First Post-Kickstarter Update

Keep in mind that this is smaller than SC and delivering a base product in a reasonable time frame will be an enormous undertaking as is.

And, as I mentioned, 9 women can’t deliver a baby in a month. It takes time to train people on a totally built from scratch engine on top of just getting them up to speed. It also becomes more difficult to manage as the variables increase.

That said, minor suggestions aren’t problematic. I even suggested dramatic lighting, mainly because it’s relatively simple and yields a lot of visual bang for the dollar.

1 Like

That’s the thing though: we all have our own concepts of what is and isn’t viable. It really isn’t for us to decide but rather the DEVs. All we can do is make suggestions. Actually, I liked your idea but I could just as easily slapped a ‘feature creep’ on it.

1 Like

‘Feature creep’ isn’t rhetoric. It’s a description of an uncontrolled addition of features to a project.

What a ridiculous thing to say. I’m all for the addition of deep and interesting gameplay but any change in the scope of a project needs to be carefully planned for.

I never said anyone shouldn’t make suggestions - My response to @Alkan2 was because I got the impression he thought the addition of a feature doesn’t count as feature creep so long as that feature is good for gameplay.

Any change to the scope of a project, whether it be the addition of a great gameplay suggestion or the overhauling of a ship texture, is feature creep unless it is planned for and only added if the impact to deadlines etc is considered acceptable.

My impression is that you seem to have an adverse reaction to the phrase ‘feature creep’.

As has been discussed in your The Future of Battlescape topic, standard for one genre does not mean standard for all genres. To suggest there is a standard set of features/mechanics that all spaceship games should have is, quite frankly, naive. If you’d like to continue that discussion, please can we do so in that topic?


I’m OK with any of his answers, even a short “of course, doh” or whatever. I’m less OK with questions being ignored, especially because it seems a regular thing for my questions. But whatever.

There’s no conspiracy, just people with not enough time on their hands to notice everybody asking questions :wink:

As for which stretch goals will be implemented with additional funding, all goals under $800K would qualify I think. Some of them will have a higher priority than others. Ex.: modding will probably come last or after the initial version of the game has been released. Higher funding goals will probably not happen.


If we can get detailed damage modelling and weather, I’ll be happy.

1 Like

When we get the core game Keith and Flavien talked about in the kickstarter without any bells or whistles added I’ll be happy. :stuck_out_tongue:

Then again, I’d probably be happy with just that prototype build they showed off.

1 Like

An easy but far-reaching mistake is to confuse complexity for depth. Ico is getting it right is a reason it is one of my favourite games ever.
(Also, why Go is better than Chess and anyone disagreeing with my highly subjective opinion about that is wrong anyway)


Go is better than chess IMHO.


So is Skyrim or Doom, right. :wink:

TicTacToe is the ultimate game.

1 Like

When i was 10 i figured out the move patterns to draw or win every game depending which side you start on. tictactoe is terrible

1 Like

Now you want others to head to another thread despite the fact many of us are discussing feature creep and its relation to funding here, including DEVs? Please chill out. Despite what you may think, being a ‘regular’ member doesn’t make you a DEV or give you the right to order people about. I seen a lot of this behavior on sites dominated by fanboys and I-Novae would best be served without this kind of obsessive compulsive drive to control others.

As for the subject at hand, Feature creep is rhetoric when it is tossed around whenever a new idea is put forward, and you sir seem to have no problem with that. What’s more there will always be new standards as technology and gameplay advances. Yes, we don’t need color television because that’s feature creep - right? Or we don’t need VR, because of course that is feature creep. Or we don’t need mining because hey, no other game did mining at the time and that is feature creep. Sure, Battlescape can ignore advances and gameplay if it wants to survive on the fringe of existence - and the fact you still don’t understand this after a nearly disastrous Kick Starter is particularly revealing.

In this topic we’re discussing feature creep. I’m happy to continue discussing that here.

