Follow on G+ Follow on Twitter Subscribe the Facebook page Subscribe the RSS feed Receive notifications of new posts by email

StarDrive 2: New Video Shows Strategic and Tactical Layers

By on March 19th, 2014 2:22 pm

StarDrive 2 | Turn-based space 4X strategy game by Zero Sum Games and Iceberg Interactive

It’s not particularly news worthy to mention tactical turn-based ground combat these days. After all, that mechanic has been a mainstay of most fantasy 4X games since the genre was invented. Tactical turn-based ground combat in a space 4X game though? That’s something quite unusual indeed. StarDrive 2 was only recently announced, officially anyway, and we already knew that real-time mechanics were being replaced with turn-based at the strategy layer. The space combat is set to remain real-time. In a rather unique twist, StarDrive 2 is introducing tactical turn-based ground combat into the mix. This and several other intricacies about the game are all revealed in the latest Dev Log video which has just recently been released.

The video highlights many of StarDrive 2’s features and mechanics. New colony features such as pollution and approval are in. Exploration will include procedurally generated systems that offer unique events that include effects or opportunities for your ships or empire, and sometimes both. Research, which has a menu that is still an early work in progress, is shown and it appears to involve some more important decision making. Ship construction is back and uses a modular system similar to the original StarDrive, though it looks much cleaner. The new battle arena mode that was announced is shown and includes a look at some real-time combat. The first space monster, hopefully one of many, appears along with some powerful weapons of its own. Unfortunately, the beam effect is uses is similar to the standard ships right now, so while devastating, it didn’t stand out as much as I’d like. Hopefully it will have some more unique visuals added later on to really make it stand out.

StarDrive 2 | Preliminary turn-based combat system

Of course, I also started off with the turn-based ground combat, and this is shown at the end of the video. How in-depth it will eventually end up remains to be seen, but it appears a fair amount of work has been put into so far. Troops can be customized with weapons and technologies you have unlocked. Weapons have statistics such as range, damage, damage type, cooldown, and AP cost. It also includes minimum ranges, so much like archers in a fantasy 4X game, it appears certain units won’t be able to fire if they are engaged in melee. Aside from weapons, armor, combat techniques, and medikits should allow for unit specialization and some tactical decisions. If you’re not into tactical combat though, it appears that the AI will be able to make these decisions for you.

     Subscribe RSS

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


  1. Happy Corner says:

    To be fair, I’ve always thought 4X space games could use more turn-based ground combat.

    Will this win over all the people who are still pissed about the first game, though?

    • Noldor says:

      Yeah I’d agree that the ground combat has been uninspiring on space 4X games. GC2 is a good example. In most games, it’s a matter of bombarding the planet until its reduced and recolonizing.

      This current game seems to be looking very Total War-like in its instanced combat. I think that’s a good thing and should help address most of the flaws in SD1.

      It probably won’t win people ticked though … that will be contingent on SD2 succeeding. If it succeeds, which I hope it does, it will probably be thought of the same way as DW before the expansions.

  2. jingles says:

    No money from me Zero *shakes fist* finish the first one!!!
    (Still at least you still patch it, therefore I wont put stardrive in my abandonware/dontbuyfromdev section on steam)

  3. hakkarin says:

    This game is actually looking really good. I just hope that unit control will be much better then in the original StarDrive. It was extremely annoying how there was no stop button for your units and how they were not able to process a move order and still shoot at the enemy both at the same time like in almost every other decent strategy game.

  4. Bob says:

    So when are you going to finish the original Stardrive with the features you promised? Or are you just abandoning it.

  5. Lens Flares Suck says:

    LOVE THE GRAPHICS/DESIGN OF THIS GAME!!! I’m so sick and tired of spreadsheets in space with a hundred tiny little icons that you don’t know what the heck they mean.

    This looks GOOD. Don’t know if it will be good, but hey, it’s a start.

    Please keep us informed on progress for this one, if the release is reasonably stable and not a bug-fest I’d buy this in a New York minute.

  6. David Carron says:

    “I’ve always been interested in taking part of the ground combat but always had to watch.”

    That dev comment might be able to be taken more seriously, if the space combat wasn’t automated… *sigh*

    The strategic stuff looks more MOO-like and IMHO better. So it looks like a mixed bag.

    • echo2361 says:

      Space combat isn’t automated. He just wasn’t controlling ships in this particular video so they were following player pre-set targeting and movement preferences. In his previous dev log video it was clear that he was commanding ships in the battle directly.

