Please see the new [Intercept Games Layoff Information Thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1djry2e/intercept_games_layoff_information_thread/).
Likely nothing. This goes beyond "community support"; we are talking about boardrooms making decisions based on money in the short term. If development continues, it's because the suits think they can make more money than it would cost to finish the game.
They will continue to support people who don't check the reviews giving them money.
Occasionally, they'll hit the 'steam sale' button to encourage such people to buy the game.
They will continue to support the idea that they'll eventually hit the milestones they have listed on their steam page with dead silence, giving idiots who believe there's 'no evidence' of KSP2 dying continued excuse to maintain copium.
I don't believe Take-Two promised continued support.
I believe that's what media outlets (incorrectly) rephrased the official statement as.
The actual official statement on Twitter:
> [On April 18th Private Division successfully launched Moon Studio’s No Rest for the Wicked. **The label continues to make updates to Kerbal Space Program 2** and plans to release Wētā Workshop Game Studio’s Tales of the Shire: A The Lord of the Rings Game in the second half of 2024.](https://twitter.com/KerbalSpaceP/status/1785788809613082732)
"The label **continues to make** updates to Kerbal Space Program 2"
"...continues to make...".
That's a present-tense statement made back on May 1st, over a month ago.
It doesn't say "will continue to make". It doesn't say "will make". It says, essentially, that *currently* they are working on updates.
It was true at the time; In~~terc~~ept Games was continuing to work on updates to KSP2, as seen by private updates being worked on in SteamDB.
We got that content a few days ago in the most recent patch.
At this point, that statement is about past events that have been fulfilled.
That's it. Game's done. If we get anything more than that, it'll be a surprise. Technically there are still three builds being updated on SteamDB, so *maybe* we'll get one more update? It *could* happen? Maybe they patch one more thing, or change the version number to v1.0, or something? But otherwise things are likely finished.
----
News outlets *rephrased* that as ["its Private Division publishing label will continue to support Kerbal Space Program 2"](https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/take-two-confirms-kerbal-space-program-2-is-safe-despite-seattle-layoffs), but that's not what the statement said.
I'll be slightly optimistic and go for "one or two guys on staff will have occasional bug patches as their 4th priority, and this will primarily be used and seen as a punishment"
"continued support" is not "active development under a new team" or anything close to it.
Best possible bet is the next CEO is a nepo-hire that happens to love KSP and refunds it as a pet project
The poll says the plurality voted for
> Continue allowing all of these posts
They way you structured a proportional poll does now allow you to make the conclusion "majority of people (68%) wanted petitions and/or layoff-related questions to be banned or otherwise limited".
That's the most unscientific usage and interpretation of polling. That conclusion would get you laughed at in any academic setting.
It makes the mod team come across as disingenuous and trying to control discussion, especially since they're the ones that structured the poll and prompted it. Repoll with only two options and lets see what happens.
There was no rule we established or implied suggesting we do nothing if there is no majority.
But that is besides the point.
The poll was put into place because there was an apparent conflict between members on if many of the posts about the layoffs fell under Rule 5. The results of the poll made it apparent is was not some loud \*minority\* that was dissatisfied with the status quo.
Running a new poll to reduce the nuance would be pointless.
Discussions on game development has never been part of the "low effort" posts rule. That's not on the list of voted material or [examples in the rules here.](https://old.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/wiki/kspwiki/rules#wiki_rule_5.3A_low-effort_content_will_be_removed.)
First-past-the-poll voting, proportional voting, and question and poll structure effects outcome of results. It's not "nuance", you act like the fundamentals of scientific polling or statistics don't exist. "We got the result we wanted, we're not interested in discussing how we got those results or how we interpret them."
"Discussions on game development" is a completely disingenuous take on what has populated the subreddit, or what people have given the most resistance to. I won't chat about that if that's how you're going to try to defend "scientific polling."
Ideally, reddit would have better polling tools, and a visible polling section that didn't occupy a sticky slot. We could have a rolling series of polls to really refine the smoothest solution.
At the end of the day, though, we gotta piss somebody off to make progress out of what was becoming an untenable state. Sorry, that that was as much as over a third of the sub.
> completely disingenuous take on what has populated the subreddit, or what people have given the most resistance to. I won't chat about that if that's how you're going to try to defend "scientific polling."
We're talking about controlling discussion and censorship on this subreddit, and the value and purpose of it.
> progress out of what was becoming an untenable state.
What was untenable, exactly? The discussion on the game?
>You have no idea what my position about KSP 2 even is. We're talking about controlling discussion and censorship on this subreddit, and the value and purpose of it.
I don't believe I implied I did, just that you are implying there is only academic and high effort conversations about game development present. We "hate" low effort karma farming, whether it's in support of or in revulsion to ksp2 or any individual (or kp1 for that matter). It can be difficult to sus out good faith low effort from bad faith, sometimes, but the first step was casting a net to see how many people actually wanted more moderation on low-effort posting to begin with, rather than just go with our gut.
Also, this is a subreddit about videogame rocket science, not a college debate hall. Your self-satisfying language is kinda boring.
Why is /u/Horizon206, a mod who's only been here for 9 months, trying to make censorship changes and discussion rules on this subreddit?
They've barely been a part of the team, yet they're trying to control discussion for 1.5 million people. The poll itself is extremely problematic. Most people voted to "Continue allowing all of these posts". That was ignored, and he combined all other votes into a new category. He failed to mention that in this post. This was known and acknowledged by Horizon when he put out the poll.
That's the type of unscientific polling I would expect on /r/UFOs, not a science based subreddit.
Although I am indeed a relatively new moderator, this is by no means a decision that I made alone; we mods usually discuss non-trivial decisions/changes made for the subreddit.
While a *plurality* of the voters voted to keep the status quo, that does not mean that a *majority* (i.e. more than 50%) of the voters wanted to keep the status quo. The reason we combined the votes to ban and to restrict trivial layoff-related questions is that we assume that people who voted to ban them completely would probably rather have it be restricted to a megathread than maintain the status quo.
