@futt
Yes.
And from what I see, the game seems unsalvagable.

I am seriously considering getting the earliest build of KSP1 just to compare how broken the physics is. Because I am sure the KSP1 was more stable.

@LukeAlmighty Yeah I was already skeptical when the Take 2/Intercept drama hit, then I saw the $50 price tag and decided to wait for the reviews. Man am I glad I did, what a complete clusterfuck of a launch. If this is all they have to show for themselves after 3 years of delays, I have no faith that the game will ever become playable.

I'll stick with KSP1 + mods, as I suspect a lot of others will.

@futt
Ok...
From the looks of it, It seems, that the first build I played had to be somewhere about 0.14

I will try finding it. Because from what I'm looking at, it seems quite stable.

@futt
It's quite funny when I think about it.
I know shit about game development, but I know, that there are things you can patch, and things, that are just fucked.

If physics is fucked in a physics based game, you cannot fix that. You are just fucked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff4jwqy8iNA

KSP1 seems to have been able to handle MANY rocket parts from the very begining. So no, my memory is not wrong. They are building KSP2 on a fucking sand at this point.

@LukeAlmighty If I remember correctly, there was also mod support at this point, and it was fairly stable.

I agree that KSP2 is build on an unsalvageable foundation; if this is the best they could do after spending 3 extra years "fixing" it then I have no faith they will ever get it to an acceptable state. And these are supposedly professional game devs, KSP1 was developed by hobbyists at a marketing firm!