  7. John says:

    StarDrive looked good and received positive feedback on this site during development (and launch). How I arrived at my purchase of a lackluster, content-less 4x game with vague developer promises that were never remotely reached.

    Cue this developer’s second game. Unless huge reparations are made to the community (free SD2 for SD1 buyers during release and subsequent months) I highly doubt this game will succeed. He has a tarnished reputation in a niche genre that can ill-afford such things.

    • StarMate says:

      amen brother, bought stardrive 1 the day it was available on desura for alpha funding. besides empty promises and still broken featuers (or only partially implemented features), the dev is also known to silence every negative comment. either he bans from his own or the steam forums, reports reviews (steam and metacritic) as spam etc.

      funny thing is, most positive reviews on metacritic, steam or the YT-video comments are from the dev himself from his many alternate accounts. it’s so funny to watch. like john said, the dev scammed a whole bunch of people, even die-hard fans which were at the release still defending him and bashing everyone else are now on the fense about him being a complete ripoff.

      if even the most inner circle is falling apart because the dev mainly consists of lies, inability and coldhearted scams then every normal buyer should be aware of this situation.

      even the publisher knows his misbehaviour and some publishers employees even seem to have joined some discussions on an anti-stardrive steamgroup, if that doesn’t say enough!

  8. Jeff P says:

    Thanks for the update, Keith! SD2 seems to be developing nicely, and I look forward to its release. My only concern at this point whether Zero will repeat his mistake from SD and release too early. I plan to be alive in 2015 so I’m willing to wait if that will ensure a better gaming experience.

  9. Edward says:

    I really wish Zero changed the races because there just too cartoony! I mean bears in space come on? It gives the impression that even Zero does not take his own game seriously!.

    • Mark says:

      That was one of the main reasons I gave the first game a miss, samurai space bears just completely turned me off. Good move as it turned out.

      • ashbery76 says:

        True but every bodies great nostalgia hit MOO2 was full of cheesy cats and bears.

        • Mark says:

          Yeah good point. I guess the moral of the story is that if you’re going to have wacky anthropomorphic cartoon characters as alien races at least make sure that the game itself doesn’t suck.

        • Happy Corner says:

          What Mark said.

          With MOO3, the design team was adamant about getting rid of all the “cheesy” races from MOO/MOO2. You can see how much that decision served the final game…

        • ashbery76 says:

          I love Birth of the Federation and apart from still having the best minor race system in 4X I’m not sure I play it for the gameplay.

  10. Ermdog says:

    This looks really impressive. A lot of similarities I see related to MoO2, but seems to add more depth. I will keep my fingers crossed in hoping this is as good as it looks

  11. Draba says:

    Well, I’m still quite angry after Stardrive 1.

    Not really about the not being finished part. Sometimes development just goes tits up and you’d rather get repeatedly kicked in the junk if that means you do not have to go near the project again. I think any dev can sympathize with that feeling :)

    Not even the no discount for Stardrive 2 part is that big of a deal. Even if the first failure was your fault, no one likes(or can afford) to work for free.

    The one thing I was missing is a plain and simple apology along the lines of “Sorry guys, fkd up a bit and I can’t afford to try and fix this mess”. Instead we got a “This game is nice and shiny enough, if you don’t like it too bad”.

    About the video:
    The turn based strategic layer should help with most of the mayor problems:
    – freighters are much easier to manage
    – navigation should get much easier to code, fixing gravity wells, exploration and make dealing with massed troops beelining for planets a bit less chaotic
    – repair/rearm ships could actually work

    Also, some great features I wanted are in:
    – MoO style weapon variants and modifiers ( WEEE! )
    – ground troop customization

    The trailer looks so good I’m still getting SD2 like the sucker I am.
    If this one doesn’t deliver either it’s time to break out the pitchforks :)

    • Chuki792 says:

      see this is where i’m sort of leaning now, its been a while since SD1 was released and yes i’m still pissed, but not so pissed that i’d cut my own nose off to spite my face, as the saying goes. If this game is awesome i will buy it (with the discount for those who own SD1 of course).

      I want an apology. Plain and simple. He’s clearly going to abandon SD1 once this is out (as if he hasn’t already) so an apology would be nice. That said, I’d also like to see more for the people who not only bought it at release, but supported him through early access with said purchases… Doesn’t even have to be a discount, free or heavily discounted (inevitable) expansions/DLC would go a long way to saying “thanks for the early access support, sorry it didn’t work out … here’s something to make this new pill easier to swallow…” or something along those lines.