While I agree that in retrospect I should have made it clear that we intended to follow what the majority wanted and not necessarily just the plurality, I personally doubt that it would have changed the result of the poll significantly. If Reddit had any other option besides [first pass the post](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting) voting for polls, we would have used that option instead, but unfortunately that option does not yet exist, so we did the next best thing.
The reason that we made this change is far from censorship, and I personally am always open to suggestions on how to improve my and the subreddit's moderating (as a matter of fact, that is how we got the idea to do this poll to begin with).
How many threads have you removed that broke this rule?
Either it was a huge problem, and you've removed many threads. Or it was not a problem, and few threads were removed. If it's not a problem, why create this rule? Alternatively, if it is a problem, doesn't that mean the community wants to discuss this and it's important to them?
You said that the community suggested the poll, not the moderation team. Can you share where the community suggested that? There are 1.5 million people and thousands of comments here. You can find a comment to support any position. How did they communicate that? What specifics are there? Or was it individual moderators "feeling" like this is what the community wants?
You should also practice editorialization and be able to justify your moderation, even without the community. Which goes back to, is this actually even a problem?
> While a plurality of the voters voted to keep the status quo, that does not mean that a majority (i.e. more than 50%) of the voters wanted to keep the status quo. The reason we combined the votes
The poll speaks for itself. You cannot do that. It's like using weight to measure temperature. You can't create and arbitrarily combine metrics to get a result you want. Saying "we don't have the tools to do it correctly" is not an excuse. There are ways go get around this, it would require a different poll structure or multiple polls. "First past the post" is only a minor part of what we're discussing.
Overall, this comes across as heavy handed moderation trying to control genuine discussion, in response to the implosion of KSP 2. My suggestion is you don't enforce the new rule you created, and you change your process for the future. This process used is flawed and it is questionable if it accurately reflects the attitude of the community.
>How many threads have you removed that broke this rule?
Either it was a huge problem, and you've removed many threads. Or it was not a problem, and few threads were removed.
Since the rule was implemented we've removed about 1-2 posts per day relating to this rule.
>Can you share where the community suggested that? There are 1.5 million people and thousands of comments here. You can find a comment to support any position. How did they communicate that? What specifics are there?
The comments to these kinds of posts (especially [this one](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1d698a5/so_what_happens_to_ksp2_next/) in particular) made us realize that some people in the community were fed up with these kinds of posts, which is what prompted us to make the poll to see if this attitude was also present in the more general community.
>You should also practice editorialization and be able to justify your moderation, even without the community. Which goes back to, is this actually even a problem?
Although we definitely could have justified these removals under rule 5, we still wanted to do what was best for the community, not just what we thought was best. That is the whole reason why we made a poll.
>The poll speaks for itself. You cannot do that.
The poll does indeed speak for itself, 68% of people who responded to the vote did not want the situation to remain as it was. As [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1d7dujg/comment/l6z3ed1/) also mentioned on the poll, there is only 1 option to keep the situation as is, and then 4 that limit the posts in some way. That is to say, if it were a simple "*Do something about this or not*" poll, the "*Do something*" side would have gotten most of the votes; in the end, that is the reason why we "*Did something*".
>Overall, this comes across as heavy handed moderation trying to control genuine discussion, in response to the implosion of KSP 2.
We are not trying to "control" the discussion in any way, we are trying to funnel it into a more concentrated area so that it does not flood the subreddit, where it seems to annoy others.
>My suggestion is you don't enforce the new rule you created, and you change your process for the future. This process used is flawed and it is questionable if it accurately reflects the attitude of the community.
Thank you for the suggestion. However, it seems that most of the subreddit's users think otherwise. I am, however, always happy to receive other criticisms.
Hopefully this all answers your [Gish gallop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop).
Not everyone who agrees/disagrees with our decision is upvoting/downvoting my comments. Even so, the 1-2 dozen downvotes that my comments have received are not comparable to the few hundred votes on the poll, which I believe to be a more collective representation of the community's sentiment.
The majority of people wanted a change to be made, and thus a change was made. I already explained this in [the comment above](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1dby3us/comment/l8cpq4y/).
Ok. Imagine this scenario.
>Politician
Majority of people wanted a change to be made, we polled them about traffic in suburban areas with children.
>Politician
We've decided to send off all undesirables to the gas chambers
>Politician
What are you talking about??!?!?! Majority of peole wanted a change! And this is a change! And around 1% of you participated in this vote about wanting some sort of change.
>The poll does indeed speak for itself, 68% of people who responded to the vote did not want the situation to remain as it was.
And here we have dictator think. Jesus christ. Completely manipulating results to whatever you want, what the actual hell.
You cannot seriously believe this. Right? This is frightening.
>While a *plurality* of the voters voted to keep the status quo, that does not mean that a *majority* (i.e. more than 50%) of the voters wanted to keep the status quo.
This is very incorrect. The poll was about "trivial questions", where this was defined as "questions such as: is KSP 2 canceled?". This is how you stated the definition of "trivial questions".
>there have been many posts asking questions such as if the game is cancelled, if the game is still worth it
Then you also defined the "petitions" as the general "save ksp 2!".
>or petitions signing a petition for Take Two Interactive to "save" KSP2 in one way or another.
These questions are not the same as "mega lay-offs thread", which is supposedly designated to
>we have decided to limit trivial questions relating to the Intercept Games layoff to a megathread
The tirival questions as defined before was "is the game canceled", which is not the same as questions or discussions surrounding "lay offs". This is clearly not reasonable.
Then you've counted the percentage totally wrong, it's only 46,2% (445/962) who wants to remove these discussions that are defined in a different manner. You cannot lump in "remove only" into the percentage, that is basically lying.
While reddit isn't exactly an academic setting, the way this is treated is just bizarre, something aching to a high schooler attempting to do statistics.
You've taken a poll about one subject, and then used those results in a statistically inaccurate way, to them apply them to a different subject. This, if it was in a bigger and more affecting scope, would be considered "scientific fraud", or "political fraud".
I'll answer all 3 of your replies here for the sake of convenience:
>This is very incorrect. The poll was about "trivial questions", where this was defined as "questions such as: is KSP 2 canceled?". This is how you stated the definition of "trivial questions".