In the other topic we were discussing your opinion of what Battlescape needs to do to keep up with what you perceive to be a standard among all spaceship-based games. - I was suggesting we continue that discussion there rather than discussing both things here in the same topic. I was by no means attempting to order you… note the polite phrasing and the question mark. One doesn’t need to be a dev (abbreviation, not acronym, hence not capitalised) to attempt to keep discussions on-topic.

As for the subject at hand, you seem to be completely missing the point.

If you do a quick search you’ll see that I have only mentioned feature creep in this topic, the first time being in response to @Alkan2 in an attempt to clarify what is meant by the term ‘feature creep’, evidently in your case my attempt has been futile.

I shall attempt one last time picking up on the television analogy:

  • In this analogy spaceship games are broadcast media.
  • E:D and SC are televisions (MMORPGs)
  • Battlescape is a radio (MMOFPS). Making it a television would be out of scope for a radio.
  • New features like a longer aerial or an LCD frequency readout are not ‘feature creep’ in and of themselves.
  • Their addition would be feature creep IF they were simply added to the project without assessing their effect on the timescale and budget of the project.
1 Like

I don’t know who made you the arbiter of how feature creep is defined. What’s more I gave you different analogies but you chose to pick apart only one. But please continue, if you think that ignoring game development is wise, then be my guest. Personally, I see reckless folly ignoring emerging standards, especially if they are labelled ‘feature creep’. But of course history is filled with companies that went under because they failed to keep up with the times. I pray I-Novae won’t be one of them.

As for my and many others off-topic comments regarding Post Kick Starter and feature creep; may I propose we run everything through you first for editing, phrasing and content relevancy - that way we will always be on the same page.

Exactly. And that is why it is the perfect game. When both players know it, nobody can win. It is a futile contest that always ends in a draw. It is almost meditative in a way. You play until you realize that the only winning move is not to play. :stuck_out_tongue: (At least until you find someone who doesn’t know the game.)

Plus, it has some great mods, like Quantum tic-tac-toe that really add to the longevity of the game.

@Zen: Please try to be a bit less aggressive. I am certain that if @hrobertson offended you, he had no intention of doing so. Let’s try to keep this conversation civil.

The point about keeping things in their own topic is part of the philosophy of the forum software, which is why it has the ability to reply as another topic: to avoid having lots of conversations in different topics with misleading titles. This not a rigid system of course, as a topic evolves it might become something other than what it originally was and that is OK too. While this is only a guideline and you or anyone else are not expected to obey it to the letter (after all, my entire post is also off topic), it is nice to keep it in mind. Not because you will be banned or anything like that, but simply to make the forums a bit neater and easier to navigate and the topics easier to read and understand for others.


Yeah, too much of an old guard thing going on here. Asked for refund. All the best.

I have 17 mil isk can I help?

In seriousness, disagreement is pretty common on the these forums and that’s okay. Why? Because a forum is where people come together to discuss ideas. I think it’s great the both of you can discuss (somewhat) civilly the aspects of feature creep and how to prevent it so that battlescape becomes the best possible game. Is that what the first post-kickstarter update(which is actually the second “first update”! I’m watching you devs :wink: ) is about? No. So make a thread for it which isn’t even a big deal. Alternatively, post in the other thread where supposedly you were already discussing it. I haven’t read it nor do I care to.

I’m not really sorry you feel that way, but I am sad to see you go because that’s 1 less supporter for an awesome game that deserves the support of all space game fans(whether they agree or disagree on things!). Especially when it’s over as something as trivial as being asked to make a new thread or use an existing one.

I’d start the tradition of asking for your stuff but we don’t quite have a game yet.



17 mil isk? How long have you played EVE?

I don’t think a company unable to promote itself and look at the changing environment around then nearly failing before ever starting is trivial. But hey, if you think the present course is the right direction and that our time is better spent trying to micro-manage forums with an old guard mentality? Good luck with that.

As of today there is over 3,500 people on this forum. You’re throwing in the towel after the devs have put in numberous years of dedication all because you disagree with a single person over a pointless subject?!? Infinity is awesome; more than awesome! You gotta remember this is a forum to whom each have their own opinions. No need to scurry off just because you feel there’s too much “old guard”.

1 Like