      • echo2361 says:

        Zero’s words from an interview posted on Spacesector several months ago:

        “Some people will see a few pieces of the game that are admittedly unpolished and ascribe that lack of polish to the whole. Others see a massive and comprehensive game with so much depth to it that they can ignore an in-game event that goes no where. To those in former crowd, all I can say is sorry. It’s my first effort. To those in the latter crowd, I can say thanks for cutting me a little slack. Glad you enjoy it.”

        Besides that apology, he has made several others on the SD forums in the past but I’m not going to go back and dig them up since the Spacesector one was easy enough for me to grab.

        I’m glad to see people are willing to calmly sit back and wait to see how good of a game SD2 is on its own merits. As rational consumers that is all we can do. Those who were truly offended by SD1 in some way will log their protest by not buying SD2 I’m sure, but I hope most people aren’t so resentful that they will cut off their own noses to spite their faces, to borrow a very appropriate line from Chuki792’s post. No reason to deprive yourself of what looks to be a great game because of past issues you may have had with the developer.

        • csebal says:

          How on earth is not buying SD2 cutting off my own nose?

          I for one will not boycott SD2. I will however not buy it blindly out of good faith either. That ship has left port a long time ago.

          Furthermore, I will wait until its on sale to compensate myself for the previous loss.

          All that assuming the game will turn out to be worth buying.

          Finally, to quote a classic:
          “Do you know the difference between an error and a mistake? Anyone can make an error. But that error doesn’t become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.”

          Saying “I’m sorry” ain’t correcting an error. Its merely the acknowledgement of its existence.

        • bugtastic says:

          Well you know, I’ll buy a Paradox or Stardock title on it’s merits and my past experience with the developer. Yours? I’m gonna think real hard about it. It means something, Zero. Go add an expansion to SD1 and maybe I’ll believe in you again. You were so close, such a huge effort and a great engine. I don’t fault you at all for what you released in SD1, but you’re abandoning it. Don’t abandon it for rehashed MOO2 crap that “any” developer could design.

        • Draba says:

          Well, to be fair the last time I’ve checked on SD1 was around half a year ago. Back then he was deleting topics on his forums, and not just the unreasonable ones.

          +I didn’t like his general attitude. My perception could be skewed a bit by encountering his negative posts more often, but there were definitely some “this game is fully playable” ones around.

    • jo says:

      Plz be sure of your facts before writing.

      From an official release:

      “Iceberg Interactive is currently plotting a course for a September 2014 release for the sequel, with an SRP of $29.99, and Iceberg and Zero Sum plan to reward their fan-base with a loyalty discount of 33% on StarDrive 2 for owners of the original StarDrive.”

      Also while i hoped for StarDrive 1 to evolve more, i think it was a good game as it was , i had around 400 hours in it i think.I can understand some dissopinetment but imho the game was good as it was

  12. whocares says:

    I guess SD2 will be pre-released at Steam. Then it will move in open public, paid, beta with discounts.
    And then it will end up being released with a -75% rebate. Give it a patch or two, then abandoned by his author.

    We don’t forget, we don’t forgive!

    • Chuki792 says:

      I wont be pre-purchasing or early accessing this game or any other game on steam… NOT ONE SINGLE GAME has lived up to its pre-release promises, or has been so porrly executed its a wonder there will be any indie devs left, given the state most of these games release in… SD1, Shadowrun, X:Rebirth, Horizon, just to give a few examples of where I’ve been burned… I nearly did it again with Wasteland 2 but managed to control myself long enough to read the Steam community hub… phew! will give that one some more time in the oven before i take a bite.

      on that note, what happened to the Predestination March release? are they still on for that (they’ve only got 11 days left…)

      [EDIT] Ignore that last bit, just checked the website, looks like its a summer release now… just hope the extra time is put to good use, as i’m sure it will be.

      • Lens Flares Suck says:

        Remember when you could get a demo so you could see the game before you paid for it?

        Now they want you to pay for it before it’s finished.

        I liked the old way better.

        • JD says:

          I remember downloading demos with my 33.6k baud modem. Although I did not do that very often, phonebill and all. Remember when you could buy game magazines which included CDs full of demos. Wow I must be old, ah fuck that ;-)

  13. hyperspeed12 says:

    Dudes & Dudettes,

    Looks like many people bought the 1st game. I am in that group as well and got an incomplete game. Well, Iwont be buying this game….yet. Wait like 5 months after official release and with many patches and wait again for 3-5 months more and see other people’s opinion. If positive then i may buy the 2nd game else will look for other games.

    apologies to the developer but part of the 1st game didnt look finished.