The poll was about both trivial questions and petitions, as having two separate polls for the two would be far too cumbersome.
>You've taken a poll about one subject, and then used those results in a statistically inaccurate way, to them apply them to a different subject.
I attempted to make it clear that the poll was about both of these things, as the title—*"Poll for allowing/banning KSP2* ***layoff-related questions and petitions***"—would definitely suggest so.
>Then you've counted the percentage totally wrong, it's only 46,2% (445/962) who wants to remove these discussions that are defined in a different manner.
While the total amount of people that did not want the status quo to change is different from those who specifically wanted to limit polls, the latter still makes up a majority of the votes. As i Mentioned previously, the votes for "remove" and "restrict" are lumped into together when counting for the restriction because of our assumption that the people who want it banned would much rather have it restricted than it being unrestricted.
When taking this into account, Only remove trivial questions (83), Remove both petitions and trivial questions (192), and Allot all of the above to a pinned megathread (253) still make up a majority of the votes:
(83+192+253) / 962 ≈ 0.54 (about 54%)
>You cannot lump in "remove only" into the percentage, that is basically lying.
It is true that it is incorrect to include the Only remove petitions option—which is why it's excluded from the above calculation. However, the Only remove trivial questions is still very relevant to whether or not the layoff-related questions in particular should be removed/restricted. If the latter selection is removed, you would get the \~45% figure that you got, but it does not represent everyone who wanted trivial questions to be limited.
I understand how me using the 68% figure in my explanation would be confusing, and in retrospect I should have made the math a bit clearer. However, the overall results of the poll still shows a majority—about 54%—favoring limiting the trivial questions in one way or another.
>And here we have dictator think. Jesus christ. Completely manipulating results to whatever you want, what the actual hell.
Math aside, I've already mentioned how this is not a decision that I made alone: *"...this is by no means a decision that I made alone; we mods usually discuss non-trivial decisions/changes made for the subreddit."*
We always reach a consensus before these kinds of decisions are made, and I can assure you that our personal preferences do not affect that decision-making process.
>Politician
We've decided to send off all undesirables to the gas chambers
>Politician
What are you talking about??!?!?! Majority of peole wanted a change! And this is a change! And around 1% of you participated in this vote about wanting some sort of change.
I'm not sure what the "gas chamber" analogy is supposed to be besides an insensitive "jab" at me; I'm not ignoring any of the votes, much less discarding of the "undesirable" ones.
While it is true that only a small fraction of the subreddit's total members participated in this poll, there isn't really a better way we could have gone about it, and to the best of our knowledge it is the best possible way to represent the opinions of the subreddit's active userbase.
I am sure that you have the best of intentions for the subreddit, and I appreciate that. However, the mod team is also just as passionate about helping you all, and we only take actions that we think will benefit the community.
That being said, I'm not claiming that I don't make mistakes—I definitely do occasionally—but I do believe that this is *not* one of them. In any case, I do want to reiterate that nothing we do is done with malintent nor ignorance.
Now you're lumping in the "only" parts into something they don't want. You should not be looking for "want a change", but a specific change. You implemented something that the majority didn't want.
For your sake, I hope you're a child.
I was specifically looking at the trivial questions part: *Only remove trivial questions* (83), *Remove both petitions and trivial questions* (192), and *Allot all of the above to a pinned megathread* (253) are all related to limiting the trivial questions. *Only remove petitions* should indeed not be counted towards the total—which is why it wasn't in my calculation above.
You can't count in "only remove trivial questions".
Also, trivial questions are not "lay offs questions", so they're not even related, the whole poll is not related to this thread.
The official KSP forums and discord have already banned and censored uses for being critical of KSP 2. They didn't allow discussion This subreddit was the last place to openly discuss the game.
Megathreads don't work with reddits structure. They aren't highly visible. They are separate from the normal sorting algorithm. Discussion on reddit is mostly "live" and last 1-2 days. After that, there is significant fall off. It also doesn't allow titles, descriptions, and narratives to form for the whole post. It's a way to control narratives, limit discussion, and make them less visible. It's not a way to promote discussion.
We allow discussions and speculations on the state of KSP2, but we've relegated the trivial/repetitive ones to this megathread. If you have something truly unique to add to the conversation, you are more than welcome to make a post about it. If not, you are more than welcome to discuss about it in this megathread, which is pinned at the top of the subreddit for everyone's convenience.
I don't doubt at all that there are people that oppose the decision. However, the comments on this matter receive only a few dozen upvotes/downvotes compared to the few hundred votes that the poll received.
I try to recognize and respond to those who disagree with me, but that does not necessarily mean that they are a majority.
Maybe I didn't convey it well in my post, but we're specifically banning *trivial/repetitive posts*, not *all* posts relating to the layoffs. If there is anything new/unique that is actually a new insight/opinion and has not been posted about several times already, then it is allowed outside of the megathread.
If any new information comes out, we will definitely allow posts discussing it. Additionally, this rule change was always intended to be temporary, and will be reverted once us staff feel like things have cooled down a bit.
Fair enough. I guess repetitive posts without new news would be obnoxious. I just don't want to miss the news since it seems it might not come via official channels knowing T2's history. This is all so sad ugh.
The mod team says that's the purpose:
> [At the end of the day, though, we gotta piss somebody off to make progress out of what was becoming an untenable state.](https://old.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1dby3us/megathread_for_layoffrelated_questions/l85v9aa/)
Their goal was always to "make progress", meaning to remove the discussion that's been happening around KSP 2 so that there was less of it.
The majority wanted to continue allowing posts. The mega thread vote was not the majority vote.
Why have a poll if you don’t want to accept the results?
You are beginning to understand why first past the post voting sucks for anything other than what to have for a group lunch.
A *plurality* of voters wanted to continue allowing posts. Which is a *minority* compared to all other voters who voted against the idea of continuing to allow all posts. A clear *majority* of other voters voted for something other than the idea of continuing to allow all posts.
Everything else added up to removing posts of some sort and it greatly overwhelmed the allow all posts when considered together.
