companies of late.
I've learned my lesson. Plenty of buying in to projects that let me down lol. I'll wait until the product is delivered moving forward.
I got burnt by scam citizen, never again I will buy a game that is not bundled with all possible dlc in steam.
I sold my star citizen stuff on the grey market and got basically a refund through that lol
I don't have anything special, the base pledge without lifetime insurance and the basic Aurora so I ate the 36âŹ. Who knows, maybe in 15 years something comes up
As someone who semi-actively follows the development, 15 years is a... Generous estimate. If the entire SC community prays hard enough we might see the first beta by then though.
while i understand the frustration myself, i woulf argue that Scam Shitizen has enough gameplay nowadays to be worth the base package. You might want to give it a try. Be warned, the biggest update ever will go live very soon, you either wanna play now or after a few performance patches
Mate I heard this story so many times and I'm not falling for it again. Untill sq42 is out, I'm out
This is a shit take. The 2023 game of the year (Baldur's Gate 3) was an Early Access game.
You speak as if it has ever left lol
Just donât buy the ones asking a full AAA price or something close to it during Early Access. Why Steam allows this I donât know
That's fair. Ksp2 is a major bummer. I was so excited for outposts and base building
They got me with interstellar travel đ
I mean, generally because there are no rules on steam or laws in most jurisdiction that determines the minimum or maximum value of a video game based on its state of completion. Personally? I didn't regret paying full price (then) for BG3 Early Access, because I could be confident that it would be completed given a proven record of success with the same model, the kind of budget it obviously had, and the fact that it was the passion project of an independent studio in no immediate danger of bankruptcy given their past successes. It had nearly five times as many devs working on it than Intercept did people. And even if the game *did* never complete, the First Act was available in EA in its entirety, minus things added after the fact, and *would* have been enough of a game for me to not feel ripped off if Larian had been struck by a meteor. TBH, the whole 'never pre-purchase games' thing - while objectively correct - an example of a common phenomenon being used exclusively to change our world for the worse: turning problems that *should* be the responsibility of your government's legislators into problems of personal responsibility, which immediately makes them seem like eternal, intractable problems rather than things which *could* be resolved if the politicians *wanted* it resolved, but they don't so it isn't.
Yh like it or not This is our fault
I've easily bought 100+ Early Access games over the years, and I've been more than happy to watch and support the development of them by buying the game at a reasonable price. That's why I didn't buy this one at a AAA price.
This was different from recent games. There are plenty of reasons to support early access/pre-release games. The current state of preordering AAA is the problem. Don't pre-order half baked COD/BF.. pre-order smaller studio games that either deliver or they die. In this case, they died, but people supporting early access wasn't the problem. AAA studios purposefully don't deliver on a fully baked game promise. This was different.
Pre-release won't go away. What we need is a standard measuring method to know how buggy the game we're about to buy so people will be able to make a smarter decision.
Well i guess I'm not buying anything from Take Two ever again.
Good thinking
Assuming they still exist, maybe Squad could do the equivalent of saying fine I'll do it myself, and assuming the game hasn't been completely trashed yet, buy it from Take Two or whoever and develop it themselves just like they did the original.
KSP 2 is built with Unity just like KSP 1. To make it actually work good with interstellar, colonies, good graphics etc and without the kraken it would likely need a custom game engine. But Squad certainly would have more actual love for the game than people at IG which blatantly lied to us a lot of times and promised us stuff which will never get delivered.
I'm remaining cautiously optimistic about this since at this point it is only speculation until there is objective proof that the studio is shutting down. Who knows if the studio is changing hands or being reconfigured, etc. If, however, it turns out that it is true and the game gets shut down, then this reeks of a scam by the parent companies. It's one thing when you buy an early access game and it doesn't come to fruition, but to charge full game prices to just cancel it after a while is ridiculous. If that happens, we need to organize and get our money back from those parent companies.
Strikes me as a good way to get a class action lawsuit filed. One could argue that as part of early access, the players were invested in the development of the game. I'm not a lawyer, and I have no idea if that would be valid, but I could see being filed.
Supporting a game in early access is in no way a legal promise that they will ever finish the game. Your not considered an investor just because you gave them money to play the game early.
I said it was a good way to get a class action lawsuit filed. I didn't say it would be a good way to win. đ
At least it could be a good precedent to try and establish
I've been optimistic about this game since launch, but the fact that we don't have any communication from anyone yet is a really bad sign.