  14. Ermdog says:

    I’m probably in the minority here, but I enjoyed Stardrive. Not saying its a great game, but a decent one. I pre-ordered it before it came out and was aware it was being made by one guy and that it was his first game. I expected flaws and got them, and I think its pretty good for someones first game. Sure I was disappointed it didn’t turn out how I wanted, but I got my money’s worth enjoying many hours of gameplay.

    Sure there were things left undone, but nothing game breaking. I can’t say that for those who wanted multiplayer however. People can either be mad and complain about it or move on. It seems a lot still want to complain about SD1 and tell us how they won’t buy SD2.

    This same scenario happened to me when Stardock released Elemental: War of Magic. I bought the game and when it was released it was unfinished and broken. The Devs knew they messed up and offered a discount on the ‘sequal’ Elemental: Fallen Enchantress. I had faith that the devs learned from their mistakes and bought the game and was not disappointed. Turned out to be a fantastic fantasy 4x game.

    I guess what I’m trying to say is, don’t be so quick to jump ship and never come back. Being one for supporting 4x devs, I will gladly take that discount and purchase this game prior to release. I’m sure Zero gained much experience and learned from his mistakes from the first game. I’m sure this game will be way better than SD1, but we will have to wait and see.

  15. ashbery76 says:

    The strategic gameplay is the closest I have seen to a MOO2 system.Racial pops,1 out of 3 research choice,command points.The exploration events and better paced real time tactical combat are improvements from MOO2 in my view..The crystal ship cutting beams looks amazing and just like the Shadows from B5.I am not convinced about the ground combat from a realism standpoint.I think it looks better than SD1 already.

  16. Zero says:

    Truth be told, I’m not entirely convinced about the ground combat either. That said, we have to do something and almost anything is better than or first effort, and better than having it completely abstracted into just a progress bar. So we will see how this looks in a few months with some more polish. I feel like it could add a fun distraction, but I also want to make sure that people who are not interested in this mini game are not obligated to play.

    • JD says:

      Just a suggestion but you already have simple RTS space battles, why don’t you do the same for ground combat? RTS ground battles, you could have tanks, mechs and such.

      • Zero says:

        Well, bottom line is money. Turn-based tactical combat using our sprites is a good compromise over investing the many man hours and dollars it would take to do a real time strategy ground combat on top of everything else. Some day maybe I can make that ultimate game. Until then we can still have a lot of fun with less expensive gameplay systems.

        As far as I recall, I don’t think GalCiv even had ground combat at all. How did they do ground combat? I know MOO2 had this sort of animated dice rolling thing where the units would run at each other. Then there was that crazy russian game where they had RTS combat….Star Wolves? Jeez what was it called. Ermm…..Space Rangers! That game was absurdly deep in some regards. Here, I want to provide some depth bordering on absurdity, but it has to be turn-based for ground combat largely due to time and budget. To answer your question in a very long-winded manner.

        • jingles says:

          If you where to put in Imperium galactica 2 style ground combat all would be forgiven.

          Infact make IG3 and ill buy it for £100. As I have stated before Im sick of games being made that dont push the boundries or at least attain those of IG2.

        • Happy Corner says:

          GalCiv 2 had ground combat, but wasn’t much of a step above MOO2. You picked one option (if you could be bothered to pay for it), the game rolled the dice, and that was that.

          The RTS missions in Space Rangers were tedious and I avoided them as much as possible. The game was fun overall, but some parts of it were much weaker than others, and the ground missions were one of those parts. I wouldn’t have cared if they weren’t in the game at all. There’s a lesson in there, naturally. When you’re putting together a game, it’s better to not do something at all than to do it poorly.

        • JD says:

          I understand this reasoning all to well, one can only do so much. Thanks for taking the time to answer.

    • Noldor says:

      Adding an auto-resolve function of the ground combat section would be the obvious solution here.

      To be honest, I’d rather you developed the space combat first and then (and only then) if there’s resources available would I allocate time to the ground stuff. Alternatively it can be added in an expansion later.

  17. kyridra says:

    Huh, I was not going to bother with Stardrive 2, the realtime stuff of the first one really made it a very unenjoyable experience with its lack of notifications and any sense of what was going on half the time.