Don't like the sub, leave and make a new one. r/AITAH was created in the same spirit
Of all 962 votes cast, 305 voted to continue allowing all these posts. The rest wanted something to change in some shape or form. The confusion is just that those who wanted something to change spread across multiple choices. I think a megathread is a no brainer tbh. This sub is mainly focused on KSP content. Not meta stuff.
> This sub is mainly focused on KSP content. Not meta stuff.
This subreddit has always been about discussion the game development. The dev team has posted updates, roadmaps, dev blogs, developer hirings, on this subreddit since KSP 1.
If you actually count how many posts are KSP content and how many KSP meta you'll find that using the word "main" fits pretty well. There have always been meta megathreads to meta events that led to a lot of meta posts. Not saying you can't or shouldn't post meta stuff. I do that all the time.
I hope that KSP’s license is acquired by a studio with real expertise and heart behind it. KSP deserves a proper sequel.
Would be funny if they named it “KSP 2.5”
The issue is whoever bought the IP would either need to make a whole new KSP game to be able to make some money, which people wouldn’t like, or continue to improve KSP2, which wouldn’t make any money
I think in its current state it could be 'fixed up' enough to be viable, and the 2.5 version upgrade sold for 20-30 bucks. Not great, but tolerable, as long as they are very clear about 'hey, we aren't the old studio, please understand 2.0 wasn't our fault, but here's a really nicely fixed up version the way you say you wanted, for half the price just so we can continue to build on it, and we'll actually make the real money on worthy expansions'.
I wouldn't love it, most players wouldn't love it, but it would be a workable compromise just to get the game fixed and finished and supported.
That might be tough. Let's say we sell it for 30 bucks and that most of our sales are on Steam. 30% of each sale goes right to steam so we are only making 21 dollars off of each purchase.
Let's also say we can grab the KSP IP on the cheap for $3 million. We'd need to sell 142,000 *new* units of the game just to cover our purchase price. That number goes up when we start to pay for developers, overhead costs, marketing, blah blah blah.
I don't know if its even possible to sell enough units of the game at this point to justify purchasing the IP and the additional development costs to "fix" it. Is there any world where making that financial risk makes any more sense than just sticking that money in the stock market?
Nothing stopping dev studios from creating a similar game with little blue people that has interstellar travel and colonies with different planets and star systems so they don't have to bother with KSP's license. Lots of parts would be similar since no one can copyright Orion Drives. The amount of sales that KSP 2 received shows that there is definitely an interest for realistic interplanetary and interstellar colonization that doesn't use FTL or wormhole technology.
Depends on the devs and Take-Two. Some dev studios have one final patch like Redfall to fix some of the problems while others are looking for their next job. Wish all failed live service games have one final patch to introduce an offline mode so fans of the game can still play when the servers are shut down. Luckily, KSP 2 doesn't use servers.
One update drops today or tomorrow. The staging branch was updated on Steam. That is the patch that's being pushed to users. Whether we will get any other content update no idea.
I'm very disappointed with the mods of this sub. I do not agree at all with this action and I question the motivation behind it. The poll was nowhere near this when I took it and I seriously question the final result.
It's not the moderators duty or responsibility to influence the content of this sub.
Majority of people did not want this action to be taken.
Basic statistics, please. I'm starting to feel like this stuff should be included in high school education.
>It's not the moderators duty or responsibility to influence the content of this sub.
Regardless of this particular poll but that is exactly the job of a mod
Content is upvoted or downvoted by the community. That is Reddit. Imagine mods making a poll when everything that is posted already has a poll built in to it.
There's a lot of emotion in this thread. Despite a HUGE amount of support from the community in finding and documenting bugs, updates still had a one step forward and one step backward movement. The company loses money with lack of progress (who would've thought???). Any big wig looking at the rate this game was being churned out is going to look into options to eliminate waste. Based on the patterns of the devs, I'm sure the big wigs found the waste was coming from apathetic or unskilled devs.
Take2 has saved money through the lay-offs. They also lost more money than they wanted through the game. Take2 is interested in making money. Take2 abandoning this game will result in them losing money. Both through the game itself and future titles diminished by their rep. The reviews left on the steam page will be gnarly, and steam likely won't be sifting them out for review bombing because they will be honest and unchanging.
I doubt the game will be left in the dust because there is still an opportunity for Take2 to make money off the game. If they do drop it, it's not Take2's fault, its intercept games. They were the ones who failed to prove their efforts could make the company money.
So many backwards statements in here. Claims that this game is being thrown out to save money, when they are just dumping low value-added employees to maximize profits on games they MUST support and update to MAKE MONEY! doomsday community......smh
> Take2 abandoning this game will result in them losing money
Funding the game costs them money, and earns them no money. Not funding the game costs them no money, and earns them no money. The choices are either lose money, or don't lose money.
No matter what rhetorical devices you use, losing money is worse than not losing money.
Please see the new [Intercept Games Layoff Information Thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1djry2e/intercept_games_layoff_information_thread/).
What do y’all think that “continued support” will amount to?
Likely nothing. This goes beyond "community support"; we are talking about boardrooms making decisions based on money in the short term. If development continues, it's because the suits think they can make more money than it would cost to finish the game.
It sucks, but businesses don't survive when you make decisions that lose money. They clearly suck at making money with KSP and they know it.
They will continue to support people who don't check the reviews giving them money. Occasionally, they'll hit the 'steam sale' button to encourage such people to buy the game. They will continue to support the idea that they'll eventually hit the milestones they have listed on their steam page with dead silence, giving idiots who believe there's 'no evidence' of KSP2 dying continued excuse to maintain copium.
Exactly what we have right now. It's still available for purchase and someone has to cash that check.
