You can disregard the whole feature creep thing and just look at how the whole thing looks from a legal obligation perspective.
Inovae pitched a game with certain features in the KS, by doing that they outlined what they are going to be developing and now they are legally obligated to stick to what they pitched. Not only legally but also to respect their backers who pledged for the game that was being offered. You cannot just change the scope/design of a game after you get peoples money. Sure some projects do this but itās a spit in the face of the original backers and is really shady legally.
That is why Inovae should stick to features they promised during the KS and only after those are implemented they could move onto extra stuff if they have the resources to do it.
Itās mostly true, with a few exceptions where the opposing sides have respect for each other. I read pretty much every post on the old forums as moderator and made something like 5000 posts of my own. Itās very rare for one side to change the other sideās mind in a debate. You donāt have to trust me on this, just try finding a post where somebody admits they are wrong.
They are legally obligated by Kickstarter to deliver the rewards they promised in the rewards. Nothing else.
Other than that, I agree, they pitched something and said they would use the money they get on what they pitched. Doing something different is what many would consider a scam.
Though there are examples where it worked out nevertheless, like Kentucky Route Zero.
IIRC a common resolution to debates was people realising they actually agree with eachother, theyāve just been misunderstanding what the other party was trying to say - At least when it came to gameplay mechanics.
I find not caring is usually what makes discussions calm and more likely to stop with either agreeing with the other or agreeing to disagree. When people get passionate about something and really care about it, itās more likely for them to get carried away during a debate. It takes a lot of conscious effort to remember to respect each other, to remember that the other is arguing because he cares as much as you but has a different opinion, to keep yourself calm or persuade yourself to pretend you donāt care during these sorts of debates.
Iām not saying thereās any sort of should. Iām just saying that unconsciously weāre very rank oriented animals without even understanding that a lot of things are simply translations of the instinct of rank.
Argument isnāt effective unless a mutual respect and humility is already established.
Well, thatās what mutual respect is there for - so that you can start to understand each other. If you respect someone, you give more credence to the idea that they may know something that you do not, and if two people do that, learning between the two individuals is likely to be achieved.
Actually, I use to find a few posts where people admitted they were wrong. But then again, I could be wrong on that. Just kidding. As someone who posted nearly as many as you - possibly more, I can confidently say open, honest debate is the only way to go. Besides, it is not just about the vocal minority - itās also about those who donāt comment and read the forums but who are essential to the future of the game.
The DEVs are not legally bound to provide anything since, and this has been recently clarified by a DEV, we are ādonatingā. So, they could provide far less if anything and they still wouldnāt be legally culpable.