    But if this one is going to actually have real time strategy to it, might be worth giving a second chance for once. Have to keep an eye on it at least.

  18. TheSisko says:


    well gotta admit the spacecombat “looks” really nice so far. Dont really know if I like extra ground combat or not.. I do like the ability to design ground forces but isnt a might and magic style combat system a bit to much useless micro? Especially considering the nature of the game? Except the first couple planets everyone will auto it ( well maybe not everyone but alot :p )

    Last night I was scrolling through the games list here and man.. that was sad. How long has it been since we got an actual great space game?

    Its 2014, and quite frankly, only good gameplay isnt cutting it anymore for me. If I just want the gameplay I can install the old games. Someone please explain to me why it looks like noone has the money AND ability/skills to make a space game that actually looks like its in the future and not effing 8bit retro from the last millenium -_-

    • BlueTemplar says:

      4X games just aren’t popular, therefore the developers don’t have much money (with the exception of Civilization 5).
      The last game that tried to really push the graphics _and_ the gameplay was Sword of the Stars 2.
      You know how that ended…

  19. stormcloud says:

    This second version definitely looks stronger in terms of depth and gameplay imo. First I’ve seen in modern space 4x games that fleshes out ground combat ala tactical RPG games. The obvious problems are many :

    – if it gets too detailed, it will un-focus players from the main gameplay. Something which you do not want happening.

    – ground combat in most space 4x are literally treated as optional. It’s far easier to glass the planet than deal with the logistics of ground combat. No space 4x game to date (that I know of), has successfully blended ground combat into the main gameplay to make it interesting … not even even MOO2. Too may “optionals” and you might end up with an “optional” game, which players won’t even bother touching. How is the dev planning to mitigate this and make it interesting?

    The other thing is the atmosphere of the game. Space 4x is serious business(!). Inserting corny/tacky characters and corny/tacky lines into the background story is only funny to the person that puts it. Either do it fully (i.e. turn the entire background story into something comedic and hire a proper writer) or don’t do it at all. Half-measures kills the atmosphere. If you want to do half-measures, then make it subtler, not slapstick.

    Video didn’t show how the game handles the fundamental flaw in large ships and spacestation design in its second iteration. The bigger it gets, the more time it takes to create/modify a design. Unproductive and tedious. Templates don’t really address this flaw. If it’s the same as before, then I’ll more than likely pass at this.

  20. zigzag says:

    Dynamic shadows with sprites. Very cool.

  21. bugtastic says:

    Meh. I rather liked the first one, still like it, just needed some additional content. This one – not so much. This looks like its trying to be GalCiv. I’d rather wait for StarDock’s which you know will be polished and complete.

  22. SamDog says:

    Ground combat is a great addition. I will probably buy this one — and shame on me. They fooled me once with the first one, but I am always hopeful.


  23. Jeff P says:

    Hmmm. I’m interested in SD2 (time will tell), but I’ve always been skeptical of the original Star Drive due to all the bad reviews from gaming sites (except this one) and users. Now it is on sale on Steam for a considerable discount (@$8.00).

    At my age, time is more important than money: I can always make or save more money, but I will never get more time. Time wasted on a buggy or lame product is never recovered.

    Is the original Star Drive worth my time playing it?

    • jingles says:

      Yes if you enjoy 4x’s that much, just dont expect a masterpiece. If I were you I would wait though until SD2 comes out, that way you might get a finished product.

      SD1 had many flaws, but I would still rate it very highly in comparison to most of the rubbish that is shifted nowadays, such as endless space.

      • Alien JD says:

        Does StarDrive 1 work late game now? I played it a while back and by mid game was getting a very very low frame rate. I played it on a beast of a computer too.

    • echo2361 says:

      I would say SD1 is definitely worth an $8 buy. I haven’t run into a bug or crash in months and I still get that “just one more turn” feeling I’m always looking for in a 4x game even though it isn’t turn based. It may not have all the features you are looking for but it is still a lot of fun for me.

      • jo says:

        Agreed pretty much.

        I hoped it woudl evolve more, but i really liked Star Drive 1.

        The main fun of the game for me was designing the ships, its one of the thigns StarDrive does very well , so if you got a bit of engeener in you , i think you should like it. If you consider tough spendign 20 minutes on ship design as boring stuff, might be the game isnt for you.