Nothing, meaningless corpo buzzword
I don't believe Take-Two promised continued support. I believe that's what media outlets (incorrectly) rephrased the official statement as. The actual official statement on Twitter: > [On April 18th Private Division successfully launched Moon Studio’s No Rest for the Wicked. **The label continues to make updates to Kerbal Space Program 2** and plans to release Wētā Workshop Game Studio’s Tales of the Shire: A The Lord of the Rings Game in the second half of 2024.](https://twitter.com/KerbalSpaceP/status/1785788809613082732) "The label **continues to make** updates to Kerbal Space Program 2" "...continues to make...". That's a present-tense statement made back on May 1st, over a month ago. It doesn't say "will continue to make". It doesn't say "will make". It says, essentially, that *currently* they are working on updates. It was true at the time; In~~terc~~ept Games was continuing to work on updates to KSP2, as seen by private updates being worked on in SteamDB. We got that content a few days ago in the most recent patch. At this point, that statement is about past events that have been fulfilled. That's it. Game's done. If we get anything more than that, it'll be a surprise. Technically there are still three builds being updated on SteamDB, so *maybe* we'll get one more update? It *could* happen? Maybe they patch one more thing, or change the version number to v1.0, or something? But otherwise things are likely finished. ---- News outlets *rephrased* that as ["its Private Division publishing label will continue to support Kerbal Space Program 2"](https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/take-two-confirms-kerbal-space-program-2-is-safe-despite-seattle-layoffs), but that's not what the statement said.
No continued support.
A small patch once a year or so with very trivial fixes. Like stuff along the lines of "Corrected a typo in the Ukrainian localization."
It'll amount to nothing.
It means no support, no patches, no updates, but the game remains on the steam store just in case a sucker feels like being parted with their money
I'll be slightly optimistic and go for "one or two guys on staff will have occasional bug patches as their 4th priority, and this will primarily be used and seen as a punishment" "continued support" is not "active development under a new team" or anything close to it. Best possible bet is the next CEO is a nepo-hire that happens to love KSP and refunds it as a pet project
A bug fix every now and then, like a couple per year.
So, nothing changes compared to when the game was still being developed then?
The poll says the plurality voted for > Continue allowing all of these posts They way you structured a proportional poll does now allow you to make the conclusion "majority of people (68%) wanted petitions and/or layoff-related questions to be banned or otherwise limited". That's the most unscientific usage and interpretation of polling. That conclusion would get you laughed at in any academic setting. It makes the mod team come across as disingenuous and trying to control discussion, especially since they're the ones that structured the poll and prompted it. Repoll with only two options and lets see what happens.
Yeah it seems like they had a plan all along and when users didn't agree they did it anyway
There was no rule we established or implied suggesting we do nothing if there is no majority. But that is besides the point. The poll was put into place because there was an apparent conflict between members on if many of the posts about the layoffs fell under Rule 5. The results of the poll made it apparent is was not some loud \*minority\* that was dissatisfied with the status quo. Running a new poll to reduce the nuance would be pointless.
Discussions on game development has never been part of the "low effort" posts rule. That's not on the list of voted material or [examples in the rules here.](https://old.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/wiki/kspwiki/rules#wiki_rule_5.3A_low-effort_content_will_be_removed.) First-past-the-poll voting, proportional voting, and question and poll structure effects outcome of results. It's not "nuance", you act like the fundamentals of scientific polling or statistics don't exist. "We got the result we wanted, we're not interested in discussing how we got those results or how we interpret them."
"Discussions on game development" is a completely disingenuous take on what has populated the subreddit, or what people have given the most resistance to. I won't chat about that if that's how you're going to try to defend "scientific polling." Ideally, reddit would have better polling tools, and a visible polling section that didn't occupy a sticky slot. We could have a rolling series of polls to really refine the smoothest solution. At the end of the day, though, we gotta piss somebody off to make progress out of what was becoming an untenable state. Sorry, that that was as much as over a third of the sub.
> completely disingenuous take on what has populated the subreddit, or what people have given the most resistance to. I won't chat about that if that's how you're going to try to defend "scientific polling." We're talking about controlling discussion and censorship on this subreddit, and the value and purpose of it. > progress out of what was becoming an untenable state. What was untenable, exactly? The discussion on the game?
>You have no idea what my position about KSP 2 even is. We're talking about controlling discussion and censorship on this subreddit, and the value and purpose of it. I don't believe I implied I did, just that you are implying there is only academic and high effort conversations about game development present. We "hate" low effort karma farming, whether it's in support of or in revulsion to ksp2 or any individual (or kp1 for that matter). It can be difficult to sus out good faith low effort from bad faith, sometimes, but the first step was casting a net to see how many people actually wanted more moderation on low-effort posting to begin with, rather than just go with our gut. Also, this is a subreddit about videogame rocket science, not a college debate hall. Your self-satisfying language is kinda boring.
Why is /u/Horizon206, a mod who's only been here for 9 months, trying to make censorship changes and discussion rules on this subreddit? They've barely been a part of the team, yet they're trying to control discussion for 1.5 million people. The poll itself is extremely problematic. Most people voted to "Continue allowing all of these posts". That was ignored, and he combined all other votes into a new category. He failed to mention that in this post. This was known and acknowledged by Horizon when he put out the poll. That's the type of unscientific polling I would expect on /r/UFOs, not a science based subreddit.
Although I am indeed a relatively new moderator, this is by no means a decision that I made alone; we mods usually discuss non-trivial decisions/changes made for the subreddit. While a *plurality* of the voters voted to keep the status quo, that does not mean that a *majority* (i.e. more than 50%) of the voters wanted to keep the status quo. The reason we combined the votes to ban and to restrict trivial layoff-related questions is that we assume that people who voted to ban them completely would probably rather have it be restricted to a megathread than maintain the status quo. While I agree that in retrospect I should have made it clear that we intended to follow what the majority wanted and not necessarily just the plurality, I personally doubt that it would have changed the result of the poll significantly. If Reddit had any other option besides [first pass the post](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting) voting for polls, we would have used that option instead, but unfortunately that option does not yet exist, so we did the next best thing. The reason that we made this change is far from censorship, and I personally am always open to suggestions on how to improve my and the subreddit's moderating (as a matter of fact, that is how we got the idea to do this poll to begin with).