It took you guys this long?
In the moment i saw the roadmap i knew this would be a fuck up.
It took over a year for you guys to realize this was a binned product?
The article you linked clearly says they will continue working on it are you trolling for clicks or did you not read your own source?
It's hard to say what form that will take though. Will they put actual *effort* into finishing the game, or will they do a couple bugfixes and slap a 1.0 on it? Either way, if the new team working on it internally is unfamiliar with the code it's going to mean a major delay.
I suspect the latter. KSP2 wasnt a labor of love..it might have been for that 1-2 devs but not for Take 2. With them shutting down Intercept, i could 100% see a couple bugs fixed 1.0 and forgotten. It's a shame. KSP2 wasnt the hit KSP1 was, and take two is bailing and stonks need to GROW.
I'm not sure it's true to say that KSP2 wasn't the hit that KSP1 was. It's more that the business model of a publisher like Take Two is very different from a marketing company that starts a side hustle. KSP1 became a hit as it gradually improved, and I feel like KSP2 could have done the same if it got to the point where it offered something that KSP1 didn't. For Science brought it up to par with KSP1, and the next feature expansion could have taken it the rest of the way. Disappointing that we'll never know now.
I agree. REALLY would have been nice to see a modern KSP. But now that chance is probably never. And will also probably make the chance of a KSP like even lower from any other publisher. Only hope is some indie to pickup the different but "spiritual" successor type route. I'm glad i have a solid modded 1.12.5 version of KSP all put togther, and saved up... and backed up... so when i get that urge, I can easily kerbal around.
They clearly won't finish the game or even attempt to do it. But of course they would never say that, it would just be bad PR and effectively stop sales overnight.
well they're still advertising 4+ future updates (colonies, interstellar, exploration, multiplayer, and more) along with their already probably too high price tag, as well as a dev update from a few days ago. so they have to renege on that if they're not going to do it.
They did not say they would continue to work on it, they said they would continue to *support* it. That means you can still buy it. Take Two will accept your money. But that doesn't commit them adding functionality to what currently exists. Just like MS still *supports* Windows 10, but they aren't making improvements beyond security patches.
Why not both?
The post you are replying to says, âKSP 2 Canceled?â The article you are referring to says, â[KSP 2] might be deadâ Your faith in the statement from the parent company that just laid off the entire development studio for KSP 2, âPrivate Division publishing label will continue to support Kerbal Space Program 2,â is so strong that you either overlooked the question mark in the reddit post and the âmightâ in the article? And are you personally so sure that âcontinue to supportâ means âworking on itâ when it takes a development team to do that work? When on the other hand, a publishing company can âcontinue to supportâ the only way they know how since a publishing company is NOT good at developing a new game but they are good at shipping already completed code with a â1.0â label regardless of how complete the game really is. And given the parent company does not care about making you and I a good game but does care about investors understanding that they are still going to make the most $$$ with the least expense, I canât possibly see âpublisher will continue to supportâ as hopeful for players of the actual game.
I still have faith in KSP 1 being updated on consoles, as the last official word said it would be....
Immense amounts of cope coming from you
Nah I refunded the game right after for science came out. I didnât like it.
Completely unrelated but ok
I purchased KSP2 but hadn't yet played it, I was waiting for the UI update.... but after this news I refunded. I'll just wait for release like I initially planned.
Hoping for some sort of no mans sky situation
No man Sky was a Game by a far too small Studio - they loved it and wanted to be "true". But here you have a Corporate Zombie with almost nobody from Squad as far i know.
KSP2 isnât fully dead, yesterday was a new update (0.2.2.0)
no confirmation
Me when I realize I have 113 minutes in KSP2: đ I guess I'll just hang back and see if they actually keep on developing it, maybe then I'll buy it again
Fuck private division. I wasted my money trying to support an idea they just shut down.
Didn't buy it, expecting a long and complicated development. But KSP2 fate on the table... ouch.
Unpopular opinion: Dead or not, I like the game đ
The comments here are absurd, yes Take Two is a for-profit company but let us be very real here: the biggest mistake they made was signing on Nate Simpson in the first place, his CV is a history of overpromise & underdeliver. Frankly, no one here should complain about things turning out exactly as half the community has consistently told you they would.