        Just my humble opinion:)/

  24. JKing says:

    It seems to be a great improvement. SD 1 wasn’t a bad game, but it looked a bit like Distant Worlds lite… and I must confess that turn based games will Always appeal more to me, it is a matter of control and game mechanics. But of course I am not saying anything new here. Still I’ve noticed something that I would like to point out… the ship models are just World War II Type XXI German Subs turned into spaceships. Is that how they are going to look like in the final game? I mean, I actually like the old-fashioned *subs in space* design for spacecraft, but that is pushing it a bit too far. I just hope the Human Ships don’t look like Gato Class subs… If they’re going to use World War II as a model for their design they might try for something better, like the space battleships of the Japanese “Yamato” anime series. Of course, that’s just a thought…

    • echo2361 says:

      Each races has distinctly different ship hull designs, just like in SD1. The Vulfen ships have always had that long and narrow design to them. The human ships tend to be more balanced between length and width and look nothing like submarines. The Ralyeh have tentacles protruding from their ships which befits their squid-like anatomy while the Opteris feature ships in the shape of insects also mirroring their own physical appearance. My personal favorites are the Draylok ships which have “wings” making them look quite ominous.

      • JKing says:

        Yes, and as I said, there is nothing wrong with the *subs in space* school of design. Actually, the Vulfen even had periscope like equipment in their bridges, as can be seen in their animation.
        But the problem is not that the ships look like submarines… their models have been designed using the hull of a German Type XXI or XXIII as a base – I am a historian and also a modeler, so I could see it immediately. In SD1 the ship models were original designs, here they are using an old modeler’s trick… you pick and old car or airplane and use it to build something totally new – it is the same way the Batmobile from the old TV series was done.
        Again, there is nothing wrong with that, as long as the original model is so buried inside the new one that it’s barely possible to see it. Here both the bow of the sub and the whole forward hull are intact, it even had the sonar dome and a modified conning tower. That’s a lazy approach to modelling… it is like picking an F-22, changing its nose for one from a Spitfire and calling it a space-fighter.

        But that is just my reaction to it… and I must add: the battles look just beautiful. This is a minor detail, it will probably bother me a little bit, but it won’t prevent me from buying the game.

      • JKing says:

        Don’t take my word… take a look:

        I don’t want to make a big deal out of it. I will buy and play the game, but I think it was kinda lazy of the design team. They could have tried a bit harder.

        • echo2361 says:

          No worries. I was more addressing your concern that other races’ ships would also be submarine in appearance. I’m in agreement with you that some of the Vulfen ships look very much like U-boats but I believe that may have been intentional on Zero’s part. The Vulfen are a race of aggressive space wolves, so if I had to guess the U-boat design is meant to allude to the wolfpack tactics U-boats used in attacking allied convoys.

          Zero likes to make lots of references appear in his games to both real world and sci-fi things. Personally I’m a fan of his various allusions, but I can see how some things might be too on the nose for others so to each his own.

  25. Mike says:

    Wow, so much anger towards SD1.

    Compare SD1 – made by one guy, his first effort to…
    MOO3 – made by a huge dev team with a huge budget…and was virtually unplayable until fans made strawberry and tropical mods.

    SD1 was better hands down.

    If I was to advise Zero, I would say learn from your mistakes, and make an even better game, instead of spending all your time trying to make a decent game better.

    As for the races, there is the Star Trek/Moo 1 idea that evolution will favor humanoid development, and the Star Wars/MOO 3 idea of wild diversity. Both are reasonable suppositions, as we still lack warp drive. Personally, I prefer Space bears to amorphous blobs of methane.

    As for feeling ripped off by Star Drive 1, I fell far better about giving $30 to an upcoming Dev with a lot of potential to make a great 4X game, than I do to an established Dev team churning out polished but forgettable content.

    Looking forward to SD2!

  26. Amused says:

    Funny. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on you.

    Not only was SD dropped cold (sorry but piddly patches don’t hit the radar), the developer was rude on multiple instances about the whole deal and never really gave any kind of sincere apology to the people that got flat out screwed.

    I get that it was a one man show and a lot of effort was made but I am sorry – I have been in software engineering a while and simply dropping a problem product is a lack of professionalism that most engineers don’t get to do.

    You know what you do when you make those mistakes (as we all do)? You apologize, make amends (free SD2 for SD1 buyers or super heavy discount), deal with fixing the issues and if a new product is the answer you work on the long term fix while not giving up on the here and now that you are on the hook for.

    Does keeping the current ship afloat while building the new ship suck? Yes it does but you suck it up, learn from your mistakes and deal with it.

    welcome to software engineering.

Related Articles:

Post category: News & Announcements, Videos