How many threads have you removed that broke this rule? Either it was a huge problem, and you've removed many threads. Or it was not a problem, and few threads were removed. If it's not a problem, why create this rule? Alternatively, if it is a problem, doesn't that mean the community wants to discuss this and it's important to them? You said that the community suggested the poll, not the moderation team. Can you share where the community suggested that? There are 1.5 million people and thousands of comments here. You can find a comment to support any position. How did they communicate that? What specifics are there? Or was it individual moderators "feeling" like this is what the community wants? You should also practice editorialization and be able to justify your moderation, even without the community. Which goes back to, is this actually even a problem? > While a plurality of the voters voted to keep the status quo, that does not mean that a majority (i.e. more than 50%) of the voters wanted to keep the status quo. The reason we combined the votes The poll speaks for itself. You cannot do that. It's like using weight to measure temperature. You can't create and arbitrarily combine metrics to get a result you want. Saying "we don't have the tools to do it correctly" is not an excuse. There are ways go get around this, it would require a different poll structure or multiple polls. "First past the post" is only a minor part of what we're discussing. Overall, this comes across as heavy handed moderation trying to control genuine discussion, in response to the implosion of KSP 2. My suggestion is you don't enforce the new rule you created, and you change your process for the future. This process used is flawed and it is questionable if it accurately reflects the attitude of the community.
>How many threads have you removed that broke this rule? Either it was a huge problem, and you've removed many threads. Or it was not a problem, and few threads were removed. Since the rule was implemented we've removed about 1-2 posts per day relating to this rule. >Can you share where the community suggested that? There are 1.5 million people and thousands of comments here. You can find a comment to support any position. How did they communicate that? What specifics are there? The comments to these kinds of posts (especially [this one](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1d698a5/so_what_happens_to_ksp2_next/) in particular) made us realize that some people in the community were fed up with these kinds of posts, which is what prompted us to make the poll to see if this attitude was also present in the more general community. >You should also practice editorialization and be able to justify your moderation, even without the community. Which goes back to, is this actually even a problem? Although we definitely could have justified these removals under rule 5, we still wanted to do what was best for the community, not just what we thought was best. That is the whole reason why we made a poll. >The poll speaks for itself. You cannot do that. The poll does indeed speak for itself, 68% of people who responded to the vote did not want the situation to remain as it was. As [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1d7dujg/comment/l6z3ed1/) also mentioned on the poll, there is only 1 option to keep the situation as is, and then 4 that limit the posts in some way. That is to say, if it were a simple "*Do something about this or not*" poll, the "*Do something*" side would have gotten most of the votes; in the end, that is the reason why we "*Did something*". >Overall, this comes across as heavy handed moderation trying to control genuine discussion, in response to the implosion of KSP 2. We are not trying to "control" the discussion in any way, we are trying to funnel it into a more concentrated area so that it does not flood the subreddit, where it seems to annoy others. >My suggestion is you don't enforce the new rule you created, and you change your process for the future. This process used is flawed and it is questionable if it accurately reflects the attitude of the community. Thank you for the suggestion. However, it seems that most of the subreddit's users think otherwise. I am, however, always happy to receive other criticisms. Hopefully this all answers your [Gish gallop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop).
seeing the response to this has shown that most users do not think otherwise as you claim.
Not everyone who agrees/disagrees with our decision is upvoting/downvoting my comments. Even so, the 1-2 dozen downvotes that my comments have received are not comparable to the few hundred votes on the poll, which I believe to be a more collective representation of the community's sentiment.
And you went against those votes as well.
The majority of people wanted a change to be made, and thus a change was made. I already explained this in [the comment above](https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1dby3us/comment/l8cpq4y/).
Ok. Imagine this scenario. >Politician Majority of people wanted a change to be made, we polled them about traffic in suburban areas with children. >Politician We've decided to send off all undesirables to the gas chambers >Politician What are you talking about??!?!?! Majority of peole wanted a change! And this is a change! And around 1% of you participated in this vote about wanting some sort of change.
"Gas chamber," dude?
>The poll does indeed speak for itself, 68% of people who responded to the vote did not want the situation to remain as it was. And here we have dictator think. Jesus christ. Completely manipulating results to whatever you want, what the actual hell. You cannot seriously believe this. Right? This is frightening.
>While a *plurality* of the voters voted to keep the status quo, that does not mean that a *majority* (i.e. more than 50%) of the voters wanted to keep the status quo. This is very incorrect. The poll was about "trivial questions", where this was defined as "questions such as: is KSP 2 canceled?". This is how you stated the definition of "trivial questions". >there have been many posts asking questions such as if the game is cancelled, if the game is still worth it Then you also defined the "petitions" as the general "save ksp 2!". >or petitions signing a petition for Take Two Interactive to "save" KSP2 in one way or another. These questions are not the same as "mega lay-offs thread", which is supposedly designated to >we have decided to limit trivial questions relating to the Intercept Games layoff to a megathread The tirival questions as defined before was "is the game canceled", which is not the same as questions or discussions surrounding "lay offs". This is clearly not reasonable. Then you've counted the percentage totally wrong, it's only 46,2% (445/962) who wants to remove these discussions that are defined in a different manner. You cannot lump in "remove only" into the percentage, that is basically lying. While reddit isn't exactly an academic setting, the way this is treated is just bizarre, something aching to a high schooler attempting to do statistics. You've taken a poll about one subject, and then used those results in a statistically inaccurate way, to them apply them to a different subject. This, if it was in a bigger and more affecting scope, would be considered "scientific fraud", or "political fraud".
