Hi, it’s useless to argue here. The game is made by developers for developers, not for Players. To keep the Players, the game must be done for the Players. And that means doing what people ask. And the development priorities of the project should consist precisely of the comments of the Players and their proposals. So, what prevents them from understanding the essence of the success of the Games and the Big Online? Is it enough to play other online projects yourself, chat with the Players, find out what holds them back? And how are they going to develop a mass online project with a one-time purchase? HUD developers did 6 months)
1 Like
I have been on topic, sorry you don’t like the steam charts or the truth.
This game has neither that is why it has 0 retention and the devs decide to change the hud from blue to green and before that they added green lasers, both of which did not work while wasting alot of time. The devs don’t understand retention, how to fix it or what to actually roadmap. If they did they would have more than just 1.5 players.
No you have not. Emphasis on words “within our budget”. You can rant as much as you want on planetary walking and NMS, it is OUT OF SCOPE for Battlescape. Period. It isn’t even up for debate.
We are interested in feedback that is within the scope of the game. Battlescape is a spaceship-based game, not a walking simulator. We’ll eventually add oceans and props on planets, but this will be part of the polish phase later on. It isn’t a priority right now. Now if you want to keep talking about it, you can sure do so in the thread you already have. This thread isn’t about planetary walking / details.
7 Likes
Yes I have and I have provided sources and facts that you are getting frustrated with.
No amount of denial, fanboy upvoting or deflection will change these numbers and an echo chamber for devs doing damage control is not healthy.
Updating old placeholders are within your budget, green lasers and polishing the hud (something no player cares about) are not within your budget.
Not once in this thread have a brought up space legs lol.
Actually infinity battlescape having players and not being dead on arrival is “out of scope” and the scope comment is a tired old excuse that has been used for years.
It is on steam. This game being dead in the water from poor roadmaps and doa isn’t even up for debate.
This thread is about how to fix retention and the only way is to add content not polish the hud for a year and roll around in steam early access dough while ignoring the players, if you ignore the players they will ignore your game hence no players. If you are rude and have poor customer service you will have no customers.
Good thing you didn’t have a publisher for all those years right so you could just string people along for a decade.
FYI, The discussion about planetary details from Crayfish’s “fixing retention” post ( Fixing Retention - Battlescape's last chance ) have been merged with SentinelGundame’s thread. The posts complaining about the discussion being derailed obviously make no sense anymore.
If anybody has anything else to add about planetary details ( and how it might or not help with player retention ), please do so in this thread, thank you.
6 Likes
You also called me an “armchair developers assemble!” well thanks to your trash talk I am a developer now. Can’t wait to fill the niche inovae neglected but someone has to do it, well see who is laughing then when you all go broke.
Congratulations!
5 Likes
lol at this thread, he’s either a troll or mentally ill.
what he wants is all in star citizens anyway, so just go buy that, guy.
or go make your own game and quit after a year with development 0.00001 percent finished. 
1 Like
Ok you want citation?
1 fan no studio no kickstarter just one fan built a demo in his spare time that looks flies and feels better than anything inovae has ever created. I would rather spend more hours playing that demo than ever picking up infinity battlescape and it’s 15 year old graphics ever again. That is pretty sad but hey you wanted citation here it is.
Putting other devs assets into an unreal engine level isnt a game though.
Why are you even here? Don’t you have a game to make?
4 Likes
It is a game demo though just like infinity bs and that person is a better dev than all of you combined.
All right, since you refuse you change your behavior and resort to insulting not just us, but pretty much everybody, it’s time to say you goodbye.
5 Likes
Also by curiosity I downloaded and tested that E:D demo he posted above. The shaders and the base asset is really nice looking, but if we’re talking of terrain tech, well -surprise surprise- the terrain itself is looking worse than ours ( it has low-res textures and low-res geometry, ours are more detailed ) and it’s just a 2D heightmap - there’s no planetary engine in sight anywhere to be seen.
Of course, the nice weather plugin that the demo creator used ( which he did not develop himself btw, he just used some UE plugin ) helps to hide the terrain in fog and rain - which I do think looks pretty fantastic. The volumetric clouds are also really nice, that is until you fly above the clouds and see it’s a flat / 2D volume ( again no spherical curvature to be seen there ) and very repetitive.
So yeah, it’s a fantastic looking demo as long as you stay near the base asset. In terms of planetary tech / terrain, there is nothing to be seen there, really. Which is pretty ironic considering he linked to this video as a showcase of better planetary tech… which this demo isn’t… 
5 Likes
Just an overrated asset flip. Most of the work on that was put in by several staff at Frontier Developments. This ‘super dev’ just copied and converted the assets to Unreal Engine.
SentinelGundam ban is understandable, as the last ~30 posts have not been quite constructive.
This still looks fantastic too:
Though there would be no point to add it to I-Novae without clouds that would form the rain.
Maybe a bit excessive?
2 Likes
“All right, since you refuse you change your behavior and resort to insulting not just us, but pretty much everybody, it’s time to say you goodbye.”
1 Like
At least his ban is shorter than yours, critic.
I think it’s safe to say that the excuse we were given about the reason for permabans being the first choice being a technical discord limitation was not true.
3 Likes
Aww. But they were fun!
I’ll make a short post in order to honour the memory of SentinelGundam on these forums:
Bad move. Noob devs.
8 Likes
These are low-priority aesthetic concerns that have nothing to do with the gameplay loop. Already I’m primed to believe this is a parody.
This is ridiculously outside the scope of the of core game loop and dilutes both the gameplay and actual player population density. This might’ve sounded cool to 12-year-old me, but it’s just ridiculous now. Battlescape is going to be more like Allegiance than Star Citizen when it’s finished. Tight gameplay scope with an ebb and flow of competitive clashes over a several-hour match. And within the capabilities of a small team to actually complete.
This HAS to be a parody. Am I taking the bait? While 12-year-old me might be nodding in agreement, all of this completely shoots past the point of “best game ever made” into “pointless tech demo”. Which, I might add, Infinity seemed to be for a long time before a game finally started being made.
Again. Is this a parody? Have I been trolled?
2 Likes