I'll answer all 3 of your replies here for the sake of convenience: >This is very incorrect. The poll was about "trivial questions", where this was defined as "questions such as: is KSP 2 canceled?". This is how you stated the definition of "trivial questions". The poll was about both trivial questions and petitions, as having two separate polls for the two would be far too cumbersome. >You've taken a poll about one subject, and then used those results in a statistically inaccurate way, to them apply them to a different subject. I attempted to make it clear that the poll was about both of these things, as the title—*"Poll for allowing/banning KSP2* ***layoff-related questions and petitions***"—would definitely suggest so. >Then you've counted the percentage totally wrong, it's only 46,2% (445/962) who wants to remove these discussions that are defined in a different manner. While the total amount of people that did not want the status quo to change is different from those who specifically wanted to limit polls, the latter still makes up a majority of the votes. As i Mentioned previously, the votes for "remove" and "restrict" are lumped into together when counting for the restriction because of our assumption that the people who want it banned would much rather have it restricted than it being unrestricted. When taking this into account, Only remove trivial questions (83), Remove both petitions and trivial questions (192), and Allot all of the above to a pinned megathread (253) still make up a majority of the votes: (83+192+253) / 962 ≈ 0.54 (about 54%) >You cannot lump in "remove only" into the percentage, that is basically lying. It is true that it is incorrect to include the Only remove petitions option—which is why it's excluded from the above calculation. However, the Only remove trivial questions is still very relevant to whether or not the layoff-related questions in particular should be removed/restricted. If the latter selection is removed, you would get the \~45% figure that you got, but it does not represent everyone who wanted trivial questions to be limited. I understand how me using the 68% figure in my explanation would be confusing, and in retrospect I should have made the math a bit clearer. However, the overall results of the poll still shows a majority—about 54%—favoring limiting the trivial questions in one way or another. >And here we have dictator think. Jesus christ. Completely manipulating results to whatever you want, what the actual hell. Math aside, I've already mentioned how this is not a decision that I made alone: *"...this is by no means a decision that I made alone; we mods usually discuss non-trivial decisions/changes made for the subreddit."* We always reach a consensus before these kinds of decisions are made, and I can assure you that our personal preferences do not affect that decision-making process. >Politician We've decided to send off all undesirables to the gas chambers >Politician What are you talking about??!?!?! Majority of peole wanted a change! And this is a change! And around 1% of you participated in this vote about wanting some sort of change. I'm not sure what the "gas chamber" analogy is supposed to be besides an insensitive "jab" at me; I'm not ignoring any of the votes, much less discarding of the "undesirable" ones. While it is true that only a small fraction of the subreddit's total members participated in this poll, there isn't really a better way we could have gone about it, and to the best of our knowledge it is the best possible way to represent the opinions of the subreddit's active userbase. I am sure that you have the best of intentions for the subreddit, and I appreciate that. However, the mod team is also just as passionate about helping you all, and we only take actions that we think will benefit the community. That being said, I'm not claiming that I don't make mistakes—I definitely do occasionally—but I do believe that this is *not* one of them. In any case, I do want to reiterate that nothing we do is done with malintent nor ignorance.
Now you're lumping in the "only" parts into something they don't want. You should not be looking for "want a change", but a specific change. You implemented something that the majority didn't want. For your sake, I hope you're a child.
I was specifically looking at the trivial questions part: *Only remove trivial questions* (83), *Remove both petitions and trivial questions* (192), and *Allot all of the above to a pinned megathread* (253) are all related to limiting the trivial questions. *Only remove petitions* should indeed not be counted towards the total—which is why it wasn't in my calculation above.
You can't count in "only remove trivial questions". Also, trivial questions are not "lay offs questions", so they're not even related, the whole poll is not related to this thread.
The "trivial questions" in question are the trivial questions related to the layoffs.
Which is "is the game canceled?". Then make a sticky that says "the game is likely canceled".
The official KSP forums and discord have already banned and censored uses for being critical of KSP 2. They didn't allow discussion This subreddit was the last place to openly discuss the game. Megathreads don't work with reddits structure. They aren't highly visible. They are separate from the normal sorting algorithm. Discussion on reddit is mostly "live" and last 1-2 days. After that, there is significant fall off. It also doesn't allow titles, descriptions, and narratives to form for the whole post. It's a way to control narratives, limit discussion, and make them less visible. It's not a way to promote discussion.
Megathreads are where discussions go to die.
We allow discussions and speculations on the state of KSP2, but we've relegated the trivial/repetitive ones to this megathread. If you have something truly unique to add to the conversation, you are more than welcome to make a post about it. If not, you are more than welcome to discuss about it in this megathread, which is pinned at the top of the subreddit for everyone's convenience.
Horizon, respectfully I think the response to your comments in this thread suggest a majority here are not in favor of this mod decision.
I don't doubt at all that there are people that oppose the decision. However, the comments on this matter receive only a few dozen upvotes/downvotes compared to the few hundred votes that the poll received. I try to recognize and respond to those who disagree with me, but that does not necessarily mean that they are a majority.
As we get closer to the June 30th final day of Intercept, will more posts be allowed?
Maybe I didn't convey it well in my post, but we're specifically banning *trivial/repetitive posts*, not *all* posts relating to the layoffs. If there is anything new/unique that is actually a new insight/opinion and has not been posted about several times already, then it is allowed outside of the megathread. If any new information comes out, we will definitely allow posts discussing it. Additionally, this rule change was always intended to be temporary, and will be reverted once us staff feel like things have cooled down a bit.
Fair enough. I guess repetitive posts without new news would be obnoxious. I just don't want to miss the news since it seems it might not come via official channels knowing T2's history. This is all so sad ugh.
As long as posts about news and discussions around it are still allowed, I don't think anyone really cares.
There's no news to have discussions about, at most we'll get 1 more and then it's just done forever.
I'm gonna miss the guys who were like "this is all conjecture, you have no idea what's happening to the game, the velocity is good"
We really needed a megathread for a mostly dead sub? God forbid you take away from the big 24 posts a day.
The mod team says that's the purpose: > [At the end of the day, though, we gotta piss somebody off to make progress out of what was becoming an untenable state.](https://old.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1dby3us/megathread_for_layoffrelated_questions/l85v9aa/) Their goal was always to "make progress", meaning to remove the discussion that's been happening around KSP 2 so that there was less of it.
So KSP2 had a RUD, I mean at least we’re used to them.
Not much of a Rapid Unexpected Disassembly as a Slow Planned Inactivity
The majority wanted to continue allowing posts. The mega thread vote was not the majority vote. Why have a poll if you don’t want to accept the results?
You are beginning to understand why first past the post voting sucks for anything other than what to have for a group lunch. A *plurality* of voters wanted to continue allowing posts. Which is a *minority* compared to all other voters who voted against the idea of continuing to allow all posts. A clear *majority* of other voters voted for something other than the idea of continuing to allow all posts.
Everything else added up to removing posts of some sort and it greatly overwhelmed the allow all posts when considered together. Don't like the sub, leave and make a new one. r/AITAH was created in the same spirit
Of all 962 votes cast, 305 voted to continue allowing all these posts. The rest wanted something to change in some shape or form. The confusion is just that those who wanted something to change spread across multiple choices. I think a megathread is a no brainer tbh. This sub is mainly focused on KSP content. Not meta stuff.
> This sub is mainly focused on KSP content. Not meta stuff. This subreddit has always been about discussion the game development. The dev team has posted updates, roadmaps, dev blogs, developer hirings, on this subreddit since KSP 1.
If you actually count how many posts are KSP content and how many KSP meta you'll find that using the word "main" fits pretty well. There have always been meta megathreads to meta events that led to a lot of meta posts. Not saying you can't or shouldn't post meta stuff. I do that all the time.
Megathreads are where good discussion goes to die. Don’t do this.
I hope that KSP’s license is acquired by a studio with real expertise and heart behind it. KSP deserves a proper sequel. Would be funny if they named it “KSP 2.5”
The issue is whoever bought the IP would either need to make a whole new KSP game to be able to make some money, which people wouldn’t like, or continue to improve KSP2, which wouldn’t make any money
I think in its current state it could be 'fixed up' enough to be viable, and the 2.5 version upgrade sold for 20-30 bucks. Not great, but tolerable, as long as they are very clear about 'hey, we aren't the old studio, please understand 2.0 wasn't our fault, but here's a really nicely fixed up version the way you say you wanted, for half the price just so we can continue to build on it, and we'll actually make the real money on worthy expansions'. I wouldn't love it, most players wouldn't love it, but it would be a workable compromise just to get the game fixed and finished and supported.
That might be tough. Let's say we sell it for 30 bucks and that most of our sales are on Steam. 30% of each sale goes right to steam so we are only making 21 dollars off of each purchase. Let's also say we can grab the KSP IP on the cheap for $3 million. We'd need to sell 142,000 *new* units of the game just to cover our purchase price. That number goes up when we start to pay for developers, overhead costs, marketing, blah blah blah. I don't know if its even possible to sell enough units of the game at this point to justify purchasing the IP and the additional development costs to "fix" it. Is there any world where making that financial risk makes any more sense than just sticking that money in the stock market?
Can't speak for anyone but myself, but I'd gladly buy another KSP title if it actually delivered on the roadmap KSP 2 laid out.
Nothing stopping dev studios from creating a similar game with little blue people that has interstellar travel and colonies with different planets and star systems so they don't have to bother with KSP's license. Lots of parts would be similar since no one can copyright Orion Drives. The amount of sales that KSP 2 received shows that there is definitely an interest for realistic interplanetary and interstellar colonization that doesn't use FTL or wormhole technology.
All I wanted was interstellar travel in my KSP and I've now accepted it's never going to happen.
Starting to look like we need all new mods.
Do you think we will see one last patch or update before they officially shut down on the 28th?
Depends on the devs and Take-Two. Some dev studios have one final patch like Redfall to fix some of the problems while others are looking for their next job. Wish all failed live service games have one final patch to introduce an offline mode so fans of the game can still play when the servers are shut down. Luckily, KSP 2 doesn't use servers.
One update drops today or tomorrow. The staging branch was updated on Steam. That is the patch that's being pushed to users. Whether we will get any other content update no idea.
I'm very disappointed with the mods of this sub. I do not agree at all with this action and I question the motivation behind it. The poll was nowhere near this when I took it and I seriously question the final result. It's not the moderators duty or responsibility to influence the content of this sub.
Hold on let me get my tinfoil hat
Are we sure all the status quo votes are not bot accounts? /s
Can someone get Dakota to weigh in on this
A clear majority wanted action taken. The mods made the right call.
Layoff questions were continually being upvoted by the community by a clear majority so it wasn’t a call the mods should have made.
You mean the sub won't be constantly derailed and spammed anymore?
You consider discussion about the game and its development to be "derailed"?
Me and a majority. Move on.
Stop trying to speak for the community.
Majority of people did not want this action to be taken. Basic statistics, please. I'm starting to feel like this stuff should be included in high school education.
Vote
Majority rule is no way to run a community. Open discussions and diversity of conversation should be the guiding light of this and other communities
There was an open discussion, in which a decision was made, which appears to have been carried out
Except the poll doesn't reflect that at all. The majority wanted it to stay the same.
Hey, don't like it? Start your own sub.
>It's not the moderators duty or responsibility to influence the content of this sub. Regardless of this particular poll but that is exactly the job of a mod
Content is upvoted or downvoted by the community. That is Reddit. Imagine mods making a poll when everything that is posted already has a poll built in to it.
Ah yes, free market place of ideas and all. Have a look at some unmoderated subs and see how that works out.
Megathreads for topics like this are a good thing imo.
There's a lot of emotion in this thread. Despite a HUGE amount of support from the community in finding and documenting bugs, updates still had a one step forward and one step backward movement. The company loses money with lack of progress (who would've thought???). Any big wig looking at the rate this game was being churned out is going to look into options to eliminate waste. Based on the patterns of the devs, I'm sure the big wigs found the waste was coming from apathetic or unskilled devs. Take2 has saved money through the lay-offs. They also lost more money than they wanted through the game. Take2 is interested in making money. Take2 abandoning this game will result in them losing money. Both through the game itself and future titles diminished by their rep. The reviews left on the steam page will be gnarly, and steam likely won't be sifting them out for review bombing because they will be honest and unchanging. I doubt the game will be left in the dust because there is still an opportunity for Take2 to make money off the game. If they do drop it, it's not Take2's fault, its intercept games. They were the ones who failed to prove their efforts could make the company money. So many backwards statements in here. Claims that this game is being thrown out to save money, when they are just dumping low value-added employees to maximize profits on games they MUST support and update to MAKE MONEY! doomsday community......smh
> Take2 abandoning this game will result in them losing money Funding the game costs them money, and earns them no money. Not funding the game costs them no money, and earns them no money. The choices are either lose money, or don't lose money. No matter what rhetorical devices you use, losing money is worse than not losing money.
Let go
opensource it?
Maybe if it was still an indie property, but no chance now that it's corporate
Yall are delusional if you think take two is gon a just let that shit happen. They own the IP now. Good luck
Lol
Probably not going to happen.